IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v16y2015icp201-211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiences – risks, challenges and tested tools

Author

Listed:
  • Spangenberg, Joachim H.
  • Görg, Christoph
  • Settele, Josef

Abstract

Conceptually, stakeholder participation in the governance of ecosystem services (ESS) is necessary for several reasons, some of them well-known for sustainability governance in general but some more specific for ecosystem services. In particular the failure of monetary valuation to provide meaningful valuation instruments requires participation of a representative diversity of stakeholders in ESS research and governance to answer the question what people value, and how. Building upon experience from transdisciplinary research projects in Asia, Africa and Europe, we argue that successful participation depends on the specific socio-cultural context and requires different means and modes of participation during different project phases. We list a variety of tested methods, with reference to the pros and cons each of them has. The challenges we describe are structured according to theoretical concepts, but not derived from them but from project experience. They are formidable, both conceptually and empirically, but with good project coordination such difficulties can be anticipated and handled.

Suggested Citation

  • Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Görg, Christoph & Settele, Josef, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiences – risks, challenges and tested tools," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 201-211.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:16:y:2015:i:c:p:201-211
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041615300310
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.006?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. Maestre Andrés, Sara & Calvet Mir, Laura & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Ring, Irene & Verburg, Peter H., 2012. "Ineffective biodiversity policy due to five rebound effects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 101-110.
    2. Iulie Aslaksen & Solveig Glomsrød & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2013. "Post-normal science and ecological economics: strategies for precautionary approaches and sustainable development," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 16(1/2), pages 107-126.
    3. de Oliveira, Luiz Eduardo Chimello & Berkes, Fikret, 2014. "What value São Pedro's procession? Ecosystem services from local people's perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 114-121.
    4. 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.
    5. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    6. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    7. Costanza, Robert & Farber, Steve, 2002. "Introduction to the special issue on the dynamics and value of ecosystem services: integrating economic and ecological perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 367-373, June.
    8. Stephen Polasky & Kris Johnson & Bonnie Keeler & Kent Kovacs & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Andrew J. Plantinga & John Withey, 2012. "Are investments to promote biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services aligned?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 139-163, Spring.
    9. Jahn, Thomas & Bergmann, Matthias & Keil, Florian, 2012. "Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-10.
    10. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Georgiou, Stavros & Lake, Iain, 2006. "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 450-460, December.
    11. Laurans, Yann & Mermet, Laurent, 2014. "Ecosystem services economic valuation, decision-support system or advocacy?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 98-105.
    12. Brandt, Patric & Ernst, Anna & Gralla, Fabienne & Luederitz, Christopher & Lang, Daniel J. & Newig, Jens & Reinert, Florian & Abson, David J. & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2013. "A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 1-15.
    13. Gallai, Nicola & Salles, Jean-Michel & Settele, Josef & Vaissière, Bernard E., 2009. "Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 810-821, January.
    14. Mayumi, Kozo & Giampietro, Mario, 2006. "The epistemological challenge of self-modifying systems: Governance and sustainability in the post-normal science era," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 382-399, May.
    15. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    16. AvcI, Duygu & Adaman, Fikret & Özkaynak, Begüm, 2010. "Valuation languages in environmental conflicts: How stakeholders oppose or support gold mining at Mount Ida, Turkey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 228-238, December.
    17. Hertz, Tilman & Schlüter, Maja, 2015. "The SES-Framework as boundary object to address theory orientation in social–ecological system research: The SES-TheOr approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 12-24.
    18. Christie, Mike & Rayment, Matt, 2012. "An economic assessment of the ecosystem service benefits derived from the SSSI biodiversity conservation policy in England and Wales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 70-84.
    19. Abson, D.J. & von Wehrden, H. & Baumgärtner, S. & Fischer, J. & Hanspach, J. & Härdtle, W. & Heinrichs, H. & Klein, A.M. & Lang, D.J. & Martens, P. & Walmsley, D., 2014. "Ecosystem services as a boundary object for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 29-37.
    20. Funtowicz, Silvio O. & Ravetz, Jerome R., 1994. "The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 197-207, August.
    21. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    22. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    23. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    24. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    25. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    26. Hirsch Hadorn, Gertrude & Bradley, David & Pohl, Christian & Rist, Stephan & Wiesmann, Urs, 2006. "Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 119-128, November.
    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. Berthet, Elsa T. & Bretagnolle, Vincent & Gaba, Sabrina, 2022. "Place-based social-ecological research is crucial for designing collective management of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    2. Scemama, Pierre & Mongruel, Rémi & Kermagoret, Charlène & Bailly, Denis & Carlier, Antoine & Mao, Patrick Le & Vaschalde, et Diane, 2022. "Guidance for stakeholder consultation to support national ecosystem services assessment: A case study from French marine assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Schmidt, Laura & Falk, Thomas & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2020. "The Objectives of Stakeholder Involvement in Transdisciplinary Research. A Conceptual Framework for a Reflective and Reflexive Practise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    4. Byg, Anja & Novo, Paula & Dinato, Mengistu & Moges, Awdenegest & Tefera, Tewodros & Balana, Bedru & Woldeamanuel, Teshale & Black, Helaina, 2017. "Trees, soils, and warthogs – Distribution of services and disservices from reforestation areas in southern Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 112-119.
    5. Abdullah Addas & Ahmad Maghrabi & Ran Goldblatt, 2021. "Public Open Spaces Evaluation Using Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) in Saudi Universities: The Case of King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    8. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    9. Falk, Thomas & Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Kobbe, Susanne & Feike, Til & Kuebler, Daniel & Settele, Josef & Vorlaufer, Tobias, 2018. "Identifying governance challenges in ecosystem services management – Conceptual considerations and comparison of global forest cases," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PB), pages 193-203.
    10. Suwarno, Aritta & Hein, Lars & Weikard, Hans-Peter & van Noordwijk, Meine & Nugroho, Bayu, 2018. "Land-use trade-offs in the Kapuas peat forest, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 340-351.
    11. Ainscough, Jacob & Wilson, Meriwether & Kenter, Jasper O., 2018. "Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 93-101.
    12. Stępniewska, Małgorzata & Lupa, Piotr & Mizgajski, Andrzej, 2018. "Drivers of the ecosystem services approach in Poland and perception by practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 59-67.
    13. Lopes, Rita & Videira, Nuno, 2019. "How to articulate the multiple value dimensions of ecosystem services? Insights from implementing the PArticulatES framework in a coastal social-ecological system in Portugal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Sarkki, Simo, 2017. "Governance services: Co-producing human well-being with ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 82-91.
    15. Hermanns, Till & Helming, Katharina & König, Hannes J. & Schmidt, Katharina & Li, Qirui & Faust, Heiko, 2017. "Sustainability impact assessment of peatland-use scenarios: Confronting land use supply with demand," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 365-376.
    16. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, Mart, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.

