Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services: uncovering the links between values, drivers of change, and human well-being

Iniesta-Arandia, Irene; García‐Llorente, Marina; Aguilera, Pedro A.; Montes, Carlos; Martín‐López, Berta

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.09.028

Cited by 250 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

132

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Those who stand to lose or gain significantly from ecosystem services but who are not directly involved in decision making, such as non-associated farmers, are vulnerable [43]. In fact, as [44] has shown, if such less-visible stakeholders are under-represented, there is a risk of masking their participation in environmental management policies.…”

Section: Target Stakeholders In Sf Experiences: Towards Social Inclusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Farming in the Promotion of Social-Ecological Sustainability in Rural and Periurban Areas

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Rural areas are facing a spectrum of landscape changes and vulnerability as a consequence of financial and environmental crises. Innovative approaches are required to maintain the provision of social services and manage ecosystem services in these areas. We explore the capacity of social farming to create viable and sustainable rural and periurban areas according to a social-ecological perspective. We use the key elements of social-ecological systems under social farming practices to analyse (1) the role of local communities and non-formal institutions; (2) the involvement of target stakeholders; and (3) the explicit connection between agroecosystems and human wellbeing. To do so, we selected and described four cases of local social farming initiatives in terms of the key elements of social-ecological systems and conducted a literature review to provide an overview of the explicit impact of social farming on the quality of life. We found that social farming illustrates hybrid governance solutions beyond market instruments that could be applied for the governance of agroecosystems. It can also provide a range of other wellbeing and cultural ecosystem services to rural and urban inhabitants. Greater cooperation between social farming and ecosystem service science could rebound in rural landscape sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Target Stakeholders In Sf Experiences: Towards Social Inclusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Farming in the Promotion of Social-Ecological Sustainability in Rural and Periurban Areas

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Il trade-off prende in considerazione una serie di fenomeni quali: i conflitti tra usi del suolo, l'incompatibilità, la rivalità, l'escludibilità e la correlazione negativa, a livello spaziale e/o temporale, tra servizi ecosistemici . Viceversa, le sinergie tengono in considerazione la correlazione positiva tra due servizi ecosistemi in termini di benefici reciproci generati a favore della società (Iniesta-Arandia et al 2014). Attualmente, l'analisi congiunta di trade-off e sinergie tra servizi ecosistemici è diventata la principale tematica di ricerca della comunità scientifica internazionale (MartinezHarms & Balvanera 2012, Schägner et al 2013.…”

Section: Introduzioneunclassified

Ecosystem services in forests of Calabria: stakeholders’ perception

Pastorella¹,

Maesano²,

Paletto³

et al. 2017

Forest@

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Ecosystem services in forests of Calabria: stakeholders' perception. In the last decades, the ecological, economic and social analysis of benefits provided by ecosystem to society has coved a great importance in the scientific international literature. The main studies focuses on three aspects: ecosystem services potential supply, demand and use. The potential supply is defined as the ecosystem biophysical capacity to supply services, while the demand represents the amount of service desired by the society. The third aspect considers the current use of a ecosystem service in order to satisfy the social demand. This study focused on the evaluation of social demand on ecosystem services provided by forests at local level (Calabria region) under the project "ALForLab". The main objective of the present study is to analyze the stakeholders' opinions and preferences of forest sector in Calabria Region about relevance of forest ecosystem services and categories of ecosystem services. The study, conducted in four areas (Pollino, Sila, Catena Costiera and Serre Calabre), was structured in three steps: (i) identification and classification of stakeholders (stakeholder analysis); (ii) administration of a questionnaire to the previously identified stakeholders; (iii) statistical analysis of the data collected by questionnaire. Stakeholders' opinions and preferences were analyzed in order to highlight the differences between study areas and groups of stakeholders. At the end of the stakeholder analysis, 320 stakeholders were identified and contacted, 71 of whom filled in the questionnaire (response rate of 22%). The results show that the two main categories of ecosystem services are the supporting services and regulating services. According to the stakeholders' opinions the three most important forest ecosystem services are: biodiversity, landscape and hydrogeological protection. Landscape is particularly important because it is strictly linked to the cultural value and social identity of a territory. This survey show that the characteristics and peculiarities of each study area are the main factors that influence the stakeholders' preferences on single elements of the landscape. In the study areas characterized by a high natural value (Pollino, Sila and Serre Calabre) the stakeholders consider the natural elements of the landscape (forests and water bodies) as the most important, while in the most urbanized study area (Catena Costiera) the anthropic and cultural elements have a key importance. Finally, the stakeholders consider the forest fires, the illegal cuttings and the forest management abandonment the three main important threat factors to forests functionality in Calabria.

