IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v91y2020ics0264837719302261.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating preferences and social values for ecosystem services in local ecological management: A framework applied in Xiaojiang Basin Yunnan province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Weixin
  • Yu, Yang
  • Wu, Xiuqin
  • Pereira, Paulo
  • Lucas Borja, Manuel Esteban

Abstract

Previous works have made great progress in mapping and assessing ecosystem services (ES) that are directed toward exploring various aspects of ecological changes and economic values. These preferences, however, may neglect the important role of people who are the direct beneficiaries in this ecosystem. Therefore, including these stakeholders in ES assessment identifies their relations and perceptions between ecosystem services and society. In order to quantify and map these relations and perceptions, we designed and implemented an analytical framework based on the Public Participatory Geographic Information System (PPGIS) method to explore local stakeholders’ (Farmers, Government managers/Experts, and Company employees) similarities and differences in recognition of preferences and social values for ecosystem services in a typical Karst basin. Our results showed that remarkable differences appeared in preferences for ES across three groups. Farmers gave more preferences to provisioning services, Government managers/Experts to regulating and cultural services, and Company employees’ preferences were individualized. The spatial distributions and relations of social values for ES also showed great differentials. Provisioning services were always related to specific natural conditions, regulating services to forests, and cultural services to specific locations around tourism localities, forest, and wetland parks. The three stakeholder groups perceived more synergies than tradeoffs between the different ecosystem services. Landscape beauty was the most influential service in Farmers’ and Company employees’ perceptions, while Local climate change regulation was the most influential service in those of Government managers/Experts. The local stakeholders’ surveys can improve the enthusiasm of the local people to participate in environmental management and provide more socio-ecological information to help the managers alleviate the conflicts among different stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Weixin & Yu, Yang & Wu, Xiuqin & Pereira, Paulo & Lucas Borja, Manuel Esteban, 2020. "Integrating preferences and social values for ecosystem services in local ecological management: A framework applied in Xiaojiang Basin Yunnan province, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:91:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719302261
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719302261
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104339?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. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    2. Anzaldua, Gerardo & Gerner, Nadine V. & Lago, Manuel & Abhold, Katrina & Hinzmann, Mandy & Beyer, Sarah & Winking, Caroline & Riegels, Niels & Krogsgaard Jensen, Jørgen & Termes, Montserrat & Amorós, , 2018. "Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: The DESSIN ESS evaluation framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 318-326.
    3. Ciftcioglu, Gulay Cetinkaya, 2017. "Social preference-based valuation of the links between home gardens, ecosystem services, and human well-being in Lefke Region of North Cyprus," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 227-236.
    4. Sharon B. Phillips & Viney P. Aneja & Daiwen Kang & S. Pal Arya, 2006. "Modelling and analysis of the atmospheric nitrogen deposition in North Carolina," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(2/3), pages 231-252.
    5. Johnson, Dana N. & van Riper, Carena J. & Chu, Maria & Winkler-Schor, Sophia, 2019. "Comparing the social values of ecosystem services in US and Australian marine protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Ho Huu, Loc & Ballatore, Thomas J. & Irvine, Kim N. & Nguyen, Thi Hong Diep & Truong, Thi Cam Tien & Yoshihisa, Shimizu, 2018. "Socio-geographic indicators to evaluate landscape Cultural Ecosystem Services: A case of Mekong Delta, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 527-542.
    7. Shoyama, Kikuko & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2016. "Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 139-149.
    8. Paudyal, Kiran & Baral, Himlal & Keenan, Rodney John, 2018. "Assessing social values of ecosystem services in the Phewa Lake Watershed, Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 67-81.
    9. Simon G. Potts & Vera Imperatriz-Fonseca & Hien Ngo & Jacobus C. Biesmeijer & Tom Breeze & Lynn Dicks & Luigi Garibaldi & Josef Settele & A.J. Vanbergen & Marcelo A. Aizen & Saul A. Cunningham & Conna, 2016. "Summary for policymakers of the assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on pollinators, pollination and food production," Post-Print hal-01946814, HAL.
    10. García-Nieto, Ana P. & García-Llorente, Marina & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Martín-López, Berta, 2013. "Mapping forest ecosystem services: From providing units to beneficiaries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 126-138.
    11. Zhang, Wei & Kato, Edward & Bhandary, Prapti & Nkonya, Ephraim & Ibrahim, Hassan Ishaq & Agbonlahor, Mure & Ibrahim, Hussaini Yusuf & Cox, Cindy, 2016. "Awareness and perceptions of ecosystem services in relation to land use types: Evidence from rural communities in Nigeria," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 150-160.
    12. Jaligot, Rémi & Kemajou, Armel & Chenal, Jérôme, 2018. "Cultural ecosystem services provision in response to urbanization in Cameroon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 641-649.
    13. Klain, Sarah C. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2012. "Navigating coastal values: Participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 104-113.
    14. Fangfang Xun & Yecui Hu & Ling Lv & Jinhui Tong, 2017. "Farmers’ Awareness of Ecosystem Services and the Associated Policy Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Sherrouse, Benson C. & Semmens, Darius J., 2014. "Validating a method for transferring social values of ecosystem services between public lands in the Rocky Mountain region," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 166-177.
    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. He, Juan & Shi, Xueyi & Fu, Yangjun & Yuan, Ye, 2020. "Evaluation and simulation of the impact of land use change on ecosystem services trade-offs in ecological restoration areas, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    3. Weixuan Wei & Yiqi Wang & Qi Yan & Guanpeng Liu & Nannan Dong, 2024. "Assessing Buffer Gradient Synergies: Comparing Objective and Subjective Evaluations of Urban Park Ecosystem Services in Century Park, Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-33, November.
    4. Meijuan Liu & Juntao Zhong & Shiyu Xu, 2024. "Simulation of Spatial and Temporal Variations in the Water Yield Function in the Source Area of the Yellow River and an Analysis of Influencing Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Zhang, Guanshi & Zheng, Duo & Xie, Long & Zhang, Xiu & Wu, Hongjuan & Li, Sen, 2021. "Mapping changes in the value of ecosystem services in the Yangtze River Middle Reaches Megalopolis, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    6. Schutter, Marleen S. & Hicks, Christina C. & Phelps, Jacob & Belmont, Clara, 2021. "Disentangling ecosystem services preferences and values," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).

