Effects of land tenure and protected areas on ecosystem services and land use preferences in Norway

Land Use Policy

Volumn 49, Issue , 2014, Pages 446-461

  Hausner, Vera Helene ^a   Brown, Greg ^b   Lægreid, Eiliv ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Commons; Ecosystem values; Land tenure; PPGIS; Protected areas

Indexed keywords

ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FISHING; HUNTING; LAND TENURE; LAND USE; NATURE CONSERVATION; PROTECTED AREA; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

NORWAY;

EID: 84946412996     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.08.018     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Antrop M. Why landscapes of the past are important for the future?. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2005, 70(1):21-34.
2. Berge E. Protected areas and traditional commons: Values and institutions. Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr. - Nor. J. Geogr. 2006, 60:65-76. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/ (accessed 13. 02.15.).
3. Beverly J., Uto K., Wilkes J., Bothwell P. Assessing spatial attributes of forest landscape values: an internet-based participatory mapping approach. Can. J. For. Res. 2008, 38:289-303.
4. Beyer, H., 2014. Geospatial Modelling Environment. Available from (accessed 27.08.15). http://www.spatialecology.com/gme/.
5. Bjerke T., Kleiven J., Thrane C. Outdoor recreation interests and environmental attitudes in Norway. Manag. leisure 2006, 11. 37-44.
6. Bonilla-Moheno M., Redo D.J., Aide T.M., Clark M.L., Grau H.R. Vegetation change and land tenure in Mexico: a country-wide analysis. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:355-364.
7. Brown G. Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource management: methods and applications. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2005, 18(1). 1-23.
8. Brown G. An empirical evaluation of the spatial accuracy of public participation GIS (PPGIS) data. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 34:289-294.
9. Brown G., Alessa L. A GIS-based inductive study of wilderness values. Int. J. Wilderness 2005, 11(1):14-18.
10. Brown G., Fagerholm N. Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: a review and evaluation. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 13:119-133.
11. Brown G., Kyttä M. Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): a synthesis based on empirical research. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 46:122-136.
12. Brown G., Raymond C. Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 122:196-208.
13. Brown G., Reed P. Social landscape metrics: measures for understanding place values from public participation geographic information systems (PPGIS). Landsc. Res. 2012, 37:73-90.
14. Brown G., Reed P. Validation of a forest values typology for use in national forest planning. For. Sci. 2000, 46(2):240-247.
15. Brown G., Reed P. Public participation GIS: a new method for use in national forest planning. For. Sci. 2009, 55:166-182.
16. Brown G., Weber D., de Bie K. Assessing the value of public lands using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and social landscape metrics. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 53:77-89.
17. Burkhard B., Kroll F., Nedkov S., Müller F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21:17-29.
18. Carpenter S.R., Mooney H.A., Agard J., Capistrano D., DeFries R.S., Díaz S., et al. Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009, 106(5):1305-1312.
19. Clement-Potter J. Spatially Explicit Values on the Pike and San Isabel National Forests in Colorado (Ph.D. Thesis) 2006, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, thesis).
20. Costanza R., Wilson M., Troy A., Voinov A., Liu S., D'Agostino J. The value of New Jersey's ecosystem services and natural capital. Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 2006, 13.
21. De Groot R.S., Alkemade R., Braat L., Hein L., Willemen L. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7(3):260-272.
22. De Groot R.S., Wilson M.A., Boumans R.M. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 41(3):393-408.
23. Díaz S., Demissew S., Carabias J., Joly C., Lonsdale M., Ash N., et al. The IPBES conceptual framework-connecting nature and people. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015, 14:1-16.
24. Daugstad K., Rønningen K., Skar B. Agriculture as an upholder of cultural heritage? Conceptualizations and value judgements-a Norwegian perspective in international context. J. Rural Stud. 2006, 22(1):67-81.
25. Daugstad K., Svarstad H., Vistad O.I. A case of conflicts in conservation: two trenches or a three-dimensional complexity?. Landsc. Res. 2006, 31(1):1-19.
26. Daugstad K., Mier M.F., Peña-Chocarro L. Landscapes of transhumance in Norway and Spain: farmers' practices, perceptions, and value orientations. Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr.-Nor. J. Geogr. 2014, 68(4):248-258.
27. Dramstad W.E., Sang N. Tenancy in Norwegian Agriculture. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:946-956.
28. Emmelin L., Kleven T. A paradigm of environmental bureaucracy? Attitudes, thought styles and world view in the Norwegian environmental administration. NIBR's Pluss Series 5-99 1999, Norwegian Institute of Urban and Regional Research, Oslo, Norway.
29. Fagerholm N., Käyhkö N., Ndumbaro F., Khamis M. Community stakeholders' knowledge in landscape assessments -mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 18:421-433.
30. Falleth E.I., Hovik S. Local government and nature conservation in Norway: decentralisation as a strategy in environmental policy. Local Environ. 2009, 14(3):221-231.
31. Falkanger T. Allmenningsrett 2009, Universitetsforlaget, ISBN 978-82-15-01529-3.
