Multi-criteria participative evaluation of Pinus halepensis plantations in a semiarid area of southeast Spain

Derak, Mchich; Cortina, Jordi

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.017

Cited by 46 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, in Southern and South-eastern Spain, stakeholders attached the highest priority to regulating services and soil formation (Castro et al, 2011;Derak and Cortina, 2014;Martín-López et al, 2012). In semiarid areas of Morocco and Spain, the provision of regulating and supporting services has been a priority, favouring the deployment of conservative agricultural practices such as terracing (Butzer, 2005;García-Llorente et al, 2012;Laouina et al, 2006).…”

Section: Stakeholder Preferences Regarding Ecosystem Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, stakeholder weights on ecosystem services can be combined with the empirical value (performance) of each service for each land use to obtain an integrative evaluation. By applying appropriate multi-criteria analysis, it may be possible to determine if restored landscape units respond more adequately to stakeholder needs and aspirations than unrestored ones, and evaluate their contribution to society well-being by enhancing the bulk of ecosystem services (Derak and Cortina, 2014;Fontana et al, 2013). Aggregation of scientific knowledge and human needs and values may enhance the efficiency and sustainability of ecological restoration practices, and thus increase the likelihood of their success.…”

Section: Implications For Ecological Restorationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contribution of these land uses to the enhancement of human well-being was assessed by estimating economic benefits (employment supply, monetary incomes) and the provision of five categories of ecosystem services (MEA, 2005): supporting (soil fertility, primary production), regulating (erosion control, flood control, local climatic regulation), provisioning (biomass production, forage productivity, food supply, aromatic and medicinal plants, water retention), cultural (aesthetic value, traditional value) and biodiversity (species richness, plant endemism, game abundance). This set of 17 services was selected on the basis of data availability, expert advice and our own experience in Béni Boufrah and similar semiarid areas (Derak and Cortina, 2014). Furthermore, we asked six experts in hydrology, forestry and sociology, as well as representatives of governmental offices and environmental organizations.…”

Section: Ecosystem Services Weightingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Derak

Taiquib

Aledoc

et al. 2016

Journal of Arid Environments

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological restoration is a suitable tool to revert the decline in the provision of ecosystem services in semiarid areas. Stakeholder opinion has been increasingly incorporated in ecological restoration strategies. However, the debate still exists whether the opinion of scientists and managers should be integrated together with that of local stakeholders in the decision making process. We assessed the restoration priorities in a semiarid area in North Morocco according to the opinion of 67 stakeholders, including scientists and managers, direct users and collaborators. The questions consisted in (i) ranking five categories of services in addition to economic benefits, and in (ii) comparing pairs of services within each category. We checked for both cardinal and ordinal inconsistency. The results showed an overall consensus about regulating and supporting services as the most valuable categories. More specifically, the most important services were erosion and flood control, soil fertility, water supply and species richness. The accuracy of the responses of the three groups was similar as the consistency for their judgments was not significantly different. Our results bring additional proof that the opinion of scientists, managers and local stakeholders should be considered of similar interest and accuracy when defining the most suitable restoration objectives.

show abstract

Section: Stakeholder Preferences Regarding Ecosystem Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implications For Ecological Restorationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ecosystem Services Weightingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Derak

Taiquib

Aledoc

et al. 2016

Journal of Arid Environments

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When designing a restoration project, properly defining objectives is one of the most critical tasks to ensure long-term sustainability. A key issue is conducting a community-based approach to forest restoration Derak and Cortina 2014). Additionally, defining and refining objectives within the context of a rapidly changing world must be accomplished using a flexible framework.…”

Section: Challenges Of Forest Restoration and Purpose Of The Congressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restoring forests: What constitutes success in the twenty-first century?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest loss and degradation is occurring at high rates but humankind is experiencing historical momentum that favors forest restoration. Approaches to restoration may follow various paradigms depending on stakeholder objectives, regional climate, or the degree of site degradation. The vast amount of land requiring restoration implies the need for spatial prioritization of restoration efforts according to cost-benefit analyses that include ecological risks. To design resistant and resilient ecosystems that can adapt to emerging circumstances, an adaptive management approach is needed. Global change, in particular, imparts a high degree of uncertainty about the future ecological and societal conditions of forest ecosystems to be restored, as well as their desired goods and services. We must also reconsider the suite of species incorporated into restoration with the aim of & Douglass F. Jacobs

show abstract

“…Accordingly, a variety of participatory methods and tools have been developed over the last decades (see for example van Asselt and Rijkens-Klomp, 2002) and have been increasingly incorporated into decision-making and integrated assessment in land and water management programs (e.g., Mostert, 2003;Salter et al, 2010). However, stakeholder participation in the evaluation of dryland restoration and sustainable dryland management is very scarce (Bautista et al, 2010;Schwilch et al, 2011), and participatory methods that effectively translate the evaluation of previous and ongoing management and restoration actions into new learning and enhanced capacity to responding to land degradation have received limited attention (Rojo et al, 2012;Schwilch et al, 2009Schwilch et al, , 2011Derak and Cortina, 2014;Kong et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating knowledge exchange and the assessment of dryland management alternatives – A learning-centered participatory approach

Bautista

Campanyà

Ocampo‐Melgar

et al. 2017

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe adoption of sustainable land management strategies and practices that respond to current climate and human pressures requires both assessment tools that can lead to better informed decision-making and effective knowledge-exchange mechanisms that facilitate new learning and behavior change. We propose a learning-centered participatory approach that links land management assessment and knowledge exchange and integrates science-based data and stakeholder perspectives on both biophysical and socio-economic attributes. We outline a structured procedure for a transparent assessment of land management alternatives, tailored to dryland management, that is based on (1) principles of constructivism and social learning, (2) the participation of stakeholders throughout the whole assessment process, from design to implementation, and (3) the combination of site-specific indicators, identified by local stakeholders as relevant to their particular objectives and context conditions, and science-based indicators that represent ecosystem services of drylands worldwide. The proposed procedure follows a pattern of eliciting, challenging, and self-reviewing stakeholder perspectives that aims to facilitate learning. The difference between the initial baseline perspectives and the final self-reviewed stakeholder perspectives is used as a proxy of learning. We illustrate the potential of this methodology by its application to the assessment of land uses in a Mediterranean fire-prone area in East Spain. The approach may be applied to a variety of socio-ecological systems and decision-making and governance scales.

show abstract

Multi-criteria participative evaluation of Pinus halepensis plantations in a semiarid area of southeast Spain

Cited by 46 publications

References 44 publications

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Restoring forests: What constitutes success in the twenty-first century?

Integrating knowledge exchange and the assessment of dryland management alternatives – A learning-centered participatory approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About