Please find attached two recently published papers mapping ecosystem services through PPGIS approach. The first paper, Fagerholm et al., addresses assessment of ecosystem service benefits perceived and mapped by residents (n=2,301) across 13 multifunctional landscapes in Europe and the second, Plieninger et al., has focus on analyzing perceived
ecosystem services synergies, trade-offs, and bundles based on the PPGIS data. Abstracts below.
Fagerholm et al. (2019), Cross-site analysis of perceived ecosystem service benefits in multifunctional landscapes
Rural development policies in many Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries promote sustainable landscape management with the intention of providing multiple ecosystem services (ES). Yet, it remains unclear which ES benefits are perceived in different landscapes and by different people. We present an assessment of ES benefits perceived and mapped by residents (n=2,301) across 13 multifunctional (deep rural to peri-urban) landscapes in Europe. We identify the most intensively perceived ES benefits, their spatial patterns, and the respondent and landscape characteristics that determine ES benefit perception. We find outdoor recreation, aesthetic values and social interactions are the key ES benefits at local scales. Settlement areas are ES benefit hotspots but many benefits are also related to forests, waters and mosaic landscapes. We find some ES benefits (e.g. culture and heritage values) are spatially clustered, while many others (e.g. aesthetic values) are dispersed. ES benefit perception is linked to people’s relationship with and accessibility to a landscape. Our study discusses how a local perspective can contribute to the development of contextualized and socially acceptable policies for sustainable ES management. We also address conceptual confusion in ES framework and present argumentation regarding the links from services to benefits, and from
benefits to different types of values.
Plieninger et al., 2019, Perceived ecosystem services synergies, trade-offs, and bundles in European high nature value farming landscapes
Context Around 30% of European agricultural landscapes are classified as high nature value (HNV) farmlands. Current policies emphasize the multifunctionality of these landscapes, but little is known about the positive and negative associations of multiple ecosystem services within HNV farmland. Objectives This study aims to identify perceived ecosystem services synergies, trade-offs, and bundles in agricultural landscapes of HNV from a sociocultural
We performed a participatory mapping survey of 10 ecosystem services categories among 2301 rural residents in 13 European sites. We analyzed bivariate synergies and trade-offs between perceived ecosystem services through nonparametric correlation analyses. Spatial bundles of perceived ecosystem services were identified through hierarchical cluster analysis. Multinomial logit models were used to assess the influence of land cover on generating associations
of ecosystem services.
We find two strong and 16 moderate synergies of perceived ecosystem services (out of 46 possible ecosystem services pairs), mainly among different cultural ecosystem services. We do not reveal moderate or strong trade-offs. We identify five spatial bundles of ecosystem services, termed ‘‘Ecosystem services coldspots’’, ‘‘Wild harvesting ranges’’, ‘‘Nature reas’’, ‘‘Recreational spaces’’, and ‘‘Ecosystem services hotspots’’. Of all land-cover co-variates, natural areas, urban areas, and roads have the strongest explanatory power.
Our study complements prevailing biophysical and economic analyses of ecosystem services synergies, trade-offs and bundles by a spatially explicit, socio-cultural perspective. We conclude that socio-cultural mapping of ecosystem services is useful for understanding the perceived multifunctionality of a landscape.
Nora Fagerholm, PhD
Department of Geography and Geology
University of Turku
FI-20014 Turku, Finland
+358 29 450 3572