Social capital as a determinant for raising ecosystem services awareness - an application to an Albanian pastoral ecosystem

Abstract

This paper aims to map the ecosystem services (ES) provided by a reputed agropastoral ecosystem in the south of Albania and ascertain whether social capital affects the level of importance attributed to them. A perception analysis of both buyers and sellers of ES within the pastoral ecosystem is undertaken. The pastoral ecosystem is mainly evaluated for cultural services such as tradition, enhancing the area’s image, and environment ES. The strong inclination towards cultural ES and socioeconomic services indicates a lack of awareness of both buyers and sellers of ES in the local community regarding the environmental aspects of their ecosystem. However, participants showing a higher radius of trust with high linking social capital are more likely to confer very high importance to environmental services. Similarly, the cultural ES (traditional aspect) of the pastoral ecosystem is affected by cognitive and structural social capital. These are interesting findings for public policymaking concerning the opportunity to develop market transaction ES. Its development is more ground-based and effective if participation and civic engagement, especially the Linking dimension, is enhanced in the pastoral community.

The Contingency of Trust in Environmental Behaviour: Does the social trap affect Zed Generation? Evidence from Albania

“…Institutional trust moderates (increase or decrease) the radius of trust, and the latter affects the following pathways a1-CCA-CCR, a2-CCA-CME and c`-CCA-EB. The validity of using IT and RT is also demonstrated in other similar research undertaken in Albania Kokthi, Muço, et al, 2021). In the same vien the work of Barnett et al(2019) relate the trust to isnitutions with the approach towards politics and highlights the conservative people about politics show at the same time a decresed level of attitude toward environmental issues.…”

Fifteen years of Landscape Online: Looking back at the development of an e-journal

“…In contrast to these new topics, the topic around ecosystem services becomes less significant, although a number of publications are regularly published in the LSI (Augstburger et al, 2018;Kokthi et al, 2021;Scolozzi et al, 2019;Wübbelmann et al, 2021;Zelený et al, 2020). Furthermore, a range of articles continues to focus on landscape structure and dynamics (Belda-Carrasco et al, 2019;Cieślak and Biłozor, 2022;Dekaraja and Mahanta, 2022;Flores et al, 2019;Giné, 2018;Istanbuly et al, 2022;Khoroshev, 2019;Oppermann et al, 2021;Schmalz and Kruse, 2019;Silva et al, 2020;Stoicescu et al, 2019), landscape vegetation and ecosystems (Botti, 2019;Carlier and Moran, 2019;Mustafa et al, 2018;Ojeda, 2018), landscape management (Buendía et al, 2021;Hanberry, 2022;MacDonald et al, 2020;Raatikainen, 2018;Siagian et al, 2022), and conceptual ideas in the field of landscape ecology (Helm and Buchroithner, 2018).…”

What explains collective action: The impact of social capital, incentive structures and economic benefits

“…However, the cooperation among farmers in Albania is critically underdeveloped (FAO, 2020;Sokoli et al, 2021) even compared to new EU member states with a communist legacy (Gijselinckx & Bussels, 2014). Collective action is strongly correlated or conditioned by trust-various studies show that there has been growing distrust during transition to a market economy, which has negatively affected collective action not only in the case of the agriculture sector but also in other areas such as natural resource management as well as rotating savings and credit schemes which were far more common during communism (Imami et al, 2020;Kokthi et al, 2021aKokthi et al, , 2021bRama, 2016). Similar challenges have been found also in other Western Balkan countries, such as North Macedonia, where farmers, especially small ones, are found to be significantly less likely to join community organizations (Gorton et al, 2009).…”