No abstract

The Ecosystem Service concept is a widely used framework to examine the links between the functioning of ecosystems and human well-being. There is a broad range of ecosystem services, which are often classified hierarchically as provisioning, regulating and cultural services. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), an approach for analyzing complex problems that involve tradeoffs between multiple objectives, has increasingly been applied in the ecosystem service context. In MCDA, a problem is typically represented hierarchically as a value tree, which resembles the hierarchical structure of the ecosystem service classifications. However, in practice, there are several potential pitfalls that could distort the analysis, if some commonly used ecosystems service classification was directly used as the basis of an MCDA value tree. In this paper, we discuss these potential pitfalls and how to avoid them. Our discussion is illustrated with experience from a case study focusing on the ecosystem services provided by the peatlands in Finland.

To manage and conserve ecosystems in a more sustainable way, it is important to identify the importance of the ecosystem services they provide and understand the connection between natural and socio-economic systems. Historically, streams have been an underrated part of the urban environment. Many of them have been straightened and often channelized under pressure of urbanization. However, little knowledge exists concerning the economic value of stream restoration or the value of the improved ecosystem services. We used the contingent valuation method to assess the social acceptability of a policy-level water management plan in the city of Helsinki, Finland, and the values placed on improvements in a set of ecosystem services, accounting for preference uncertainty. According to our study, the action plan would provide high returns on restoration investments, since the benefit-cost ratio was 15-37. Moreover, seventy-two percent of the respondents willing to pay for stream restoration chose "I want to conserve streams as a part of urban nature for future generations" as the most motivating reason. Our study indicates that the water management plan for urban streams in Helsinki has strong public support. If better marketed to the population within the watershed, the future projects could be partly funded by the local residents, making the projects easier to accomplish. The results of this study can be used in planning, management and decision making related to small urban watercourses.

No abstract

No abstract