IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v143y2018icp47-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reasons for Adoption and Advocacy of the Ecosystem Services Concept in UK Forestry

Author

Listed:
  • Raum, Susanne

Abstract

The ecosystem services concept has enjoyed widespread interest and recognition in recent years. In particular, the monetary valuation and commodification of ecosystem services in form of payments for ecosystem services schemes and the development of new markets for ecosystem services has appreciated large popularity. However, who is behind this strong momentum towards ecosystem services and especially why is less well known. In this paper I aim to shed light on this by looking specifically at advocates of the concept of ecosystem services, using forestry in the United Kingdom (UK) as an example. I explore the motivations for accommodating or actively pursuing ecosystem services thinking in this important sector through interviews with forestry and conservation experts. Four prominent groups with a specific interest in the ecosystem services concept in the context of UK forestry are governmental organisations, non-governmental conservation organisations, private forest owners, and the timber and forest industry. These stakeholder groups are interested in this new perspective, chiefly, but not exclusively, because (1) it is required under international obligations; (2) it is in line with dominant market political philosophy; (3) it holds the promise to include the environment more fully into prevailing economic decision-making processes; (4) it can help to draw more attention to biodiversity conservation; (5) it holds the promise of new sources of income from both public and private sources; and (6) it can be used as a convenient argument to promote further tree planting. However, these groups have different, but frequently overlapping reasons for pursuing this new perspective. The results provide a baseline and important insights into who was embracing ecosystem services thinking and why during the early years of the adoption of this approach in the UK.

Suggested Citation

  • Raum, Susanne, 2018. "Reasons for Adoption and Advocacy of the Ecosystem Services Concept in UK Forestry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 47-54.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:143:y:2018:i:c:p:47-54
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800916314847
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    2. Fisher, Janet A. & Brown, Katrina, 2014. "Ecosystem services concepts and approaches in conservation: Just a rhetorical tool?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 257-265.
    3. A S Mather, 2001. "Forests of Consumption: Postproductivism, Postmaterialism, and the Postindustrial Forest," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(2), pages 249-268, April.
    4. Clive Potter & Steven Wolf, 2014. "Payments for ecosystem services in relation to US and UK agri-environmental policy: disruptive neoliberal innovation or hybrid policy adaptation?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(3), pages 397-408, September.
    5. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    6. Muradian, Roldan & Rival, Laura, 2012. "Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 93-100.
    7. Amacher, Gregory S. & Ollikainen, Markku & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2014. "Forests and ecosystem services: Outlines for new policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-3.
    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. Jang-Hwan Jo & Taewoo Roh & Jongmin Hwang & Kyeong-hak Lee & Changbae Lee, 2020. "Factors and Paths Affecting Payment for Forest Ecosystem Service: Evidence from Voluntary Forest Carbon Market in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    3. Pecurul-Botines, Mireia & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni, 2019. "Multi-level processes and the institutionalization of forest conservation discourses: Insights from Natura 2000," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 136-145.
    4. Altmann, Alexandre & Berger Filho, Airton Guilherme, 2020. "Certification and labeling for conservation of ecosystem services in the Pampa Biome: Case study of the Aliança do Pastizal scheme," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    5. Jones, Kelly W. & Powlen, Kathryn & Roberts, Ryan & Shinbrot, Xoco, 2020. "Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    6. Raum, Susanne, 2018. "A framework for integrating systematic stakeholder analysis in ecosystem services research: Stakeholder mapping for forest ecosystem services in the UK," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 170-184.
    7. van Oudenhoven, Alexander P.E. & Aukes, Ewert & Bontje, Lotte E. & Vikolainen, Vera & van Bodegom, Peter M. & Slinger, Jill H., 2018. "‘Mind the Gap’ between ecosystem services classification and strategic decision making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 77-88.

    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. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    2. Maczka, Krzysztof & Chmielewski, Piotr & Jeran, Agnieszka & Matczak, Piotr & van Riper, Carena J., 2019. "The ecosystem services concept as a tool for public participation in management of Poland’s Natura 2000 network," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 173-183.
    3. Steger, Cara & Hirsch, Shana & Evers, Cody & Branoff, Benjamin & Petrova, Maria & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Wardropper, Chloe & van Riper, Carena J., 2018. "Ecosystem Services as Boundary Objects for Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 153-160.
    4. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    5. Lima, Letícia Santos de & Ramos Barón, Pablo Andres & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Krueger, Tobias, 2019. "Will PES Schemes Survive in the Long-term Without Evidence of Their Effectiveness? Exploring Four Water-related Cases in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 211-223.
    6. Cook, David & Malinauskaite, Laura & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Ögmundardóttir, Helga, 2021. "Co-production processes underpinning the ecosystem services of glaciers and adaptive management in the era of climate change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Schröter, Matthias & Kraemer, Roland & Mantel, Martin & Kabisch, Nadja & Hecker, Susanne & Richter, Anett & Neumeier, Veronika & Bonn, Aletta, 2017. "Citizen science for assessing ecosystem services: Status, challenges and opportunities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 80-94.
    8. Sattler, Claudia & Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Meyer, Claas, 2018. "Methods in ecosystem services governance analysis: An introduction," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 155-168.
    9. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & Ávila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    10. Prevost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey & Michelot, Agnès, 2016. "Économie politique des services écosystémiques : de l’analyse économique aux évolutions juridiques," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 19.
    11. Molina Murillo, Sergio A. & Pérez Castillo, Juan Pablo & Herrera Ugalde, María Elena, 2014. "Assessment of environmental payments on indigenous territories: The case of Cabecar-Talamanca, Costa Rica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 35-43.
    12. Adam P. Hejnowicz & Murray A. Rudd, 2017. "The Value Landscape in Ecosystem Services: Value, Value Wherefore Art Thou Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-34, May.
    13. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    14. Muradian, Roldan & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2021. "Beyond ecosystem services and nature's contributions: Is it time to leave utilitarian environmentalism behind?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    15. Hysing, Erik, 2021. "Challenges and opportunities for the Ecosystem Services approach: Evaluating experiences of implementation in Sweden," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    16. Géraldine Froger & Valérie Boisvert & Philippe Méral & Jean-François Le Coq & Armelle Caron & Olivier Aznar, 2015. "Market-Based Instruments for Ecosystem Services between Discourse and Reality: An Economic and Narrative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-17, August.
    17. Jacob, Céline & Vaissiere, Anne-Charlotte & Bas, Adeline & Calvet, Coralie, 2016. "Investigating the inclusion of ecosystem services in biodiversity offsetting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 92-102.
    18. Aijun Guo & Yongnian Zhang & Fanglei Zhong & Daiwei Jiang, 2020. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of Ecosystem Service Value Changes and Their Coordination with Economic Development: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-17, November.
    19. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.
    20. Suhardiman, Diana & Wichelns, Dennis & Lestrelin, Guillaume & Thai Hoanh, Chu, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services in Vietnam: Market-based incentives or state control of resources?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 94-101.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:143:y:2018:i:c:p:47-54. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.