IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aieabj/308840.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefits for the local society attached to rural landscape: An analysis of residents’ perception of ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Targetti, Stefano
  • Raggi, Meri
  • Viaggi, Davide

Abstract

Ecosystem services are the benefits for society deriving from ecosystems. The perception of ecosystem services by local residents is relevant to understand the extent to which such services contribute to society and regional development. The objective of this study is to assess the perception of ecosystem services associated to rural landscape by local residents and to use them to respond to two main questions: Are residents able to attribute flows of services from specific landscape elements to the different socioeconomic sectors? Are such perceptions affected by the different land-scape features of the area of residency (e.g. rural vs. urban dwellers)? The analysis is carried out using data from a survey (n=295) in a rural area located in North Italy (Po Delta lowlands, Province of Ferrara). The results show that the urban population has a rather generic and positive consideration of ecosystem services associated to rural landscape elements and that perception is largely related to their recreational experi-ence. The rural population has a more complex understanding of services and is more prone to acknowledge disservices associated to specific elements and/or specific socio-economic sectors. Such differences are likely connected to a more direct experience and to the different spatial scales that affect the perception of ecosystem services. The results indicate that cultural services such as recreation and actions linked to the pro-motion of the territory are commonly acknowledged. On the other hand, initiatives to enhance the awareness of less visible services (e.g. regulation services) would be useful for improving the valorization of specific landscape elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Targetti, Stefano & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2020. "Benefits for the local society attached to rural landscape: An analysis of residents’ perception of ecosystem services," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(2), August.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aieabj:308840
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.308840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/308840/files/Targetti_et_al_BAE_9_2_2020.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.308840?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Severino, Romano & Vanni, Francesco & Viaggi, Davide, 2020. "Economics of culture and food in evolving agri-food systems and rural areas," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(2), August.
    2. Targetti, S. & Raggi, M. & Zavalloni, M. & Viaggi, D., 2021. "Perceived benefits from reclaimed rural landscapes: Evidence from the lowlands of the Po River Delta, Italy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Gios, Geremia & Farinelli, Stefano & Kheiraoui, Flavia & Martini, Fabrizio & Orlando, Jacopo Gabriele, 2022. "Pesticides, crop choices and changes in well-being," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 11(2), July.
    4. Lucia Rocchi & Anastasija Novikova & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2022. "Assessing Consumer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Agricultural Landscape Attributes in Lithuania," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    2. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    3. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    4. Yangcheng Hu & Yi Liu & Changyan Li, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation of Land Use Change and Ecosystem Service Value in the Middle Reaches of Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    5. Tanner, Michael K. & Moity, Nicolas & Costa, Matthew T. & Marin Jarrin, Jose R. & Aburto-Oropeza, Octavio & Salinas-de-León, Pelayo, 2019. "Mangroves in the Galapagos: Ecosystem services and their valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 12-24.
    6. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Breffle, William S. & Muralidharan, Daya & Donovan, Richard P. & Liu, Fangming & Mukherjee, Amlan & Jin, Yongliang, 2013. "Socioeconomic evaluation of the impact of natural resource stressors on human-use services in the Great Lakes environment: A Lake Michigan case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 152-161.
    8. Uta Schirpke & Lukas Egarter Vigl & Erich Tasser & Ulrike Tappeiner, 2019. "Analyzing Spatial Congruencies and Mismatches between Supply, Demand and Flow of Ecosystem Services and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Madleina Gerecke & Oskar Hagen & Janine Bolliger & Anna M. Hersperger & Felix Kienast & Bronwyn Price & Loïc Pellissier, 2019. "Assessing potential landscape service trade-offs driven by urbanization in Switzerland," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Reyes-García, Victoria & Menendez-Baceta, Gorka & Aceituno-Mata, Laura & Acosta-Naranjo, Rufino & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Domínguez, Pablo & Garnatje, Teresa & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Molina-Bustamante, M, 2015. "From famine foods to delicatessen: Interpreting trends in the use of wild edible plants through cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 303-311.
    12. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    13. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    14. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    16. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    17. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    18. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    19. Fabiana Forte & Paolo Cupo, 2024. "The Collective Domains in the Ecological Transition: A Preliminary Analysis in an Inner Area in the Campania Region, Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, May.
    20. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community/Rural/Urban Development;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aieabj:308840. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.