Applying a participatory methodology to evaluate ecosystem services in the Pampa biome: lessons learned from the Tessa methodology in Uruguay

D. Schossler, C. Nabinger, C. Ribeiro, P. Boggiano, M. Cadenazzi, Diana L. Restrepo-Osorio
{"title":"Applying a participatory methodology to evaluate ecosystem services in the Pampa biome: lessons learned from the Tessa methodology in Uruguay","authors":"D. Schossler, C. Nabinger, C. Ribeiro, P. Boggiano, M. Cadenazzi, Diana L. Restrepo-Osorio","doi":"10.18472/sustdeb.v12n1.2021.38175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Identifying and measuring ecosystem services involving local stakeholders has been characterised as a novel approach in the literature. This article describes the methodology used in the participatory workshops, the lessons learned, and the specific results of applying the Tessa method. The methodology was piloted with 56 researchers and technicians, more than 22 institutions, and 54 livestock producers involved with the grassland conservation initiative, Alianza del Pastizal. Identified change agents with the most significant impact include the absence of a rural workforce, the lack of family succession, and weeding and overgrazing of grasslands. The primary ecosystem services identified included the production of fodder, meat/wool, wildlife forage, way of life/culture, and medicinal plants. The methodology presented here is replicable, capable of expansion to more groups, contributes to a better understanding, by the producers, of their problems and points to the need for the development of public incentive policies.","PeriodicalId":146126,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability in Debate","volume":"124 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability in Debate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18472/sustdeb.v12n1.2021.38175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Identifying and measuring ecosystem services involving local stakeholders has been characterised as a novel approach in the literature. This article describes the methodology used in the participatory workshops, the lessons learned, and the specific results of applying the Tessa method. The methodology was piloted with 56 researchers and technicians, more than 22 institutions, and 54 livestock producers involved with the grassland conservation initiative, Alianza del Pastizal. Identified change agents with the most significant impact include the absence of a rural workforce, the lack of family succession, and weeding and overgrazing of grasslands. The primary ecosystem services identified included the production of fodder, meat/wool, wildlife forage, way of life/culture, and medicinal plants. The methodology presented here is replicable, capable of expansion to more groups, contributes to a better understanding, by the producers, of their problems and points to the need for the development of public incentive policies.
应用参与性方法评价潘帕草原生物群系的生态系统服务:从乌拉圭Tessa方法中吸取的经验教训
识别和测量涉及当地利益相关者的生态系统服务在文献中被描述为一种新颖的方法。本文描述了参与性讲习班中使用的方法、吸取的经验教训以及应用Tessa方法的具体结果。参与草原保护倡议“草原联盟”(Alianza del Pastizal)的56名研究人员和技术人员、超过22个机构和54名畜牧生产者试用了该方法。已确定的影响最大的变革因素包括农村劳动力的缺乏、家庭继承的缺乏以及草原的除草和过度放牧。确定的主要生态系统服务包括饲料、肉类/羊毛、野生动物饲料、生活方式/文化和药用植物的生产。这里提出的方法是可复制的,能够推广到更多的群体,有助于生产者更好地了解它们的问题,并指出需要制订公共奖励政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信