An assessment of visited landscapes using a Cultural Ecosystem Services framework

Lake related greenspace provides many benefits to residents and visitors, which often get unnoticed. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Project (2005) proposed the valuation of ecosystem services, defined as regulatory, provisional, ecosystem support, providing cultural services from natural resources, free of charge. The challenge here is: How can we use cultural ecosystem services derived from scenic landscapes for Greenspace management and assessment? Cultural ecosystem services received international recognition as part of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Project (2005). Also, ecosystems services encompass regulatory, provisional and ecosystem support. For this article, we are particularly concerned with cultural services, which include recreation, science and education, spiritual/historical as well as aesthetic functions. De Groot (2002) and Farber (2006) provided descriptions of cultural Ecosystem services. De Groot (2002) describes Information functions as comprising of; aesthetic information, recreation, cultural-artistic information and spiritual/historical information. Farber (2005) description of cultural services includes; aesthetic, recreation, science/education, and spiritual/historical functions. This article examines the existing literature with the objective of assessing ecosystem cultural services related to water-based scenic landscape resources and applies it to an Upstate New York lake landscape. Careful accounting of greenspace ecosystem services is presented as applied to lakeshore residents, village residents and town/watershed residents and other lake greenspace users utilizing the US Environmental Protection Agency’s user benefit calculations to yield over 10.6 million dollars of benefits per year (Smardon 2018).

Cultural ecosystem services constitute a growing field of research that is characterized by an increasing number of publications from various academic disciplines. We conducted a semiquantitative review of publications explicitly dealing with cultural ecosystem services. Our aims were: (1) to provide an overview of the current state of research, (2) to classify the diversity of research approaches by identifying clusters of publications that address cultural ecosystem services in similar ways, and (3) to highlight some important challenges for the future of cultural ecosystem services research. We reviewed 107 publications and extracted 20 attributes describing their type and content, including methods, scales, drivers of change, and trade-offs between services. Using a cluster analysis on a subset of attributes we identified five groups of publications: Group 1, conceptual focus, deals with theoretical issues; Group 2, descriptive reviews, consists mostly of desktop studies; Group 3, localized outcomes, deals with case studies coming from different disciplines; Group 4, social and participatory, deals mainly with assessing preferences and perceptions; and Group 5, economic assessments, provides economic valuations. Emerging themes in cultural ecosystem services research relate to improving methods for cultural ecosystem services valuation, studying cultural ecosystem services in the context of ecosystem service bundles, and more clearly articulating policy implications. Based on our findings, we conclude that: (1) cultural ecosystem services are well placed as a tool to bridge gaps between different academic disciplines and research communities, (2) capitalizing on the societal relevance of cultural ecosystem services could help address real-world problems, and (3) cultural ecosystem services have the potential to foster new conceptual links between alternative logics relating to a variety of social and ecological issues.

Analysis of cultural ecosystem services using text mining of residents’ opinions

The importance of cultural ecosystem services in natural resource-dependent communities: Implications for management

The land use system, which is endowed with the most crucial and fundamental natural resources for human survival and development, plays a pivotal role within the entire ecosystem. In recent years, cultural ecosystem services (CESs) have also gradually garnered widespread attention. The study of cultural ecosystem services in the land use system plays a significant role in the rational utilization of land resources and the resolution of contradictions between land resources and sustainable development. This review, framed in Land Use/Land Cover Change (LUCC), applies keyword clustering and keyword evolution analysis to comprehensively review and synthesize academic literature on cultural ecosystem services. The analysis is organized into two dimensions: the overall study of cultural ecosystem services in LUCC and the study of specific categories of cultural ecosystem services in LUCC. Relevant papers from CNKI and WOS academic databases are included. The results show that the number of papers retrieved from WOS was significantly higher than the number retrieved from CNKI, while both databases exhibited a clear upward trend in the number of papers. It is worth noting that in the literature retrieval results for different types of land research, the majority of the papers focused on water, accounting for 51% and 44% of the totals in WOS and CNKI, respectively. Among these papers, research centered on recreation and ecotourism was the richest. Through this review, it was further revealed that research on cultural ecosystem services was initiated and has gradually developed into a relatively complete knowledge system. However, research on cultural ecosystem services in LUCC still requires further exploration, particularly in terms of assessment methods. This review thus highlights the need for future research to focus more on cultural ecosystem services in the land use system and to delve deeper into evaluating their values. By employing more scientific and rational approaches, land resources can be effectively managed and utilized to address challenges related to land resources and sustainable development.

Cultural ecosystem services enabled through work with shellfish

An ecosystem service approach for land-use or conservation decisions normally uses economic or biophysical assessments for valuating nature’s services. In contrast, even though ecosystem services are required for human well-being, the actual use of services by differing stakeholder groups are rarely considered in typical ecosystem service assessments, especially the more intangible, cultural ecosystem services. The aim of this research was to quantify different uses for 15 cultural and provisioning ecosystem service indicators across seven stakeholder groups in a watershed proposed with large hydroelectric dam development. We used a large-scale survey to quantify use and frequency of use for ecosystem services. We demonstrate that different stakeholder groups use ecosystem services differently, both in terms of specific ecosystem service indicators, as well as for frequency of ecosystem service use. Across all stakeholder groups, specific cultural ecosystem services were consistently more important to participants when compared to provisioning ecosystem services, especially aesthetic/scenic values. This work is of global importance as it highlights the importance of considering cultural ecosystem services (e.g. aesthetic/scenic, sense-of-place values) along with multiple stakeholder groups to identify the trade-offs and synergies during decision-making processes for land-use or conservation initiatives.

