Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region

Castro, Antonio; Martín‐López, Berta; García‐Llorente, Marina; Aguilera, Pedro A.; López, Enrique; Cabello, Javier

doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2011.05.013

Cited by 145 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…GI measures such as water plazas and green roofs would be more easily accepted if residents are informed about their adaptation capacity. Other studies found similar effects (Castro et al, 2011) but stress the need for clear policy communication and trust in municipal authorities (Lo & Jim, 2010). Our WTP analysis confirms this latter point.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Derkzen

Teeffelen

Verburg

2017

Landscape and Urban Planning

260

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

h i g h l i g h t s• Novel socio-cultural valuation framework for green infrastructure and climate impacts.• People are more aware of present-day heat waves but more alarmed by future flooding.• People tend to prefer diverse, familiar and visually attractive adaptation measures.• Environmental education can increase support for effective adaptation measures.• Results help planners prioritize effective and desired green infrastructure designs. a r t i c l e i n f o b s t r a c tCities are particularly prone to the effects of climate change. One way for cities to adapt is by enhancing their green infrastructure (GI) to mitigate the impacts of heat waves and flooding. While alternative GI design options exist, there are many unknowns regarding public support for the various options. This study aims to fill this gap by performing a socio-cultural valuation of urban GI for climate adaptation that encompasses multiple dimensions: people's notion of and concerns about climate impacts, the degree to which people acknowledge the benefits of GI to alleviate such impacts, and people's preferences for different GI measures, including their willingness to pay (WTP). Data were collected through photo-assisted face-to-face surveys (n = 200) with residents in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and linked to GI GIS data. Respondents had a notion of and concerns about climate impacts, but did not necessarily acknowledge that GI may help tackle these issues. Yet, when residents were informed about the adaptation capacity of different GI measures, their preferences shifted towards the most effective options. There was no information effect, however, on people's WTP for GI, which was mostly related to income and ethnicity. Our study shows that economic valuation alone would miss nuances that socio-cultural valuation as applied in this paper can reveal. The method revealed preferences for particular adaptation designs, and assists in detecting why policy for climate adaptation may be hampered. Understanding people's views on climate impacts and adaptation options is crucial for prioritizing effective policy responses in the face of climate change.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Derkzen

Teeffelen

Verburg

2017

Landscape and Urban Planning

260

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This lack of awareness probably resulted from a deficient understanding of the concept of biodiversity. Previous studies have found that stakeholder preferences towards biodiversity were influenced by socioeconomic and cultural level (Castro et al, 2011;Martín-López et al, 2007a). Our results support these findings, as they showed that local stakeholders (particularly direct users) had lower educational level, lower experience with environmental activities, and higher dependence on local natural resources than scientists and managers, probably as a consequence of their lower economic possibilities (Table 1).…”

Section: Stakeholder Preferences Regarding Ecosystem Servicessupporting

confidence: 88%

“…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%

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Derak

Taiquib

Aledoc

et al. 2016

Journal of Arid Environments

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

“…Previous ES studies have often related socio-cultural values to ESs provided by a conservation area in general, not differentiating between specific ecosystems or ecosystem components (Castro et al 2011;Tengberg et al 2012;Allendorf and Yang 2013;Petrosillo et al 2013;Sagie et al 2013). Our results show that there is substantial difference between asking people for their awareness of ESs provided by Persina in general and the specific wetland types.…”

Section: Linking Ess To Wetland Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Support for Wetland Restoration: What is the Link With Ecosystem Service Values?

Scholte¹,

Todorova²,

Teeffelen³

et al. 2016

Wetlands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fostering public support for wetland restoration is essential for long-term sustainable management and use of wetland areas. This paper explores the socio-cultural dimension of wetland restoration, by looking at the importance of wetland ecosystem services for different user groups. We try to better comprehend such values by evaluating the awareness people have of ecosystem services and the direct benefits people obtain from the ecosystems in their surroundings. In addition, we study how the values people assign to ecosystem services are related to wetland restoration attitudes. We identified four perspectives towards wetland restoration, which could partially be explained by corresponding values for ecosystem services: an eco-centric, a cultural, an economic and a negative perspective. To gather public support for wetland restoration it is important to take into account the different motivations people have to support such initiatives.

show abstract

Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region

Cited by 145 publications

References 43 publications

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area

Public Support for Wetland Restoration: What is the Link With Ecosystem Service Values?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About