Linking Biophysical and Economic Assessments of Ecosystem Services for a Social–Ecological Approach to Conservation Planning: Application in a Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain)

Castillo-Eguskitza, Nekane; Schmitz, María F.; Onaindia, Miren; Rescia, Alejandro J.

doi:10.3390/su11113092

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the ES concept fits well within the BR focus on human–nature relationships and our approach of spatial assessment of ES values has rarely been undertaken in BRs. There are few studies that have mapped ES in biosphere reserves (but see Kermagoret & Dupras, 2018; Poikolainen et al., 2019), and even fewer that explicitly consider zonation in their analyses (but see Castillo‐Eguskitza et al., 2018, 2019). Second, we have used a participatory approach which is an important criterion of BR governance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Making the right decisions for sustainable development requires sound knowledge of the values and spatial distribution of the services co‐produced by ecosystems and people. UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere programme and associated Biosphere Reserves (BRs) are key learning sites or model regions for sustainable development providing key entry points for transdisciplinary work on sustainable development. However, there is limited research exploring spatial distribution of socio‐cultural Ecosystem Service (ES) values in BRs and how those values vary according to the BR zonation. We used a transdisciplinary approach to design and implement a public participation geographical information systems (PPGIS) survey in a recently designated BR to (a) asses the spatial distribution of ES values in the different zones, (b) identify hotspots of ES values, (c) identify spatial bundles of ES values and (d) assess the social‐ecological characteristics that determine the distribution of those values. We found that stakeholders identify high biocultural ES values, mapping predominantly places for outdoor recreation, biodiversity, agricultural products and cultural heritage. Buffer zones had high agricultural and cultural heritage values while extractive values were largely absent from cores zones. We identified five spatial ES‐value bundles highlighting distinct places important for ES values related to ‘multifunctional landscapes’ located close to settlements, ‘cultural landscapes’ associated with agricultural land, ‘wild animal resources’ along the coastlines, ‘outdoor recreation and biodiversity’ and ‘passive cultural values’ widely distributed in high and moderately populated areas. We found that accessibility was important for ES values and that people value nature close to where they live. We show the importance of biocultural values in the region, and agricultural landscapes were highly valued for multiple ES values beyond agricultural products alone. We show that BRs have become places that link cultural heritage, agricultural and biodiversity values in multifunctional landscapes. We put our findings into the local context and suggest how they can inform land‐use planning and management through policies aimed at maintaining key agricultural landscapes that provide social‐ecological resilience. Additionally, we discuss the value of our study for the wider BR network and how similar work can contribute to monitoring of BR implementation. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plieninger et al 2013;Cusens et al 2022). However, few studies have the BR zonation explicitly in their analyses (but see Castillo-Eguskitza et al 2019;Palliwoda et al 2021;Cusens et al 2022). Palliwoda et al (2021) explicitly mapped and analysed the differences in ES co-production across the zones of 137 European BRs finding that ES co-production does not always match with the objectives of zonation within BRs.…”

Section: Ecosystem Services In Unesco Biosphere Reservesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Palliwoda et al (2021) explicitly mapped and analysed the differences in ES co-production across the zones of 137 European BRs finding that ES co-production does not always match with the objectives of zonation within BRs. Castillo-Eguskitza et al (2019) mapped biophysical and monetary ES values in Urdaibai BR, Spain, and assessed the coincidence between the two value types within the BR zones. Although these two studies highlight the value of zonespecific ES valuation for assessing BR goals and objectives, both consider zones as an aggregate of each zone type (i.e.…”

Section: Ecosystem Services In Unesco Biosphere Reservesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration matters: Combining socio-cultural and biophysical methods for mapping ecosystem service bundles

Cusens

Barraclough

Måren

2023

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem services (ESs) play an important role in sustainable landscape management. People value ESs in diverse ways encompassing social and ecological domains and we need to bring these different values together. We used social-cultural and biophysical methods to map a diverse set of ESs at two spatial scales in a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve in Norway. The ESs bundled into three distinct social–ecological system archetypes which were similar in their distribution and relative ES values at both spatial scales. The bundles were also well matched to relative ESs values of the Biosphere Reserve zones (core, buffer, and transition) indicating that the bundles capture the social–ecological systems of the zones. We argue that it is important to consider the social–ecological context of the zones to provide sufficient knowledge to inform management. Our work has the capacity to contribute to sustainable land management that takes biocultural values into consideration.

show abstract

“…The number of studies that consider the goods and services that ecosystems provide to human societies has increased over the last two decades [3][4][5]; however, there remains a need for strategies that take ESs provision into account in order to achieve a sustainable way of life for human societies and ecosystems [6]. Biophysical and socio-economic characterization is critical for informing decisions concerning the use, management, and administration of ecosystems [7]; however, experience has shown that exclusion of the perception of different stakeholders, along with their ties and interests, can lead to disagreements and even conflicts [8]. Perceptions of ESs depend on the environmental or ecological characteristics of the systems and on the cultural and socio-economic context [9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions and Social Values Regarding the Ecosystem Services of Beaches and Coastal Dunes in Yucatán, Mexico

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ecosystem services (ESs) approach has been used as a powerful tool for the analysis of socio-ecological systems to investigate the relationship between society and the environment. The aim of this article is to analyze the social perceptions of stakeholders, forms of use (sociocultural and economic), and the conservation of beaches and coastal dunes in Yucatán, Mexico. Interviews were held with focus groups to analyze the forms of use, social perceptions of stakeholders, and the conservation of beaches and coastal dunes in Yucatán, Mexico. The results indicate that these ecosystems are important to different types of activities related to regulating, provisioning, and cultural services. However, degradation is identified as a consequence of contamination and land-use change. The main identified threats are natural phenomena, followed by the presence of garbage, human presence in natural environments, infrastructure construction, and privatization of beaches. The opinions (e.g., conservation, ecosystem services provision, drivers of change), emotions (e.g., joy, fear, sadness), and knowledge of the local community and tourists with respect to these ecosystems were evidenced. In general, there is an absence of conservation and sustainable management projects. However, community perceptions provide an opportunity to outline public conservation strategies in which the community, as a component of these socio-ecosystems, can be fully involved in their implementation.

show abstract

Linking Biophysical and Economic Assessments of Ecosystem Services for a Social–Ecological Approach to Conservation Planning: Application in a Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain)

Cited by 10 publications

References 93 publications

Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve

Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve

Integration matters: Combining socio-cultural and biophysical methods for mapping ecosystem service bundles

Perceptions and Social Values Regarding the Ecosystem Services of Beaches and Coastal Dunes in Yucatán, Mexico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About