Are preferences for soil-based ecosystem services driven by spatial phenomena?

Bartosz Bartkowski , Nele Lienhoop , Lukas Mahlich , Julian R. Massenberg
{"title":"Are preferences for soil-based ecosystem services driven by spatial phenomena?","authors":"Bartosz Bartkowski ,&nbsp;Nele Lienhoop ,&nbsp;Lukas Mahlich ,&nbsp;Julian R. Massenberg","doi":"10.1016/j.soisec.2023.100120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Agricultural soils provide multiple ecosystem services that affect human well-being. Soils’ potential to provide these ecosystem services varies spatially. Socio-demographic and other drivers of environmental preferences are also spatially variable. Therefore, preferences for soil-based ecosystem services are likely to be spatially heterogeneous, which may result in different policy priorities across locations. Understanding this spatial heterogeneity of preferences is therefore essential to guide public policy to protect healthy soils. We present a study that combines explorative and hypothesis-driven approaches to understand the spatial heterogeneity of preferences for four soil-based ecosystem services: climate regulation, clean water provision, drought protection and flood protection. Based on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted on a representative sample of the German public, we first use global and local spatial autocorrelation measures to test whether there are any obvious patterns in the spatial distribution of preferences. Second, we use spatial lag models to test a number of hypotheses to explain the observed preference heterogeneity. We particularly focus on the spatial variability of relevant phenomena such as floods, droughts or nitrate pollution of groundwater, and their effects on the studied preferences. Lastly, we compare the results from both approaches in order to see whether the identified patterns are consistent with each other. We find weak patterns of spatial heterogeneity, but our hypotheses are all rejected. This suggests that salience of relevant phenomena and individual affectedness do not have an effect on preferences for soil-based ecosystem services.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74839,"journal":{"name":"Soil security","volume":"13 ","pages":"Article 100120"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667006223000370/pdfft?md5=4fd9883e9a8a1d665f3251bf20131601&pid=1-s2.0-S2667006223000370-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667006223000370","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

Agricultural soils provide multiple ecosystem services that affect human well-being. Soils’ potential to provide these ecosystem services varies spatially. Socio-demographic and other drivers of environmental preferences are also spatially variable. Therefore, preferences for soil-based ecosystem services are likely to be spatially heterogeneous, which may result in different policy priorities across locations. Understanding this spatial heterogeneity of preferences is therefore essential to guide public policy to protect healthy soils. We present a study that combines explorative and hypothesis-driven approaches to understand the spatial heterogeneity of preferences for four soil-based ecosystem services: climate regulation, clean water provision, drought protection and flood protection. Based on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted on a representative sample of the German public, we first use global and local spatial autocorrelation measures to test whether there are any obvious patterns in the spatial distribution of preferences. Second, we use spatial lag models to test a number of hypotheses to explain the observed preference heterogeneity. We particularly focus on the spatial variability of relevant phenomena such as floods, droughts or nitrate pollution of groundwater, and their effects on the studied preferences. Lastly, we compare the results from both approaches in order to see whether the identified patterns are consistent with each other. We find weak patterns of spatial heterogeneity, but our hypotheses are all rejected. This suggests that salience of relevant phenomena and individual affectedness do not have an effect on preferences for soil-based ecosystem services.

对基于土壤的生态系统服务的偏好是否受到空间现象的驱动?
农业土壤提供多种影响人类福祉的生态系统服务。土壤提供这些生态系统服务的潜力因空间而异。社会人口和环境偏好的其他驱动因素在空间上也是可变的。因此,对土壤生态系统服务的偏好可能具有空间异质性,这可能导致不同地点的政策重点不同。因此,了解这种偏好的空间异质性对于指导保护健康土壤的公共政策至关重要。本文采用探索性和假设驱动相结合的方法,研究了四种基于土壤的生态系统服务(气候调节、清洁水供应、干旱保护和洪水保护)偏好的空间异质性。基于对德国公众代表性样本进行的离散选择实验的结果,我们首先使用全局和局部空间自相关度量来检验偏好的空间分布是否存在明显的模式。其次,我们使用空间滞后模型来检验一些假设,以解释观察到的偏好异质性。我们特别关注相关现象的空间变异性,如洪水、干旱或地下水的硝酸盐污染,以及它们对研究偏好的影响。最后,我们比较了两种方法的结果,以查看所识别的模式是否相互一致。我们发现了微弱的空间异质性模式,但我们的假设都被拒绝了。这表明,相关现象的显著性和个体影响对土壤生态系统服务的偏好没有影响。
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
Soil security
Soil security Soil Science
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
90 days
×
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