Assessing linkages between ecosystem services, land-use and well-being in an agroforestry landscape using public participation GIS

Applied Geography

Volumn 74, Issue , 2016, Pages 30-46

  Fagerholm, Nora ^a,b   Oteros Rozas, Elisa ^a,c   Raymond, Christopher M ^d   Torralba, Mario ^a   Moreno, Gerardo ^e   Plieninger, Tobias ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSIDAD PABLO DE OLAVIDE   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF EXTREMADURA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Dehesa; Landscape management; Landscape values; Participatory mapping; Public participation GIS (PPGIS); Silvopastoral

Indexed keywords

AGROFORESTRY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; GIS; LAND MANAGEMENT; LAND USE; LOCAL PARTICIPATION;

EID: 84978923807     PISSN: 01436228     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Berbés-Blázquez, M., A participatory assessment of ecosystem services and human wellbeing in Rural Costa Rica Using Photo-Voice. Environmental Management 49 (2012), 862–875.
2. Bieling, C., Plieninger, T., Pirker, H., Vogl, C.R., Linkages between landscapes and human well-being: An empirical exploration with short interviews. Ecological Economics 105 (2014), 19–30.
3. Brown, G., Fagerholm, N., Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation. Ecosystem Services 13 (2015), 119–133.
4. Brown, G., Montag, J.M., Lyon, K., Public participation GIS: A method for identifying ecosystem services. Society & Natural Resources 25 (2012), 633–651.
5. Brown, G., Reed, P., Validation of a forest values typology for use in national forest planning. Forest Science 46 (2000), 240–247.
6. Brown, G., Reed, P., Public participation GIS: A new method for use in national forest planning. Forest Science 55 (2009), 166–182.
7. Brown, G.G., Reed, P., Harris, C.C., Testing a place-based theory for environmental evaluation: An Alaska case study. Applied Geography 22 (2002), 49–76.
8. Brown, G., Weber, D., de Bie, K., Assessing the value of public lands using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and social landscape metrics. Applied Geography 53 (2014), 77–89.
9. Burton, R.J.F., Seeing through the ’good farmer's’ eyes: Towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of ‘productivist’ behaviour. Sociologia Ruralis 44 (2004), 195–215.
10. Burton, R.J.F., Understanding farmers’ aesthetic preference for tidy agricultural landscapes: A Bourdieusian perspective. Landscape Research 37 (2012), 51–71.
11. Campos, P., Ovando, P., Montero, G., Does private income support sustainable agroforestry in Spanish dehesa?. Land Use Policy 25 (2008), 510–522.
12. Campos, P., Oviedo, J.L., Caparros, A., Huntsinger, L., Coelho, I., Contingent valuation of woodland-owner private amenities in Spain, Portugal, and California. Rangeland Ecology & Management 62 (2009), 240–252.
13. Castro, A.J., Martín-López, B., López, E., Plieninger, T., Alcaraz-Segura, D., Vaughn, C.C., et al. Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Applied Geography 60 (2015), 1–9.
14. Chan, K.M.A., Satterfield, T., Goldstein, J., Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics 74 (2012), 8–18.
15. Costanza, R., D'Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387 (1997), 253–260.
16. Crossman, N.D., Burkhard, B., Nedkov, S., Willemen, L., Petz, K., Palomo, I., et al. A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 4 (2013), 4–14.
17. Daniel, T.C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J.W., Chan, K.M.A., et al. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 23 (2012), 8812–8819.
18. Daw, T., Brown, K., Rosendo, S., Pomeroy, R., Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: The need to disaggregate human well-being. Environmental Conservation 38 (2011), 370–379.
19. Ebdon, D., Statistics in Geography. 1985, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
20. EEA (European Environmental Agency), Natura 2000 data – The European network of protected sites. 2012 http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-4#tab-gis-data Downloaded 9.4.2014.
21. EEA (European Environmental Agency), Corine land cover 2006. 2013 http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/corine-land-cover-2006-raster-3 23.10.2015. Downloaded 9.4.2014.
22. EEA (European Environmental Agency), The common international classification of ecosystem services (CICES) V4.3. 2014 http://www.cices.eu/ Accessed 25.10.14.
23. Eichhorn, M.P., Paris, P., Herzog, F., Incoll, L.D., Liagre, F., Mantzanas, K., et al. Silvoarable systems in Europe – Past, present and future prospects. Agroforestry Systems 67 (2006), 29–50.
24. Fagerholm, N., Käyhkö, N., Ndumbaro, F., Khamis, M., Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments – Mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecological Indicators 18 (2012), 421–433.
25. Fagerholm, N., Torralba, M., Herzog, F., Burgess, P.J., Plieninger, T., A systematic map of ecosystem services assessments around European agroforestry. Ecological Indicators 62 (2015), 47–65.
