Plural valuation in space: mapping values of grasslands and their ecosystem services

IF 5.3 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences

Ecosystems and People Pub Date : 2022-05-12 DOI:10.1080/26395916.2022.2065361

Thomas M. Schmitt, Rebekka Riebl, B. Martín‐López, Maria Hänsel, T. Koellner

{"title":"Plural valuation in space: mapping values of grasslands and their ecosystem services","authors":"Thomas M. Schmitt, Rebekka Riebl, B. Martín‐López, Maria Hänsel, T. Koellner","doi":"10.1080/26395916.2022.2065361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The agricultural management of grasslands not only is strongly linked to fodder production but also provides other valuable ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration, nutrient regulation, and recreation. Capturing the values that society places on such ecosystem services is a step to provide management recommendations. To elicit the societal value of grasslands and their ecosystem services, it is important to consider multiple dimensions, namely, instrumental, intrinsic, and relational values. We conducted surveys with citizens in 2018 and 2020 in two study areas in Bavaria, Germany: one grassland-dominated and one with mixed agricultural land use. In the surveys, the respondents were invited to map up to seven points in their respective regions where they perceived grasslands to be ‘especially valuable’. Also, the respondents could provide reasons for this selection. These verbatims were classified into instrumental, intrinsic, and several sub-types of relational values using Qualitative Content Analysis. Next, we conducted a hotspot analysis that revealed spatial hotspots and coldspots for each value type . Besides some overlaps, we found that hotspots of instrumental, intrinsic, and relational values varied in space. A Constrained Correspondence Analysis underlined the trade-offs between instrumentally valued grasslands that are perceived as suitable to supply provisioning services and intrinsically valued grasslands that are closely related to relational values such as care. The results show that grasslands and their ecosystem services are valued for a variety of reasons on different locations, and point out the need for further investigations of the spatial distribution of values associated with ecosystem services.","PeriodicalId":37104,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystems and People","volume":"18 1","pages":"258 - 274"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystems and People","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2022.2065361","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT The agricultural management of grasslands not only is strongly linked to fodder production but also provides other valuable ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration, nutrient regulation, and recreation. Capturing the values that society places on such ecosystem services is a step to provide management recommendations. To elicit the societal value of grasslands and their ecosystem services, it is important to consider multiple dimensions, namely, instrumental, intrinsic, and relational values. We conducted surveys with citizens in 2018 and 2020 in two study areas in Bavaria, Germany: one grassland-dominated and one with mixed agricultural land use. In the surveys, the respondents were invited to map up to seven points in their respective regions where they perceived grasslands to be ‘especially valuable’. Also, the respondents could provide reasons for this selection. These verbatims were classified into instrumental, intrinsic, and several sub-types of relational values using Qualitative Content Analysis. Next, we conducted a hotspot analysis that revealed spatial hotspots and coldspots for each value type . Besides some overlaps, we found that hotspots of instrumental, intrinsic, and relational values varied in space. A Constrained Correspondence Analysis underlined the trade-offs between instrumentally valued grasslands that are perceived as suitable to supply provisioning services and intrinsically valued grasslands that are closely related to relational values such as care. The results show that grasslands and their ecosystem services are valued for a variety of reasons on different locations, and point out the need for further investigations of the spatial distribution of values associated with ecosystem services.

查看原文本刊更多论文

空间多元价值:草地及其生态系统服务价值制图

摘要草原的农业管理不仅与饲料生产密切相关，还提供其他宝贵的生态系统服务，如碳封存、营养调节和娱乐。获取社会对此类生态系统服务的重视是提供管理建议的一个步骤。为了获得草原及其生态系统服务的社会价值，重要的是要考虑多个维度，即工具价值、内在价值和关系价值。2018年和2020年，我们在德国巴伐利亚州的两个研究区对公民进行了调查：一个以草原为主，另一个以混合农业用地为主。在调查中，受访者被邀请在他们认为草原“特别有价值”的地区绘制多达7个点的地图。此外，受访者可以提供选择的理由。使用定性内容分析将这些措辞分为工具性、内在和几个关系值的子类型。接下来，我们进行了热点分析，揭示了每种价值类型的空间热点和冷点。除了一些重叠之外，我们发现工具价值观、内在价值观和关系价值观的热点在空间上各不相同。一项约束对应分析强调了被认为适合提供供应服务的工具价值草原和与护理等关系价值密切相关的内在价值草原之间的权衡。结果表明，不同地区的草原及其生态系统服务受到重视的原因多种多样，并指出需要进一步研究与生态系统服务相关的价值的空间分布。

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

Ecosystems and People Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

11.30%

发文量

审稿时长

42 weeks

期刊介绍： Ecosystems and People is an interdisciplinary journal that addresses how biodiversity and ecosystems underpin human quality of life, and how societal activities and preferences drive changes in ecosystems. Research published in Ecosystems and People addresses human-nature relationships and social-ecological systems in a broad sense. This embraces research on biodiversity, ecosystem services, their contributions to quality of life, implications for equity and justice, and the diverse and rich ways in which people relate to nature.