32. Fauchald O.K., Gulbrandsen L.H. The Norwegian reform of protected area management: a grand experiment with delegation of authority?. Local Environ. 2012, 17(2):203-222.
33. Fjellstad W., Mittenzwei K., Dramstad W., Øvren E. Landscape protection as a tool for managing agricultural landscapes in Norway. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12(8):1144-1152.
34. Gangaas K.E., Kaltenborn B.P., Andreassen H.P. Environmental attitudes associated with large-scale cultural differences, not local environmental conflicts. Environ. Conserv. 2015, 42:41-50.
35. Haukeland J.V., Daugstad K., Vistad O.I. Harmony or conflict? A focus group study on traditional use and tourism development in and around Rondane and Jotunheimen national parks in Norway. Scand. J. of Hosp. Tour. 2011, 11:13-37.
36. Hausner V.H. National parks and protected areas: Norway. Encyclopedia of the Arctic 2005.
37. Hausner V.H., Fauchald P., Jernsletten J.L. Community-based management: under what conditions do Sami pastoralists manage pastures sustainably?. PLoS One 2012, e51187.
38. Holland M.B., de Koning F., Morales M., Naughton-Treves L., Robinson B.E., Suárez L. Complex tenure and deforestation: implications for conservation incentives in the Ecuadorian Amazon. World Dev. 2014, 55:21-36. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0305750x13000181 (accessed 20.01.15.).
39. Kaiser H.F. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1960, 20(1):141-151.
40. Kaltenborn B.P., Haaland H., Sandell K. The public right of access -some challenges to sustainable tourism development in Scandinavia. J. Sustain. Tour. 2001, 9:417-433.
41. Kaltenborn B.P., Hongslo E., Gundersen V., Andersen O. Public perceptions of planning objectives for regional level management of wild reindeer in Norway. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2015, 58(5):819-836.
42. Kitamura K., Clapp R.A. Common property protected areas: community control in forest conservation. Land Use Policy 2013, 34:204-212.
43. Lambin E.F., Meyfroidt P., Rueda X., Blackman A., Börner J., et al. Effectiveness and synergies of policy instruments for land use governance in tropical regions. Global Environ. Change 2014, 28:129-140.
44. Lågbu, R., Aune-Lundberg, L., Bye, A.S., Gundersen, G.I., Strand, G.-H., 2012. Arealstatistikk: Eiendommer og utmark. The Norwegian Forestry and Landscape Institute (Skog og landskap). Report 14/12: vol. 24 s. Available from: (accessed 22.07.15.). http://www.skogoglandskap.no/filearchive/rapport_14_12_arealstatistikk_eiendommer_og_utmark.pdf.
45. Martínez-Harms M.J., Balvanera P. Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst Serv Manag 2012, 8(1-2):17-25.
46. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assesment) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment 2005, Island Press, Washington D.C.
47. Nelson A., Chomitz K. Effectiveness of strict vs. multiple use protected areas in reducing tropical forest fires: a global analysis using matching methods. PLoS ONE 2011, 6. 1-22722.
48. Netting R.M. Balancing on an Alp: ecological change and continuity in a Swiss mountain community. CPU Archive 1981.
49. NOU (Norwegian Official Report) 2004:28, 2004. Act of 19 June 2009 No. 100 Relating to the Management of Biological, Geological and Landscape Diversity (Nature Diversity Act), Ministry of the Environment, Oslo.
50. Nolte C., Agrawal A., Silvius K.M., Soares-Filho B.S. Governance regime and location influence avoided deforestation success of protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2013, 110(13):4956-4961.
51. Olsson E.G.A., Austrheim G., Grenne S.N. Landscape change patterns in mountains, land use and environmental diversity, Mid-Norway 1960-1993. Landsc. Ecol. 2000, 15(2):155-170.
52. Olsson E.G.A., Hanssen S., Rønningen K. Different conservation values of biological diversity? A case study from the Jotunheimen mountain range, Norway. Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr.-Nor. J. Geogr. 2004, 58(4):204-212.
53. Ostrom E., Janssen M., Anderies J. Going beyond panaceas. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2007, 104(39):15176-15178.
54. Plieninger T., Hartel T., Martín-López B., Beaufoy G., Bergmeier E., Kirby K., Montero M., Moreno G., Oteros-Rozas E., Uytvanck J. Wood-pastures of Europe: geographic coverage, social-ecological values, conservation management, and policy implications. Biol. Conserv. 2015, 190:70-79.
55. Raudsepp-Hearne C., Peterson G.D., Bennett E.M. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2010, 107(11):5242-5247.
56. Reiten M. Rights of common and conservation of nature in Skjåk municipality. Centre for land tenure studies 10/13. Norw. Univ. Life Sci., Aas (In Norwegian) 2013.
57. Robinson B.E., Holland M.B., Naughton-Treves L. Does secure land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure and tropical deforestation. Global Environ. Change 2014, 29:281-293.
58. Rodríguez-Ortega T., Oteros-Rozas E., Ripoll-Bosch R., Tichit M., Martín-López B., Bernués A. Applying the ecosystem services framework to pasture-based livestock farming systems in Europe. Animal 2014, 8(8):1361-1372.
59. Sherrouse B.C., Clement J.M., Semmens D.J. A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31(2):748-760.
60. Soliva R., Hunziker M. How do biodiversity and conservation values relate to landscape preferences? A case study from the Swiss Alps. Biodivers. Conserv. 2009, 18(9):2483-2507.
61. Statistics Norway, 2013. Population and housing census 2011. http://www.ssb.no/en/innrapportering/personer-og-husholdning/fob2011.
62. van Gils H., Siegl G., Bennett R.M. The living commons of West Tyrol, Austria: lessons for land policy and land administration. Land Use Policy 2014, 38:16-25.