IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i16p6437-d397033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Key Insights of Sociological Risk Theory into the Ecosystem Services Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Sophie Peter

    (Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

Abstract

Environmental risks give urgency to the need to understand the society–nature relationship. While the ecosystem services (ES) framework allows analysis of interrelationships between biophysical supply and human demand for natural resources, further research is needed to understand what drives societal demand for ES. Here, I explore how incorporation of the key sociological theories of risk (systems theory, ‘world risk society’, and cultural theory of risk) can advance this understanding. By examining these theories, the following key insights were identified: (1) A deeper understanding of societal structures and risk perception helps to understand culturally driven patterns of ES demand; (2) sociological ES research must use inter- and transdisciplinary methods to understand the drivers of ES demand and risk perception. It must also link this understanding to the natural sciences’ knowledge of the drivers of ES supply if it is to identify new instruments of environmental governance; (3) while anthropocentric in character, the ES framework, especially one that is modified by the concept of risk, enables society to reflect on its role as a proactive part of a social–ecological system, rather than a passive victim of nature’s whims. This change in perspective may prove to be a key step in achieving sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Sophie Peter, 2020. "Integrating Key Insights of Sociological Risk Theory into the Ecosystem Services Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6437-:d:397033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6437/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6437/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bradley J. Cardinale & J. Emmett Duffy & Andrew Gonzalez & David U. Hooper & Charles Perrings & Patrick Venail & Anita Narwani & Georgina M. Mace & David Tilman & David A. Wardle & Ann P. Kinzig & Gre, 2012. "Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7401), pages 59-67, June.
    2. Christine Pearson & Christophe Roux-Dufort & Judith A. Clair, 2007. "International handbook of organizational crisis management," Post-Print hal-01892767, HAL.
    3. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    4. Christine Pearson & Christophe Roux-Dufort & Judith A. Clair, 2007. "International handbook of organizational crisis management," Post-Print hal-02298082, HAL.
    5. 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.
    6. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    7. Susanne Rippl, 2002. "Cultural theory and risk perception: a proposal for a better measurement," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 147-165, April.
    8. Marion Mehring & Uwe Zajonz & Diana Hummel, 2017. "Social-Ecological Dynamics of Ecosystem Services: Livelihoods and the Functional Relation between Ecosystem Service Supply and Demand—Evidence from Socotra Archipelago, Yemen and the Sahel Region, Wes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, C.S.A. (Kris) & van Ierland, Ekko C. & Leidekker, Jakob, 2016. "Temporal scales, ecosystem dynamics, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystems services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 109-119.
    10. 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.
    11. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    12. Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Lu, Nachuan & Dong, Xiaobin & Zhao, Yanan & Ya, Xijia & Zhao, Yifei, 2017. "Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 15-27.
    13. 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.
    14. Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & García-Llorente, Marina & Aguilera, Pedro A. & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2014. "Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services: uncovering the links between values, drivers of change, and human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 36-48.
    15. Potschin-Young, M. & Haines-Young, R. & Görg, C. & Heink, U. & Jax, K. & Schleyer, C., 2018. "Understanding the role of conceptual frameworks: Reading the ecosystem service cascade," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 428-440.
    16. Graeme S. Cumming & Andreas Buerkert & Ellen M. Hoffmann & Eva Schlecht & Stephan von Cramon-Taubadel & Teja Tscharntke, 2014. "Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 50-57, 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. Maebe, Laura & Dufrêne, Marc & Claessens, Hugues & Maréchal, Kevin & Ligot, Gauthier & Messier, Christian, 2023. "The Navigate framework: How the ecosystem services and resilience concepts can help us navigate in the current crises," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Juan F. Velasco-Muñoz & José A. Aznar-Sánchez & Marina Schoenemann & Belén López-Felices, 2022. "An Analysis of the Worldwide Research on the Socio-Cultural Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.

    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. María D. López-Rodríguez & Javier Cabello & Hermelindo Castro & Jaime Rodríguez, 2019. "Social Learning for Facilitating Dialogue and Understanding of the Ecosystem Services Approach: Lessons from a Cross-Border Experience in the Alboran Marine Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, September.
    2. 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).
    3. 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).
    4. Sattler, Claudia & Schröter, Barbara, 2022. "Collective action across boundaries: Collaborative network initiatives as boundary organizations to improve ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    5. Rova, Silvia & Stocco, Alice & Pranovi, Fabio, 2023. "Sustainability threshold for multiple ecosystem services in the Venice lagoon, Italy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Tusznio, Joanna & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2020. "Application of the ecosystem services concept at the local level – Challenges, opportunities, and limitations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    7. Uehara, Takuro & Hidaka, Takeshi & Tsuge, Takahiro & Sakurai, Ryo & Cordier, Mateo, 2021. "An adaptive social-ecological system management matrix for guiding ecosystem service improvements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    8. 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).
    9. Marull, Joan & Padró, Roc & Cirera, Jacob & Giocoli, Annalisa & Pons, Manel & Tello, Enric, 2021. "A socioecological integrated analysis of the Barcelona metropolitan agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    10. Alonso Roldán, Virginia & Galván, David E. & Lopes, Priscila F.M. & López, Jaime & Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina & Gallego, Federico & Cinti, Ana & Rius, Pía & Schröter, Barbara & Aguado, Mateo & Muñoz , 2019. "Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Wang, Zhuangzhuang & Fu, Bojie & Zhang, Liwei & Wu, Xutong & Li, Yingjie, 2022. "Ecosystem service assessments across cascade levels: typology and an evidence map," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    12. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    13. 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.
    14. 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).
    15. Gissi, Elena & Garramone, Vito, 2018. "Learning on ecosystem services co-production in decision-making from role-playing simulation: Comparative analysis from Southeast Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 228-253.
    16. Marius Nita & Sorela-Maria Pruteanu, 2020. "The Importance of Military Management in Pandemic Crises Management," Book chapters-LUMEN Proceedings, in: Marcin Waldemar STANIEWSKI & Valentina VASILE & Adriana Grigorescu (ed.), International Conference Innovative Business Management & Global Entrepreneurship (IBMAGE 2020), edition 1, volume 14, chapter 12, pages 157-167, Editura Lumen.
    17. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    18. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    19. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    20. Michael C. Withers & Kevin G. Corley & Amy J. Hillman, 2012. "Stay or Leave: Director Identities and Voluntary Exit from the Board During Organizational Crisis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 835-850, June.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6437-:d:397033. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.