Limitations of the ecosystem services versus disservices dichotomy

Saunders, Manu E.; Luck, Gary W.

doi:10.1111/cobi.12740

Cited by 44 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On one hand, EDS were claimed to reinforce the tendency of human societies to pay too much attention to the negative impact of nature (Shapiro and Báldi, 2014) and to potentially undermine biodiversity conservation (Villa et al, 2014). In addition, some authors argued that the EDS concept promotes a black-and-white approach that ignores the possibility that every ecosystem may contribute to either ES or EDS, depending on the context (Saunders and Luck, 2016). On the other hand, the EDS concept was advocated as a way to better balance the positive and negative effects of nature on human wellbeing and to better assess its net contribution (Dunn, 2010;Schaubroeck, 2017).…”

Section: Ecosystem Disservices: a Debated Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem disservices (EDS) highlight the negative effects of nature on human well-being. Like ecosystem services (ES), EDS impact economic and non-economic aspects of human life within social-ecological systems (SES). The concept of EDS has been much debated, with strongly differing opinions regarding its utility and implications. In this opinion paper, we emphasize its relevance and complementarity to the ES concept for analyzing SES, and advocate applying EDS to SES research more systematically. Firstly, we highlight that though EDS are now sometimes studied, they remain neglected compared to ES. Secondly, we propose five reasons why EDS and ES are complementary concepts. Thirdly, we suggest that EDS are critical to understanding stakeholders' behavior regarding ecosystems. Drawing on existing studies, we illustrate how stakeholders in SES simultaneously perceive and benefit or suffer from ES and EDS. We further suggest that, under certain conditions, EDS may influence people's behavior more than ES. Such 'EDS-biased behavior' implies that, under certain circumstances, targeting EDS reduction may be more effective than targeting ES increase to encourage nature-friendly behaviors. Finally, we provide five recommendations to further integrate ES and EDS in research, as a pathway towards improving the understanding of SES and the effectiveness of sustainability policies.

show abstract

Section: Ecosystem Disservices: a Debated Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). In this sense, it has recently been recognized that the same ecosystem service can be perceived as benign or harmful, depending on the social actors involved (Saunders & Luck ). Additionally, conservation policies and practices are a result of human decisions and behavior, either intended or unintended (Mascia et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the reasons for mainstreaming the social dimensions (i.e., perceptions, values, beliefs, or attitudes) in biodiversity conservation (Bennet et al 2016;Pooley et al 2017) is the acknowledgment of the crucial role of biodiversity in supporting human well-being through the provision of ecosystem services (e.g., MA 2005;Díaz et al 2006;Cardinale et al 2012), which are understood as the benefits (and occasionally detriments) that people obtain from ecosystems . In this sense, it has recently been recognized that the same ecosystem service can be perceived as benign or harmful, depending on the social actors involved (Saunders & Luck 2016). Additionally, conservation policies and practices are a result of human decisions and behavior, either intended or unintended (Mascia et al 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmer Perceptions of the Ecosystem Services Provided by Scavengers: What, Who, and to Whom

Morales‐Reyes

Martín‐López

Moleón

et al. 2017

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A socioecological approach to biodiversity conservation has recently been encouraged. We examined farmer perceptions of ecosystem services provided by scavenging vertebrates in Spain through face-to-face surveys with farmers in seven large extensive livestock systems. Scavenging services (i.e., carrion consumption) was the most perceived benefit whereas the role of some scavengers as predators was the most recognized damage. The most beneficial scavengers perceived were vultures. Overall, we detected a "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" paradox as the same species and species within the same guild can be dually perceived as beneficial or harmful. Our findings provide evidence that traditional extensive farming linked to experience-based and local ecological knowledge drives positive perceptions of scavengers and their consideration as ecosystem services providers. Research on social perceptions can contribute to the conservation of scavengers by raising awareness about the ecosystem services provided by this functional group.

show abstract

“…mineral extraction versus habitat support) and between economic and cultural values (e.g. between the landscape aesthetic value of a suite of glacial landforms and the economic value of the sand and gravel they contain) (Lele et al 2013;Guerry et al 2015;Saunders and Luck 2016).…”

Section: Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing the Role of Geoconservation in Protected Area Management and Nature Conservation

Gordon

Crofts²,

Díaz-Martínez

et al. 2017

Geoheritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acknowledgement by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) that geodiversity is part of natural diversity and geoheritage is part of natural heritage should help to strengthen the position and delivery of geoconservation through engagement with the wider nature conservation agenda. In particular, we identify six key areas offering opportunities to enhance the standing and mainstreaming of geoconservation: (1) integrating geoconservation principles in protected area management, including the promotion of geoheritage conservation across the full range of IUCN Protected Area Management Categories; (2) supporting biodiversity conservation and adaptation to climate change through the nature-based solutions approach and 'conserving nature's stage'; (3) contributing to natural capital and ecosystem services valuation; (4) contributing to conservation in the marine environment; (5) enhancing the connections between people, place, and nature and contributing to human well-being; and (6) promoting ecosystem stewardship and contributing to the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Adoption of a more outward-looking approach should help to progress the integration of geoconservation within nature conservation, protected area planning and management, and broader environmental strategies and policies.

show abstract

Limitations of the ecosystem services versus disservices dichotomy

Cited by 44 publications

References 22 publications

Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy

Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy

Farmer Perceptions of the Ecosystem Services Provided by Scavengers: What, Who, and to Whom

Enhancing the Role of Geoconservation in Protected Area Management and Nature Conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About