    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. Garcia, Xavier & Benages-Albert, Marta & Vall-Casas, Pere, 2018. "Landscape conflict assessment based on a mixed methods analysis of qualitative PPGIS data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 112-124.
    2. Pingarroni, Aline & Castro, Antonio J. & Gambi, Marcos & Bongers, Frans & Kolb, Melanie & García-Frapolli, Eduardo & Balvanera, Patricia, 2022. "Uncovering spatial patterns of ecosystem services and biodiversity through local communities' preferences and perceptions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    3. Scully-Engelmeyer, Kaegan M. & Granek, Elise F. & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Brown, Greg, 2021. "Participatory GIS mapping highlights indirect use and existence values of coastal resources and marine conservation areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    4. Hanna, Dalal E.L. & Roux, Dirk J. & Currie, Bianca & Bennett, Elena M., 2020. "Identifying pathways to reduce discrepancies between desired and provided ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    5. Ingrid Nesheim & Line Barkved, 2019. "The Suitability of the Ecosystem Services Framework for Guiding Benefit Assessments in Human-Modified Landscapes Exemplified by Regulated Watersheds—Implications for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Simon Lhoest & Cédric Vermeulen & Adeline Fayolle & Pierre Jamar & Samuel Hette & Arielle Nkodo & Kevin Maréchal & Marc Dufrêne & Patrick Meyfroidt, 2020. "Quantifying the Use of Forest Ecosystem Services by Local Populations in Southeastern Cameroon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, March.
    7. Chakraborty, Shamik & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Blasiak, Robert, 2020. "Multiple values for the management and sustainable use of coastal and marine ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    9. Mengist, Wondimagegn & Soromessa, Teshome & Feyisa, Gudina Legese & Jenerette, G. Darrel, 2022. "Socio-environmental determinants of the perceived value of moist Afromontane forest ecosystem services in Kaffa Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    10. Kim, Ilkwon & Lee, Jae-hyuck & Kwon, Hyuksoo, 2021. "Participatory ecosystem service assessment to enhance environmental decision-making in a border city of South Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    11. Semmens, Darius J. & Sherrouse, Benson C. & Ancona, Zach H., 2019. "Using social-context matching to improve spatial function-transfer performance for cultural ecosystem service models," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Das, Manob & Das, Arijit & Pandey, Rajiv, 2022. "Importance-performance analysis of ecosystem services in tribal communities of the Barind region, Eastern India," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    13. Claudia Canedoli & Craig Bullock & Marcus J. Collier & Deirdre Joyce & Emilio Padoa-Schioppa, 2017. "Public Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: Citizen Perception and Park Management in the Parco Nord of Milan (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-27, May.
    14. García-Nieto, Ana P. & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & García-Llorente, Marina & Palomo, Ignacio & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2015. "Collaborative mapping of ecosystem services: The role of stakeholders׳ profiles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 141-152.
    15. Tajima, Yuno & Hashimoto, Shizuka & Dasgupta, Rajarshi & Takahashi, Yasuo, 2023. "Spatial characterization of cultural ecosystem services in the Ishigaki Island of Japan: A comparison between residents and tourists," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Xin Cheng & Sylvie Van Damme & Pieter Uyttenhove, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Park Renovations on Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, April.
    17. Wai Soe Zin & Aya Suzuki & Kelvin S.-H. Peh & Alexandros Gasparatos, 2019. "Economic Value of Cultural Ecosystem Services from Recreation in Popa Mountain National Park, Myanmar: A Comparison of Two Rapid Valuation Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    18. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    19. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    20. Loc, Ho Huu & Park, Edward & Thu, Tran Ngoc & Diep, Nguyen Thi Hong & Can, Nguyen Trong, 2021. "An enhanced analytical framework of participatory GIS for ecosystem services assessment applied to a Ramsar wetland site in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).

    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:91:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719302261. 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.