IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i8p4765-d795037.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing Stakeholder Perceptions of Water Ecosystem Services to Enhance Resilience in the Middle Drâa Valley, Southern Morocco

Author

Listed:
  • Imane Mahjoubi

    (iES Landau, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, 76829 Landau, Germany)

  • Lisa Bossenbroek

    (iES Landau, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, 76829 Landau, Germany
    CRESC—Centre de Recherches et d’Études sur les Sociétés Contemporaines Rabat, Rabat 10020, Morocco)

  • Elisabeth Berger

    (iES Landau, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, 76829 Landau, Germany)

  • Oliver Frör

    (iES Landau, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, 76829 Landau, Germany)

Abstract

Freshwater ecosystems deliver an extensive range of ecosystem services (ESs), which are the benefits people obtain from their interaction with nature. Increasing pressure on water resources threatens the sustainable supply of water-related ecosystem services, especially in arid regions, as is the case for the Drâa Valley located in southern Morocco. With the long-term objective of contributing to a sustainable supply of important ecosystem services in the Drâa Valley, this paper analyzes stakeholder perceptions of water-related ecosystem services (WESs). To assess the different perceptions of WES, 35 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the inhabitants of three oases in the middle Drâa Valley, as well as 12 other interviews with key government officials. Based on our interviews, we reflect on two of the policy-relevant generic principles proposed by the Stockholm Resilience Centre for enhancing the resilience of WESs. Our results reveal similarities in perceptions of WES among stakeholder groups regarding provisioning services but marked differences regarding regulating and cultural services. The analysis suggests that these differences stem from stakeholders’ different roles and activities in the area. In addition, socio-demographic, biophysical, and spatial aspects also shape how WESs are perceived in the area. Learning about similarities in WES perceptions can help build common ground among stakeholders. The recognition of differences can also assist the balancing of the different needs and interests of these groups. ESs perception assessment can contribute to strengthened stakeholder knowledge of the categories of ESs and provide a common ground for participating in ES-related decision making, hence enhancing resilience in social–ecological systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Imane Mahjoubi & Lisa Bossenbroek & Elisabeth Berger & Oliver Frör, 2022. "Analyzing Stakeholder Perceptions of Water Ecosystem Services to Enhance Resilience in the Middle Drâa Valley, Southern Morocco," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:8:p:4765-:d:795037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/8/4765/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/8/4765/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Dolisca, Frito & McDaniel, Josh M. & Teeter, Lawrence D., 2007. "Farmers' perceptions towards forests: A case study from Haiti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 704-712, February.
    3. Silvano, Renato A.M. & Udvardy, Shana & Ceroni, Marta & Farley, Joshua, 2005. "An ecological integrity assessment of a Brazilian Atlantic Forest watershed based on surveys of stream health and local farmers' perceptions: implications for management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 369-385, May.
    4. Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Janusz R. Rak, 2020. "Consumers’ Perceptions of the Supply of Tap Water in Crisis Situations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Muhamad, Dendi & Okubo, Satoru & Harashina, Koji & Parikesit, & Gunawan, Budhi & Takeuchi, Kazuhiko, 2014. "Living close to forests enhances people׳s perception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 197-206.
    6. 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.
    7. Frances Cleaver, 1999. "Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 597-612.
    8. Simon L. Lewis & Mark A. Maslin, 2015. "Defining the Anthropocene," Nature, Nature, vol. 519(7542), pages 171-180, March.
    9. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    10. Guerbois, Chloé & Fritz, Hervé, 2017. "Patterns and perceived sustainability of provisioning ecosystem services on the edge of a protected area in times of crisis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 196-206.
    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. Muhamad, Dendi & Okubo, Satoru & Harashina, Koji & Parikesit, & Gunawan, Budhi & Takeuchi, Kazuhiko, 2014. "Living close to forests enhances people׳s perception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 197-206.
    2. Lima, Flávia Pereira & Bastos, Rogério Pereira, 2019. "Perceiving the invisible: Formal education affects the perception of ecosystem services provided by native areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Lhoest, Simon & Dufrêne, Marc & Vermeulen, Cédric & Oszwald, Johan & Doucet, Jean-Louis & Fayolle, Adeline, 2019. "Perceptions of ecosystem services provided by tropical forests to local populations in Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Dehghani Pour, Milad & Barati, Ali Akbar & Azadi, Hossein & Scheffran, Jürgen & Shirkhani, Mehdi, 2023. "Analyzing forest residents' perception and knowledge of forest ecosystem services to guide forest management and biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    5. 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).
    6. Wilhelm, Jennifer A. & Smith, Richard G. & Jolejole-Foreman, Maria Christina & Hurley, Stephanie, 2020. "Resident and stakeholder perceptions of ecosystem services associated with agricultural landscapes in New Hampshire," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Targetti, S. & Raggi, M. & Zavalloni, M. & Viaggi, D., 2021. "Perceived benefits from reclaimed rural landscapes: Evidence from the lowlands of the Po River Delta, Italy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    10. Gebregziabher, Dawit & Soltani, Arezoo, 2019. "Exclosures in people’s minds: perceptions and attitudes in the Tigray region, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 1-14.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    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. Hongjuan Zhang & Qian Pang & Huan Long & Haochen Zhu & Xin Gao & Xiuqing Li & Xiaohui Jiang & Kang Liu, 2019. "Local Residents’ Perceptions for Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of Fenghe River Watershed," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-19, September.
    15. 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).
    16. Syndhia Mathé & Hélène Rey-Valette, 2015. "Local Knowledge of Pond Fish-Farming Ecosystem Services: Management Implications of Stakeholders’ Perceptions in Three Different Contexts (Brazil, France and Indonesia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-23, June.
    17. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    18. Tironi, Martín & Rivera Lisboa, Diego Ignacio, 2023. "Artificial intelligence in the new forms of environmental governance in the Chilean State: Towards an eco-algorithmic governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    19. Józef Ober & Janusz Karwot, 2021. "Tap Water Quality: Seasonal User Surveys in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    20. 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.

    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:14:y:2022:i:8:p:4765-:d:795037. 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.