Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept : Results from 27 case studies

Show full item record



Permalink

http://hdl.handle.net/10138/311969

Citation

Dick , J , Turkelboom , F , Woods , H , Iniesta-Arandia , I , Primmer , E , Saarela , S-R , Bezak , P , Mederly , P , Leone , M , Verheyden , W , Kelemen , E , Hauck , J , Andrews , C , Antunes , P , Aszalos , R , Baro , F , Barton , D N , Berry , P , Bugter , R , Carvalho , L , Czucz , B , Dunford , R , Garcia Blanco , G , Geamana , N , Giuca , R , Grizetti , B , Izakovicova , Z , Kertesz , M , Kopperoinen , L , Langemeyer , J , Montenegro Lapola , D , Liquete , C , Luque , S , Martinez Pastur , G , Martín-López , B , Mukhopadhyay , R , Niemelä , J K , Odee , D , Luis Peri , P , Pinho , P , Buerger Patricio-Roberto , G , Preda , E , Priess , J , Röckmann , C , Santos , R , Silaghi , D , Smith , R , Vadineanu , A , Tjalling van der Wal , J , Arany , I , Badea , O , Bela , G , Boros , E , Bucur , M , Blumentrath , S , Calvache , M , Carmen , E , Clemente , P , Fernandes , J , Ferraz , D , Fongar , C , Garcia-Llorante , M , Gomez-Baggethun , E , Gundersen , V , Haavardsholm , O , Kaloczkai , A , Khalalwe , T , Kiss , G , Köhler , B , Lazanyi , O , Lellei-Kovacs , E , Lichungu , R , Lindhjem , H , Magare , C , Mustajoki , J , Ndege , C , Nowell , M , Nuss Girona , S , Ochieng , J , Anders , O , Palomo , I , Pataki , G , Reinvang , R , Rusch , G M , Saarikoski , H , Smith , A , Soy Massoni , E , Stange , E , Vågnes Traaholt , N , Vari , A , Verweij , P , Vikström , S , Yli-Pelkonen , V J & Zulian , G 2018 , ' Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept : Results from 27 case studies ' , Ecosystem Services , vol. 29 , pp. 552-565 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015

Title: Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept : Results from 27 case studies
Author: Dick, Jan; Turkelboom, Francis; Woods, Helen; Iniesta-Arandia, Irene; Primmer, Eeva; Saarela, Sanna-Riikka; Bezak, Peter; Mederly, Peter; Leone, Michael; Verheyden, Wim; Kelemen, Eszter; Hauck, Jennifer; Andrews, Chris; Antunes, Paula; Aszalos, Reka; Baro, Francesc; Barton, David Nicholas; Berry, Pam; Bugter, Rob; Carvalho, Laurence; Czucz, Balint; Dunford, Rob; Garcia Blanco, Gemma; Geamana, Nicoleta; Giuca, Relu; Grizetti, Bruna; Izakovicova, Zita; Kertesz, Miklos; Kopperoinen, Leena; Langemeyer, Johannes; Montenegro Lapola, David; Liquete, Camino; Luque, Sandra; Martinez Pastur, Guillermo; Martín-López, Berta; Mukhopadhyay, Raktima; Niemelä, Jari Kalevi; Odee, David; Luis Peri, Pablo; Pinho, Patricia; Buerger Patricio-Roberto, Gleiciani; Preda, Elena; Priess, Joerg; Röckmann, Christine; Santos, Rui; Silaghi, Diana; Smith, Ron; Vadineanu, Angheluta; Tjalling van der Wal, Jan; Arany, Ildiko; Badea, Ovidiu; Bela, Györgyi; Boros, Emil; Bucur, Magdalena; Blumentrath, Stefan; Calvache, Marta; Carmen, Esther; Clemente, Pedro; Fernandes, Joao; Ferraz, Diego; Fongar, Claudia; Garcia-Llorante, Marina; Gomez-Baggethun, Erik; Gundersen, Vegard; Haavardsholm, Oscar; Kaloczkai, Agnes; Khalalwe, Thalma; Kiss, Gabriela; Köhler, Berit; Lazanyi, Orsolya; Lellei-Kovacs, Eszter; Lichungu, Rael; Lindhjem, Henrik; Magare, Charles; Mustajoki, Jyri; Ndege, Charles; Nowell, Megan; Nuss Girona, Sergi; Ochieng, John; Anders, Often; Palomo, Ignacio; Pataki, György; Reinvang, Rasmus; Rusch, Graciela M.; Saarikoski, Heli; Smith, Alison; Soy Massoni, Emma; Stange, Erik; Vågnes Traaholt, Nora; Vari, Agnes; Verweij, Peter; Vikström, Suvi; Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa Johannes; Zulian, Grazia
Contributor: University of Helsinki, Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science (HELSUS)
University of Helsinki, Environmental Sciences
Date: 2018-02-21
Language: eng
Number of pages: 14
Belongs to series: Ecosystem Services
ISSN: 2212-0416
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/311969
Abstract: The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners' perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n = 246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Subject: 1172 Environmental sciences
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
ekosysteemipalvelut
STAKEHOLDERS
stakeholder perceptions
Place-based implementation
evaluation
ecosystem services operationalisation
management practice
boundary-work
trade-offs
landscapes
valuation
knowledge
governance
framework
science
policy
Rights:


Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
Dick_et_al_2018_ACCEPTED_FINAL_DRAFT.pdf 1.521Mb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record