Conceptualizing ‘sense of place’ in cultural ecosystem services: A framework for interdisciplinary research

Background and Objectives: Cultural ecosystem services of urban green spaces are increasingly important and often recognized as such by people living in urban areas. Qualitative studies on perception of cultural ecosystem services from urban green spaces are still rare. Previous studies addressed only certain types of urban green space and often only some services. There is a lack of understanding how people perceive cultural ecosystem services from different types of tree-based urban green spaces. Hence, the purpose of the study was to explore whether and how people perceive and use cultural ecosystem services of different types of tree-based urban green spaces. Materials and Methods: Focus groups were conducted with citizens in each city district. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and transcripts analyzed in MAXQDA software. We used bottom up code-category-theme approach to analyze the data without predefined set of codes or categories. Results: Place attachment, aesthetic and recreational services were more recognized than educational and cultural identity services. For place attachment, most important single attributes were positive memories, and good maintenance, while most important categories were facilities, existence of emotional ties, possibility of experiences, recreational use and access. Presence of specific tree species and presence of trees in general were most important attributes for aesthetic services, while possibility of experiences and trees were the most important categories. Conclusions: People perceived various cultural ecosystem services from tree-based urban green space, even though some services more than others. Recreation may be the underlying goal of our participants when interacting with tree-based urban nature. Forests, parks were recognized as those providing multiple cultural ecosystem services. However, other types of green spaces were also recognized as bearers of these services, albeit with less services and attributes attached. It supports the importance of careful planning of urban green spaces in terms of providing a variety of green space types. The study provides basis for later quantification of cultural ecosystem services (CES) from tree-based urban green space.

"Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are the non-material benefits that humans obtain from the natural environment. They include, for example, getting a sense of community roots and/or religious meaning from natural sites; deriving aesthetic pleasure and satisfaction from natural landscapes; using natural sites/landscapes as a source for recreation and education, and so on. CES are one of the four primary kinds of benefits that humans derives from ecosystems - these different kinds being termed as 'ecosystem services by the major UN-led study, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). The other kinds of ecosystem services include provisioning services, such as the production of food and water; regulating services, such as the control of climate and disease, supporting services, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination. To help decision makers, such as policy makers, conservationists etc., many of these services are being assigned economic values through quantitative models. However, CES are often experienced intangibly, in the realm of meaning and its effects on practices and behavior. Thereby, while important, their full importance cannot be gauged in quantitative terms, but rather in qualitative terms.   One of the most striking examples of CES in the HKH region are those provided by sacred natural sites, hundreds of thousands of which dot this region from east to west. Sacred natural sites include sacred mountains (such Mt Kailash and Mt Kanchenjunga), sacred lakes (such as Gosain Kund and Lake Manasarovar), sacred forests/sacred groves (such as Gwallek Kedar in Baitadi), sacred caves, rocks, streams, etc. Communities often treat these sites with special forms of behavior, symbolism, and practices, that elevates these sites over profane/non-sacred natural sites and landscapes. This working paper lays out a framework devised for assessing the CES of HKH region's sacred natural sites, and includes: a background to the cultural ecosystem services discourse, the need for such a framework; the process of developing this particular framework; the framework and the methodology to use it, and a pilot case study from district Baitadi, Nepal."

An empirical evaluation of spatial value transfer methods for identifying cultural ecosystem services

Mapping of cultural ecosystem services (CES) in marine and coastal areas is still recognised as a conceptually and technically challenging task, due to the difficulties in establishing a link between the biophysical features of the coastal ecosystem and the supply of services such as recreation and tourism, bird watching and enjoyment of other assets of nature. This was also one of the major challenges in ecosystem service mapping for the Maritime Spatial Plan for Internal Waters, Territorial Waters and Economic Exclusive Zone of the Republic of Latvia. Suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities was chosen as an indicator to map the CES – physical and experiential interactions. The method involved the compilation of field data from a survey of visitors at the beach and on coastal infrastructure, serving as the input for the multi-criteria assessment of CES. Four criteria were applied to assess the suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities: i) accessibility; ii) proximity to densely populated areas; iii) suitability of the area for a particular (niche) tourism or leisure activity; and iv) recreational use. The selected criteria provide an overall assessment framework, which integrates the ecosystem service potential, benefiting areas, flow and demand aspects. The CES mapping and assessment results were applied to the maritime spatial planning for proposing areas of priority for tourism development, as well as assessing the impacts of the proposed solutions for other uses of the sea. The Latvian approach for mapping of the cultural services in coastal areas was selected as the ESMERALDA case study and examined at the stakeholder workshop in Prague, September 2016.

Ecosystem service provision by stormwater wetlands and ponds – A means for evaluation?

Cultural ecosystem services: A review of methods and tools for economic evaluation

Users’ views on cultural ecosystem services of urban parks: An importance-performance analysis of a case in Beijing, China