    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Christian Schleyer & Alexandra Lux & Marion Mehring & Christoph Görg, 2017. "Ecosystem Services as a Boundary Concept: Arguments from Social Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-14, June.
    4. 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).
    5. Jacobs, Sander & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David N. & Dunford, Robert & Harrison, Paula A. & Kelemen, Eszter & Saarikoski, Heli & Termansen, Mette & García-Llorente, Marina & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2018. "The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 515-528.
    6. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    7. Ainscough, Jacob & Wilson, Meriwether & Kenter, Jasper O., 2018. "Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 93-101.
    8. 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.
    9. Schmidt, Laura & Falk, Thomas & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2020. "The Objectives of Stakeholder Involvement in Transdisciplinary Research. A Conceptual Framework for a Reflective and Reflexive Practise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Maia de Souza, Danielle & Lopes, Gabriela Russo & Hansson, Julia & Hansen, Karin, 2018. "Ecosystem services in life cycle assessment: A synthesis of knowledge and recommendations for biofuels," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 200-210.
    11. 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).
    12. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    13. Bull, J.W. & Jobstvogt, N. & Böhnke-Henrichs, A. & Mascarenhas, A. & Sitas, N. & Baulcomb, C. & Lambini, C.K. & Rawlins, M. & Baral, H. & Zähringer, J. & Carter-Silk, E. & Balzan, M.V. & Kenter, J.O. , 2016. "Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats: A SWOT analysis of the ecosystem services framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 99-111.
    14. Brück, Maria & Abson, David J. & Fischer, Joern & Schultner, Jannik, 2022. "Broadening the scope of ecosystem services research: Disaggregation as a powerful concept for sustainable natural resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    15. Tadaki, Marc & Allen, Will & Sinner, Jim, 2015. "Revealing ecological processes or imposing social rationalities? The politics of bounding and measuring ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 168-176.
    16. Tokunaga, Kanae & Sugino, Hiroaki & Nomura, Hideaki & Michida, Yutaka, 2020. "Norms and the willingness to pay for coastal ecosystem restoration: A case of the Tokyo Bay intertidal flats," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    17. Marina Knickel & Karlheinz Knickel & Francesca Galli & Damian Maye & Johannes S. C. Wiskerke, 2019. "Towards a Reflexive Framework for Fostering Co—Learning and Improvement of Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    18. Hoelting, Kristin R. & Martinez, Doreen E. & Schuster, Rudy M. & Gavin, Michael C., 2024. "Advancing knowledge pluralism and cultural benefits in ecosystem services theory and application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    19. Masiero, Mauro & Franceschinis, Cristiano & Mattea, Stefania & Thiene, Mara & Pettenella, Davide & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2018. "Ecosystem services’ values and improved revenue collection for regional protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 136-153.
    20. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.

    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:ecoser:v:16:y:2015:i:c:p:201-211. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.