26. Felipe-Lucia, M., Martín-López, B., Lavorel, S., Berraquero-Díaz, L., Escalera-Reyes, J., Comín, F.A., Ecosystem services flows: Why stakeholders’ power relationships matter. PLoS ONE, 10, 2015, e0132232.
27. García-Llorente, M., Martín-López, B., Iniesta-Arandia, I., López-Santiago, C.A., Aguilera, P.A., Montes, C., The role of multi-functionality in social preferences toward semi-arid rural landscapes: An ecosystem service approach. Environmental Science & Policy 19–20 (2012), 136–146.
28. Gómez-Baggethun, E., Mingorría, S., Reyes-García, V., Calvet, L., Montes, C., Traditional ecological knowledge trends in the transition to a market Economy: Empirical study in the Doñana natural areas. Conservation Biology 24 (2010), 721–729.
29. de Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A., Boumans, R.M.J., A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41 (2002), 393–408.
30. Hartel, T., Fischer, J., Câmpeanu, C., Milcu, A.I., Hanspach, J., Fazey, I., The importance of ecosystem services for rural inhabitants in a changing cultural landscape in Romania. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 2014, 42.
31. Hausmann, A., Slotow, R., Burns, J.K., Di Minin, E., The ecosystem service of sense of place: Benefits for human well-being and biodiversity conservation. Environmental Conservation 43 (2015), 117–127, 10.1017/S0376892915000314.
32. Hausner, V.H., Brown, G., Lægreid, E., Effects of land tenure and protected areas on ecosystem services and land use preferences in Norway. Land Use Policy 49 (2015), 446–461.
33. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadística), Censos de Población y Viviendas 2011. Resultados definitivos, 2015 http://www.ine.es/censos2011_datos/cen11_datos_resultados.htm Downloaded 20.4.2015.
34. Ingold, T., The temporality of the landscape. World Archaeology 25 (1993), 152–174.
35. Ives, C.D., Kendal, D., The role of social values in the management of ecological systems. Journal of Environmental Management 144 (2014), 67–72.
36. Kyttä, M., Broberg, A., Haybatollahi, M., Schmidt-Thomé, K., Urban happiness: Context-sensitive study of the social sustainability of urban settings. Environment and Planning B 47:1 (2015), 1–24.
37. Lechner, A.M., Raymond, C.M., Adams, V.M., Polyakov, M., Gordon, A., Rhodes, J.R., et al. Characterizing spatial uncertainty when integrating social data in conservation planning. Conservation Biology 28 (2014), 1497–1511.
38. López-Santiago, C.A., Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., Plieninger, T., Martín, E.G., González, J.A., Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: The case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 2014, 27.
39. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. 2005, Island Press, Washington D.C.
40. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J.P., et al. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosystem Services 1 (2012), 31–39.
41. Martín-López, B., Iniesta-Arandia, I., García-Llorente, M., Palomo, I., Casado-Arzuaga, I., Del Amo, D.G., et al. Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE, 7, 2012, e38970.
42. Martínez-Harms, M.J., Balvanera, P., Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: A review. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 8 (2012), 17–25.
43. McAdam, J.H., Burgess, P.J., Graves, A.R., Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., Mosquera-Losada, M., Classifications and functions of agroforestry systems in Europe. Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., McAdam, J., Mosquera-Losada, M., (eds.) Agroforestry in Europe. Current status and future prospects, 2009, Springer, Netherlands, 21–41.
44. Moreno, G., Pulido, F.J., The functioning, management and persistence of dehesas. Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., McAdam, J., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., (eds.) Agroforestry in Europe. Current status and future prospects, 2009, Springer, Netherlands, 127–160.
45. Mosquera-Losada, M., McAdam, J.H., Romero-Franco, R., Santiago-Freijanes, J., Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., Rigueiro-Rodróguez, A., McAdam, J., Mosquera-Losada, M., (eds.) Definitions and components of agroforestry practices in Europe, 2009, Springer, Netherlands, 3–19.
46. Nair, P.R., The coming of age of agroforestry. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 87 (2007), 1613–1619.
47. Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., González, J.A., Plieninger, T., López, C.A., Montes, C., Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services in a transhumance social-ecological network. Regional Environmental Change 14 (2014), 1269–1289.
48. Palomo, I., Martín-López, B., Potschin, M., Haines-Young, R., Montes, C., National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosystem Services 4 (2013), 104–116.
49. Pinto-Correia, T., Barroso, F., Surová, D., Menezes, H., The fuzziness of montado landscapes: Progress in assessing user preferences through photo-based surveys. Agroforestry Systems 82 (2011), 209–224.
50. Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., Bieling, C., Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33 (2013), 118–129.