show abstract

“…Second, authors observed that stakeholders had greater difficulty appreciating the importance of regulating services and biodiversity (Lewan andSöderqvist 2002, Villamagna et al 2013): these are considered out of their sphere of experience and perception (Iniesta-Arandia et al 2014). Indeed, these are often intermediate services contributing to the supply of other ES rather than ES from which stakeholders directly benefit (Boyd and Banzhaf 2007, Fisher et al 2009, Felipe-Lucía et al 2015.…”

Section: Discrepancies Between Perceived and Actual Ecological Influementioning

confidence: 99%

“…To obtain a realistic and integrative description of the social-ecological system, consultations on ES influence networks need to deliberately consider the diversity of stakeholders and organizations related to the issue discussed (Lamarque et al 2011, Bennett et al 2015. Stakeholders hold various priorities in environmental management and have varying perceptions and knowledge about social-ecological systems (e.g., Castro et al 2011, Lugnot and Martin 2013, Iniesta-Arandia et al 2014. We insist that the nature and complexity of INF outputs should be considered as a collective production reflecting the panel of stakeholders consulted.…”

Section: Discrepancies Between Perceived and Actual Ecological Influementioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling trade-offs and synergies around ecosystem services with the influence network framework: illustration from a consultative process over the French Alps

Crouzat¹,

Martín‐López²,

Turkelboom³

2016

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. An important aspect of sustainability is to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem functioning while improving human well-being. For this, the ecosystem service (ES) approach has the potential to bridge the still existing gap between ecological management and social development, especially by focusing on trade-offs and synergies between ES and between their beneficiaries. Several frameworks have been proposed to account for trade-offs and synergies between ES, and between ES and other components of socialecological systems. However, to date, insufficient explicit attention has been paid to the three facets encompassed in the ES concept, namely potential supply, demand, and use, leading to incomplete descriptions of ES interactions. We expand on previous frameworks by proposing a new influence network framework (INF) based on an explicit consideration of influence relationships between these three ES facets, biodiversity, and external driving variables. We tested its ability to provide a comprehensive view of complex socialecological interactions around ES through a consultative process focused on environmental management in the French Alps. We synthetized the interactions mentioned during this consultative process and grouped variables according to their overall propensity to influence or be influenced by the system. The resulting directed sequence of influences distinguished between: (1) mostly influential variables (dynamic social variables and ecological state variables), (2) target variables (provisioning and cultural services), and (3) mostly impacted variables (regulating services and biodiversity parameters). We discussed possible reasons for the discrepancies between actual and perceived influences and proposed options to overcome them. We demonstrated that the INF holds the potential to deliver collective assessments of ES relations by: (1) including ecological as well as social aspects, (2) providing opportunities for colearning processes between stakeholder groups, and (3) supporting communication about complex social-ecological systems and consequences for environmental management.

show abstract

Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services: uncovering the links between values, drivers of change, and human well-being

Cited by 250 publications

References 53 publications

Social Farming in the Promotion of Social-Ecological Sustainability in Rural and Periurban Areas

Social Farming in the Promotion of Social-Ecological Sustainability in Rural and Periurban Areas

Ecosystem services in forests of Calabria: stakeholders’ perception

Disentangling trade-offs and synergies around ecosystem services with the influence network framework: illustration from a consultative process over the French Alps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About