IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v139y2024ics0264837724000255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the human-nature nexus towards effective nature-based solutions: the Aral Sea case

Author

Listed:
  • Alikhanova, Shahzoda
  • Milner-Gulland, Eleanor Jane
  • Bull, Joseph William

Abstract

Incorporating societal challenges and values into the design of locally appropriate nature-based solutions (NbS) is an integral strategy for ensuring benefits for both communities and the environment. But how are human-nature relations impacted when the environments containing resources which are valued and relied on, undergo dramatic and sustained change on decadal timescales? To explore this interplay, we selected Muynak as a case study, once a thriving town on the shores of the former Aral Sea in Uzbekistan. We conducted a social survey among the residents to identify the use of natural resources and the values they assign to the most common and yet highly degraded resources in the area (wetlands, rangelands, afforested areas, the Aral Sea, and wildlife). The survey was complemented with expert interviews. Our study suggests that grasslands are the most frequently used of the resources under study, while wetlands and wildlife are generally more valued. Overall, resources were more culturally valued than financially, historically, or recreationally. The majority of respondents perceived a degradation in most natural resources over the past decade, particularly wetlands (79 %), followed by grasslands (48 %), and the Aral Sea (42 %). Wetlands were reported to be in a state of ongoing degradation by 79 % of respondents, which negatively affected the livelihoods of almost half of the households in the survey area. Afforested areas were the only resources reported to have a positive perceived change in both status and their effect on well-being. The vast majority of respondents (83 %) felt that human well-being was linked to environmental conditions. This study lays the foundation for future interventions to develop nature-based solutions to benefit both people and nature, and highlights the continuing value placed on nature by residents of an area that has suffered substantial anthropogenic degradation.

Suggested Citation

  • Alikhanova, Shahzoda & Milner-Gulland, Eleanor Jane & Bull, Joseph William, 2024. "Exploring the human-nature nexus towards effective nature-based solutions: the Aral Sea case," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:139:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724000255
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837724000255
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107073?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. 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.
    2. Bakhtiyor Karimov & Helmut Lieth & Mohira Kurambaeva & Irina Matsapaeva, 2005. "The Problems of Fishermen in the Southern Aral Sea Region," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 87-103, January.
    3. Jogo, Wellington & Hassan, Rashid, 2010. "Balancing the use of wetlands for economic well-being and ecological security: The case of the Limpopo wetland in southern Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1569-1579, May.
    4. Sophie Mok & Ernesta Mačiulytė & Pieter Hein Bult & Tom Hawxwell, 2021. "Valuing the Invaluable(?)—A Framework to Facilitate Stakeholder Engagement in the Planning of Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Crighton, Eric J. & Elliott, Susan J. & Meer, Joost van der & Small, Ian & Upshur, Ross, 2003. "Impacts of an environmental disaster on psychosocial health and well-being in Karakalpakstan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 551-567, February.
    6. Dasgupta, Partha, 2001. "Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199247882.
    7. Ryan P. Powers & Walter Jetz, 2019. "Global habitat loss and extinction risk of terrestrial vertebrates under future land-use-change scenarios," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(4), pages 323-329, April.
    8. Mengxue Liu & Hejie Wei & Xiaobin Dong & Xue-Chao Wang & Bingyu Zhao & Ying Zhang, 2022. "Integrating Land Use, Ecosystem Service, and Human Well-Being: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-31, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Sachet, Erwan & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Vanegas, Martha & Quintero, Marcela, 2017. "To what extent have the links between ecosystem services and human well-being been researched in Africa, Asia, and Latin America?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 201-212.
    2. Bartkowski, Bartosz, 2017. "Existence value, biodiversity, and the utilitarian dilemma," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2017, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    3. Das Gupta, Monica & Bongaarts, John & Cleland, John, 2011. "Population, poverty, and sustainable development : a review of the evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5719, The World Bank.
    4. Chunrong Mi & Liang Ma & Mengyuan Yang & Xinhai Li & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Oleksandra Oskyrko & Daniel Pincheira-Donoso & Lilly P. Harvey & Daniel Jablonski & Barbod Safaei-Mahroo & Hanyeh Ghaffari , 2023. "Global Protected Areas as refuges for amphibians and reptiles under climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    6. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    7. Agnar Sandmo, 2003. "Environmental Taxation and Revenue for Development," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-86, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Tandarić, Neven & Ives, Christopher D. & Watkins, Charles, 2022. "From city in the park to “greenery in plant pots”: The influence of socialist and post-socialist planning on opportunities for cultural ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    9. James Bohman, 2011. "Children and the Rights of Citizens: Nondomination and Intergenerational Justice," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 633(1), pages 128-140, January.
    10. Stergios Athanassoglou & Glenn Sheriff & Tobias Siegfried & Woonghee Huh, 2012. "Optimal Mechanisms for Heterogeneous Multi-Cell Aquifers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 265-291, June.
    11. Aarras, Nina & Rönkä, Mia & Kamppinen, Matti & Tolvanen, Harri & Vihervaara, Petteri, 2014. "Environmental technology and regional sustainability – The role of life-based design," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 52-59.
    12. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    13. van der Ploeg, Frederick, 2010. "Why do many resource-rich countries have negative genuine saving?: Anticipation of better times or rapacious rent seeking," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 28-44, January.
    14. Purnamita Dasgupta, 2008. "Measuring Sustainability with Macroeconomic Data for India," Working Papers id:1574, eSocialSciences.
    15. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Dietz, Simon & Neumayer, Eric, 2007. "Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 617-626, March.
    17. James P. Herrera & Jean Yves Rabezara & Ny Anjara Fifi Ravelomanantsoa & Miranda Metz & Courtni France & Ajilé Owens & Michelle Pender & Charles L. Nunn & Randall A. Kramer, 2021. "Food insecurity related to agricultural practices and household characteristics in rural communities of northeast Madagascar," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(6), pages 1393-1405, December.
    18. Parkinson, Aidan & Guthrie, Peter, 2014. "Evaluating the energy performance of buildings within a value at risk framework with demonstration on UK offices," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 40-55.
    19. Klasen, Stephan & Meyer, Katrin M. & Dislich, Claudia & Euler, Michael & Faust, Heiko & Gatto, Marcel & Hettig, Elisabeth & Melati, Dian N. & Jaya, I. Nengah Surati & Otten, Fenna & Pérez-Cruzado, Cés, 2016. "Economic and ecological trade-offs of agricultural specialization at different spatial scales," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 111-120.
    20. Stefan Baumgärtner & Moritz A. Drupp & Martin F. Quaas, 2017. "Subsistence, Substitutability and Sustainability in Consumption," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(1), pages 47-66, May.

    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:lauspo:v:139:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724000255. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-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.