IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v66y2016icp250-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing and operationalizing human wellbeing for ecosystem assessment and management

Author

Listed:
  • Breslow, Sara Jo
  • Sojka, Brit
  • Barnea, Raz
  • Basurto, Xavier
  • Carothers, Courtney
  • Charnley, Susan
  • Coulthard, Sarah
  • Dolšak, Nives
  • Donatuto, Jamie
  • García-Quijano, Carlos
  • Hicks, Christina C.
  • Levine, Arielle
  • Mascia, Michael B.
  • Norman, Karma
  • Poe, Melissa
  • Satterfield, Terre
  • Martin, Kevin St.
  • Levin, Phillip S.

Abstract

There is growing interest in assessing the effects of changing environmental conditions and management actions on human wellbeing. A challenge is to translate social science expertise regarding these relationships into terms usable by environmental scientists, policymakers, and managers. Here, we present a comprehensive, structured, and transparent conceptual framework of human wellbeing designed to guide the development of indicators and a complementary social science research agenda for ecosystem-based management. Our framework grew out of an effort to develop social indicators for an integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA) of the California Current large marine ecosystem. Drawing from scholarship in international development, anthropology, geography, and political science, we define human wellbeing as a state of being with others and the environment, which arises when human needs are met, when individuals and communities can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and when individuals and communities enjoy a satisfactory quality of life. We propose four major social science-based constituents of wellbeing: connections, capabilities, conditions, and cross-cutting domains. The latter includes the domains of equity and justice, security, resilience, and sustainability, which may be assessed through cross-cutting analyses of other constituents. We outline a process for identifying policy-relevant attributes of wellbeing that can guide ecosystem assessments. To operationalize the framework, we provide a detailed table of attributes and a large database of available indicators, which may be used to develop measures suited to a variety of management needs and social goals. Finally, we discuss four guidelines for operationalizing human wellbeing measures in ecosystem assessments, including considerations for context, feasibility, indicators and research, and social difference. Developed for the U.S. west coast, the framework may be adapted for other regions, management needs, and scales with appropriate modifications.

Suggested Citation

  • Breslow, Sara Jo & Sojka, Brit & Barnea, Raz & Basurto, Xavier & Carothers, Courtney & Charnley, Susan & Coulthard, Sarah & Dolšak, Nives & Donatuto, Jamie & García-Quijano, Carlos & Hicks, Christina , 2016. "Conceptualizing and operationalizing human wellbeing for ecosystem assessment and management," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 250-259.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:66:y:2016:i:c:p:250-259
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116303719
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.023?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kwaku Addai & Berna Serener & Dervis Kirikkaleli, 2022. "Asymmetricity in the Effect of Economic and Environmental Factors on Social Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from Eastern European Economies using Dynamic Analysis with CCEMG & D-H Causality Approac," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 12(3), pages 75-93.
    2. Joe Baldwin & Claire Haven-Tang & Steve Gill & Nigel Morgan & Annette Pritchard, 2021. "Using the Perceptual Experience Laboratory (PEL) to simulate tourism environments for hedonic wellbeing," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 45-67, March.
    3. Nathan J. Bennett & Jessica Blythe & Andrés M. Cisneros-Montemayor & Gerald G. Singh & U. Rashid Sumaila, 2019. "Just Transformations to Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Wenhao Qi & Wei Xu & Xiulin Qi & Meng Sun, 2023. "Can Environmental Protection Behavior Enhance Farmers' Subjective Well-Being?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 505-528, February.
    5. Hambur Wang, 2024. "Can ESG Investment and the Implementation of the New Environmental Protection Law Enhance Public Subjective Well-being?," Papers 2411.06110, arXiv.org.
    6. Xiaoyu Li & Shudan Gong & Qingdong Shi & Yuan Fang, 2023. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Based on Bibliometric Analysis: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, November.
    7. Havrda, Marek & Klocek, Adam, 2023. "Well-being impact assessment of artificial intelligence – A search for causality and proposal for an open platform for well-being impact assessment of AI systems," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Maiko Nishi, 2023. "Japanese land reform in the new era? Farmers’ wellbeing and sustainable farmland management," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(3), pages 429-447, May.
    9. Ilyes Boumahdi & Nouzha Zaoujal, 2023. "Regional Well-Being Disparities in Morocco and its OECD Partners," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 183-211, June.
    10. Matthew Berman & Robert W. Orttung, 2020. "Measuring Progress toward Urban Sustainability: Do Global Measures Work for Arctic Cities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Joe Baldwin & Claire Haven-Tang & Steve Gill & Nigel Morgan & Annette Pritchard, 0. "Using the Perceptual Experience Laboratory (PEL) to simulate tourism environments for hedonic wellbeing," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-23.
    12. Kwaku Addai & Berna Serener & Dervis Kirikkaleli, 2022. "Asymmetricity in the Effect of Economic and Environmental Factors on Social Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from Eastern European Economies using Dynamic Analysis with CCEMG & D-H Causality Approac," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 12(3), pages 75-92.
    13. Dean C. Stronge & Bryan A. Stevenson & Garth R. Harmsworth & Robyn L. Kannemeyer, 2020. "A Well-Being Approach to Soil Health—Insights from Aotearoa New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-12, September.
    14. L'Roe, Jessica & Detoeuf, Diane & Wieland, Michelle & Ikati, Bernard & Enduyi Kimuha, Moïse & Sandrin, François & Angauko Sukari, Odette & Nzale Nkumu, Junior & Kretser, Heidi E. & Wilkie, David, 2023. "Large-scale monitoring in the DRC’s Ituri forest with a locally informed multidimensional well-being index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Ebun Akinsete & Stella Apostolaki & Nikos Chatzistamoulou & Phoebe Koundouri & Stella Tsani, 2019. "The Link between Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing in the Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: Assessing Four River Basins in Europe," DEOS Working Papers 1911, Athens University of Economics and Business.

    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:enscpo:v:66:y:2016:i:c:p:250-259. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.