51. Plieninger, T., Hartel, T., Martín-López, B., Beaufoy, G., Bergmeier, E., Kirby, K., et al. Wood-pastures of Europe: Geographic coverage, social–ecological values, conservation management, and policy implications. Biological Conservation 190 (2015), 70–79.
52. Rao, C., The use and interpretation of principal component analysis in applied research. Sankhya. The Indian Journal of Statistics Series A, 1964, 329–358.
53. Raymond, C.M., Bryan, B.A., MacDonald, D.H., Cast, A., Strathearn, S., Grandgirard, A., et al. Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 68 (2009), 1301–1315.
54. Raymond, C.M., Kenter, J.O., Plieninger, T., Turner, N.J., Alexander, K.A., Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 107 (2014), 145–156.
55. Raymond, C.M., Curtis, A., Mapping community values for regional sustainability in the Lower Hunter region of NSW, NERP Landscape and Policy Research Hub. NERP Landscape and Policy Research Hub. 2013, The University of Tasmania.
56. Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Cumming, G.S., Elmqvist, T., Hejnowicz, A.P., Polasky, S., Getting the measure of ecosystem services: A social-ecological approach. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11 (2013), 268–273.
57. Schaich, H., Plieninger, T., Land ownership drives stand structure and carbon storage of deciduous temperate forests. Forest Ecology and Management 305 (2013), 146–157.
58. Scholte, S.S.K., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Verburg, P.H., Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods. Ecological Economics 114 (2015), 67–78.
59. Schröter, M., van der Zanden, E.H., van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Remme, R.P., Serna-Chavez, H.M., de Groot, R.S., et al. Ecosystem services as a contested concept: A synthesis of critique and counter-arguments. Conservation Letters 7:6 (2014), 514–523, 10.1111/conl.12091.
60. Scolozzi, R., Schirpke, U., Detassis, C., Abdullah, S., Gretter, A., Mapping Alpine landscape values and related threats as perceived by tourists. Landscape Research 40 (2014), 451–465.
61. Setten, G., Stenseke, M., Moen, J., Ecosystem services and landscape management: Three challenges and one plea. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 8 (2012), 305–312.
62. Seymour, E., Curtis, A., Pannell, D., Allan, C., Roberts, A., Understanding the role of assigned values in natural resource management. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 17 (2010), 142–153.
63. Sherrouse, B.C., Clement, J.M., Semmens, D.J., A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Applied Geography 31 (2011), 748–760.
64. Silverman, B.W., Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. 1986, Chapman and Hall, New York.
65. Smith, J., Pearce, B.D., Wolfe, M.S., Reconciling productivity with protection of the environment: Is temperate agroforestry the answer?. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 28 (2013), 80–92.
66. de Snoo, G.R., Herzon, I., Staats, H., Burton, R.J.F., Schindler, S., van Dijk, J., et al. Toward effective nature conservation on farmland: Making farmers matter. Conservation Letters 6 (2013), 66–72.
67. Stenseke, M., Biodiversity and the local context: Linking seminatural grasslands and their future use to social aspects. Environmental Science & Policy 9 (2006), 350–359.
68. Stephenson, J., The Cultural Values Model: An integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landscape Urban Plann 84 (2008), 127–139.
69. Torralba, M., Fagerholm, N., Burgess, P.J., Moreno, G., Plieninger, T., Do European agroforestry systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services? A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 230 (16 August 2016), 150–161 ISSN 0167-8809 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.06.002.
70. Vallés-Planells, M., Galiana, F., Van Eetvelde, V., A classification of landscape services to support local landscape planning. Ecology and Society, 19(1), 2014, 44.
71. Van Riper, C.J., Kyle, G.T., Capturing multiple values of ecosystem services shaped by environmental worldviews: A spatial analysis. Journal of Environmental Management 145 (2014), 374–384.
72. Veen, P., Jefferson, R., de Smidt, J., van der Straaten, J., Grasslands in Europe of high nature value. 2009, KNNV Publishing, Zeist, 319.
73. Villamagna, A., Giesecke, C., Adapting human well-being frameworks for ecosystem service assessments across diverse landscapes. Ecology and Society, 19(1), 2014, 11.
74. Villamor, G.B., Palomo, I., Santiago, C.A.L., Oteros-Rozas, E., Hill, J., Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions and values towards social-ecological systems using participatory methods. Ecological Processes 3 (2014), 1–12, 10.1186/s13717-014-0022-9.
75. Weber, D., Anderson, D., Contact with Nature: Recreation experience preferences in Australian parks. Annals of Leisure Research 13 (2010), 46–69.
76. Williams, D.R., Patterson, M.E., Environmental meaning and ecosystem management: Perspectives from environmental psychology and human geography. Society & Natural Resources 9 (1996), 507–521.