Suchergebnisse

Cultural ecosystem services research is in a somewhat tumultuous state. The cultural ecosystem services (CES) idea is seen simultaneously as a welcoming, expansive addition to conservation policy-making and as a strange, square-peg-in-a-round-hole concept that should be replaced by a more appropriate metaphor or conceptual structure. This confluence of interest and skepticism suggests an opportune moment to take stock of CES, both as a concept and growing scholarly field. Here, we focus on dilemmas that characterize and constitute CES as a field of empirical inquiry and practice. We describe five tensions that characterize the field (and mirror tensions in interdisciplinary work more broadly): universalism and anti-universalism; reductionism and non-reductionism; historical and ahistorical approaches; politicized and depoliticized approaches; and objectivity and situated knowledges. We then suggest five non-mutually-exclusive roles that CES research can (and does) play: The Convener/Illuminator; the Process Police Officer; the Translator; the Revolutionary; and the Policy In-fighter. We provide examples of each tension and role, and posit that clarity and reflexivity may help to make sense of a fertile, if sometimes confusing, interdisciplinary field. Making more sense of, and being more explicit about, the contradictions and contributions of the CES field, can, we suggest, aid decision-makers, CES researchers, and others to better include these values in environmental management.

Abstract
Despite being intangible, subjective and difficult to measure, cultural ecosystem services (CES) are more comprehensible and meaningful to people than many other services. They contribute greatly to the quality of urban life and achieving sustainability. Yet, little attention has been paid to how CES might practically be incorporated into urban planning. This paper addresses this gap by examining the challenges planners might face when handling CES, establishing strategies for addressing the challenges and highlighting key factors planners should consider when planning for CES. CES differ greatly from other ecosystem services—they are definitionally vague, difficult to measure, often bundled with other services and depend on users' perceptions and situational factors. Therefore, rather than adopting a deterministic approach to generating CES, we suggest that urban planners should seek to create opportunities for CES to 'hatch' and 'grow' as people encounter nature in cities. This paper draws from diverse theoretical considerations of the CES concept as well as greenspace planning scholarship and practice. We identify five factors that need to be considered when planning for CES: place, people, past, practices and purpose. We see the proposed '5P' framework as a useful heuristic for planners when implementing CES in urban planning.

AbstractTo sustain cultural ecosystem services and cultural heritage it is important to go in depth in the science policy interface, because efficient governance mechanisms emerge from the cooperation of scientists and practitioners. In the Basque Country, we are on the road towards adaptive and resilient landscape management through an integrative approach that enhances the link between science, policy-making and society. Key elements of this approach are: The establishment from the outset of a transdisciplinar community of practice; the creation of specific transdisciplinar working groups to go in depth with concrete applicability measures; a strong outreach strategy and educational programs development; and last but not least, the involvement of stakeholders at multiple stage of the process. Diverse research lines are carried out during the process (e.g. mapping ecosystems services, analyzing social perceptions), whose results are combined to help identify response options for sustainable landscape. Relevant policy implementations of the results of this broad research are already taking place in the Basque Country. The proved utility of this working mechanism makes key agents to continue involved, and to attract more agents into the process. These transdisciplinary processes facilitate the creation of synergies and win-win solutions towards sustainable management of cultural ecosystem services.

This study shows how socio-cultural diversity of countries gives benefits to human well-being from ASEAN region perspectives. The relevance of CES to indicate human well-being is based on a few indicators such as emotions, stress, health, and happiness. Previous studies show that there was a significant relationship between the existence of CES and human well-being. However, those studies only provide the knowledge quantitatively. The authors also found that to discuss CES only from quantitative approach is absurd because CES cannot be separated from spiritual and religious services.

Abstract Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) are important for contributing to the physical and mental health of humans, but they have been little studied in low-income populations. It is intended to understand the meaning of the "Entrenubes" Ecological Park (PEN) for visitors, through: 1) identifying the sociodemographic variables associated with the different ecosystem services and disservices; 2) Define how the relative importance of interactions with these variables differs between ES. A questionnaire was applied to 281 visitors. A Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA), chi-squared test and ordinal logistic regression were performed between ES and visitor profile. 7 CES and 3 regulatory ones were identified. No significant associations were found between ES preferences, disservices and sociodemographic characteristics of the visitors. Recreation presented the highest average perception. Drug abuse was the predominant disservice. These results provide criteria for decision-making in urban green infrastructure planning.

Published ; This is the final version of the article. Available from Elsevier via the DOI in this record. ; The construction of culture as a class of ecosystem service presents a significant test of the holistic ambitions of an ecosystems approach to decision making. In this paper we explore the theoretical challenges arising from efforts to understand ecosystems as objects of cultural concern and consider the operational complexities associated with understanding how, and with what consequences, knowledge about cultural ecosystem services are created, communicated and accounted for in real world decision making. We specifically forward and develop a conceptual framework for understanding cultural ecosystem services and related benefits in terms of the environmental spaces and cultural practices that arise from interactions between humans and ecosystems. The types of knowledge, and approaches to knowledge production, presumed by this relational, non-linear and place-based perspective on cultural ecosystem services are discussed and reviewed. The framework not only helps navigate more fully the challenge of operationalising 'cultural ecosystem services' but points to a more relational understanding of the ecosystem services framework as a whole. Extending and refining understanding through more ambitious engagements in interdisciplinarity remains important. ; This research was funded through the UK National Ecosystem Assessment Follow-On (Work Package 5: Cultural ecosystem services and indicators) funded by the UK Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Welsh Government, the UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).