Public preferences for production of local and global ecosystem services

Drake, Ben; Smart, James C. R.; Termansen, Mette; Hubacek, Klaus

doi:10.1007/s10113-011-0252-7

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All reviewed studies are based on surveys, interviews and workshops. The following methods were adopted: content analysis [30,102], statistical analysis [74,103], contingent valuation as a form of willingness to pay [85], and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) paired with multi-attribute utility theory and choice experiment [67].…”

Section: Valuation Of Co-benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, people who reported higher degrees of stewardship to nature or, otherwise stated, those who put a higher value on feeling responsible for the conservation of nature, preferred NBS over more conventional flood management approaches [93]. Another study interpreted a preference for NBS as evidence of altruistic behavior: though individuals did not receive any personal benefit, they still preferred NBS for the sake of 'the level of environmental quality provided' and 'the act of giving' [67].…”

Section: Environmental Attitudementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reducing Hydro-Meteorological Risk by Nature-Based Solutions: What Do We Know about People’s Perceptions?

Han

Kuhlicke

2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nature-based solutions (NBS) have recently received attention due to their potential ability to sustainably reduce hydro-meteorological risks, providing co-benefits for both ecosystems and affected people. Therefore, pioneering research has dedicated efforts to optimize the design of NBS, to evaluate their wider co-benefits and to understand promoting and/or hampering governance conditions for the uptake of NBS. In this article, we aim to complement this research by conducting a comprehensive literature review of factors shaping people’s perceptions of NBS as a means to reduce hydro-meteorological risks. Based on 102 studies, we identified six topics shaping the current discussion in this field of research: (1) valuation of the co-benefits (including those related to ecosystems and society); (2) evaluation of risk reduction efficacy; (3) stakeholder participation; (4) socio-economic and location-specific conditions; (5) environmental attitude, and (6) uncertainty. Our analysis reveals that concerned empirical insights are diverse and even contradictory, they vary in the depth of the insights generated and are often not comparable for a lack of a sound theoretical-methodological grounding. We, therefore, propose a conceptual model outlining avenues for future research by indicating potential inter-linkages between constructs underlying perceptions of NBS to hydro-meteorological risks.

show abstract

Section: Valuation Of Co-benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Environmental Attitudementioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing Hydro-Meteorological Risk by Nature-Based Solutions: What Do We Know about People’s Perceptions?

Han

Kuhlicke

2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ordered response models have proven a useful tool to evaluate the effects of socio-economic characteristics on stakeholder attitudes, measured on an ordinal scale (Greene and Hensher, 2010). This topic has been the subject of an increasing amount of empirical literature, particularly to understand individual perceptions about environmental issues and climate change concerns (Quiroga et al, 2015;Drake et al, 2013;García de Jalón et al, 2013;Bosselmann, 2012;Maddison, 2007;Layton and Brown, 2000). For our empirical analysis, we estimated an ordered probit model based on owner perceptions in six European countries to characterise how the probability of strongly agree (j=5) to strongly disagree (j=1) with a subsidized forest policy responds to owner typologies, as shown in equation [1]:…”

Section: Estimating Perceptions Through An Ordered Probit Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

Quiroga¹,

Suárez²,

Ficko³

et al. 2019

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyses the linkages between private forest owners' perceptions of forest management, and their affinity for subsidies, in a range of European countries. Society increasingly requires the provision of ecosystem services from forests, but the willingness of forest owners to redirect management goals from wood production to the provision of public goods is crucial for sustaining ecosystem services. EU incentives in the forestry sector are still mainly oriented towards an anthropocentric vision of forest management. Forest owners and managers are diverse, and although many efforts have been made to understand the role of forest subsidies in private forest management, it is still necessary to analyse the different perspectives on forest subsidies with a regional comparative approach. This paper explores European private forest owners' affinity for subsidiesthrough survey data at European leveland estimates an ordered probit model to (i) analyse how private forest owners in Europe respond to subsidies in forestry, including regional differences in terms of affinity for subsidies, (ii) characterise the factors that influence these responses and (iii) discuss lessons learned related to forest owners' attitudes on subsidies and the implications for introducing similar kind of incentives such as payments for ecosystem services. Simulations were conducted to examine the potential effects of changes in property fragmentation or the time allotted to forest activities. Forest owners with an utilitarian view of forest management, bigger forest holdings, full or part-time farmers and forest owners from East Europe are most in favour of forest subsidies. Property fragmentation and absenteeism decreases affinity for subsidies.

show abstract

“…For example, while cultural services such as the ecotourism of coral reefs are relatively easy to quantify, services that are harder to incorporate, such as the spiritual value associated with watching the sun set over the sea, are frequently overlooked in ecosystem service assessments, and the overlap between these two services is not considered. While it can seem useful to determine the monetary value associated with ecosystem services for decision making purposes, few markets currently exist for these marine and coastal ecosystem services (Drake et al, 2013), which makes these values primarily useful on a local scale rather than in a national or global context and, therefore, easily ignored in largescale, long-term decisionmaking contexts.…”

Section: Social Dynamics and Value Complexitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenge of Implementing the Marine Ecosystem Service Concept

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of ecosystem services has gained traction as a means of linking societal benefits to the underlying ecology and functioning of ecosystems, and is now frequently included in decision-making and legislation. Moving the ecosystem service concept from theory into practice is now crucial. However, advancements in this area of research differ by ecosystem type, and marine systems lag significantly behind terrestrial counterparts in terms of understanding, implementation, and number of studies. In this paper we explore several reasons why ecosystem service research has been limited in marine systems and we outline the challenges that hinder progress. Marine systems suffer from a scarcity of spatial data relative to terrestrial counterparts. In terrestrial systems the spatial patterns of land-use/land-cover (LULC) are relatively straightforward to access via satellite and have been used as proxy indicators of service provisions. In contrast, remote sensing tools used to study the surface of the Earth are much less effective at capturing images of the seabed, and by extension marine habitats. Marine waters and their constituents are also frequently driven great distances by winds, tides, and currents. This creates a challenge for management as the identification and protection of areas where ecosystem services are exploited is not necessarily sufficient to ensure sustained service delivery. Further complications arise from the three-dimensional uses of marine systems, incorporating activities that use the sea surface, the water column and the benthic habitats below. Progress is being made as technological advancements are resulting in the acquisition of spatial data at faster rates and higher resolutions than previously possible. There is a growing capacity to map, model and value an increasing number of services with initiatives such as InVEST or principle-based modeling. We suggest that awareness is needed around the limited progress in marine systems as this could affect the way we value the biosphere and the relative proportion between biomes.

show abstract

Public preferences for production of local and global ecosystem services

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

Reducing Hydro-Meteorological Risk by Nature-Based Solutions: What Do We Know about People’s Perceptions?

Reducing Hydro-Meteorological Risk by Nature-Based Solutions: What Do We Know about People’s Perceptions?

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

The Challenge of Implementing the Marine Ecosystem Service Concept

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About