为文化生态系统服务和人类福祉辩论做出贡献:关于指标和联系的案例研究应用

Q2 Environmental Science
Landscape Online Pub Date : 2017-03-29 DOI:10.3097/LO.201750
P. Wangai, Benjamin Burkhard, M. Kruse, F. Müller
{"title":"为文化生态系统服务和人类福祉辩论做出贡献:关于指标和联系的案例研究应用","authors":"P. Wangai, Benjamin Burkhard, M. Kruse, F. Müller","doi":"10.3097/LO.201750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inadequacies in the indication of cultural ecosystem services (CES) are a hindrance in assessing their comprehensive impacts on human wellbeing. Similarly, uncertainties about the quantity and quality of CES, in real time and space, have hampered the ability of resource managers to precisely take responsive management actions. The aim of the study is to demonstrate, how CES indicators can be identified and qualified in order to link CES to human wellbeing, and to integrate them into the ‘ecosystem services cascade’ and the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) models. A case study methodology is applied at the Nairobi-Kiambu (Kenya) peri-urban area. Primary data on CES was collected in the case study through survey, field observations and matrix tables. Secondary data originates from literature analysis. Results show that the participatory identification of CES and human wellbeing indicators could improve their transparencyand comprehensibility. The environmental policy formulation and implementation processes have been demonstrated. The tripartite framework of CES-human wellbeing-DPSIR has demonstrated more linkages and feedbacks than initially indicated in the cascade model. For policy formulation and implementation, appropriate communication of results is mandatory. This is illustrated by a terminology that enables the transfer of scientific messages to stakeholders, especially for the local people. The conclusion indicates the importance of consistency in qualifying CES and human wellbeing indicators even at this time of urgency to bridge the gaps existing in CES and human wellbeing research.","PeriodicalId":38803,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Online","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contributing to the cultural ecosystem services and human wellbeing debate: a case study application on indicators and linkages\",\"authors\":\"P. Wangai, Benjamin Burkhard, M. Kruse, F. Müller\",\"doi\":\"10.3097/LO.201750\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Inadequacies in the indication of cultural ecosystem services (CES) are a hindrance in assessing their comprehensive impacts on human wellbeing. Similarly, uncertainties about the quantity and quality of CES, in real time and space, have hampered the ability of resource managers to precisely take responsive management actions. The aim of the study is to demonstrate, how CES indicators can be identified and qualified in order to link CES to human wellbeing, and to integrate them into the ‘ecosystem services cascade’ and the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) models. A case study methodology is applied at the Nairobi-Kiambu (Kenya) peri-urban area. Primary data on CES was collected in the case study through survey, field observations and matrix tables. Secondary data originates from literature analysis. Results show that the participatory identification of CES and human wellbeing indicators could improve their transparencyand comprehensibility. The environmental policy formulation and implementation processes have been demonstrated. The tripartite framework of CES-human wellbeing-DPSIR has demonstrated more linkages and feedbacks than initially indicated in the cascade model. For policy formulation and implementation, appropriate communication of results is mandatory. This is illustrated by a terminology that enables the transfer of scientific messages to stakeholders, especially for the local people. The conclusion indicates the importance of consistency in qualifying CES and human wellbeing indicators even at this time of urgency to bridge the gaps existing in CES and human wellbeing research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Landscape Online\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Landscape Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201750\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

文化生态系统服务(CES)指标的不足阻碍了评估其对人类福祉的综合影响。同样,在实际时间和空间上,关于消费环境的数量和质量的不确定性妨碍了资源管理人员准确采取响应性管理行动的能力。该研究的目的是展示如何识别和限定CES指标,以便将CES与人类福祉联系起来,并将其整合到“生态系统服务级联”和驱动-压力-状态-影响-响应(DPSIR)模型中。在内罗毕-基安布(肯尼亚)近郊地区采用了个案研究方法。在个案研究中,通过调查、实地观察和矩阵表收集了关于消费环境的初步数据。二手资料来源于文献分析。结果表明,参与式的社会消费水平和人类福祉指标识别可以提高其透明度和可理解性。环境政策的制订和执行过程已得到展示。ces -人类福祉- dpsir的三方框架已经证明了比最初在级联模型中指出的更多的联系和反馈。对于政策的制定和实施,适当的结果沟通是必须的。这可以通过一个术语来说明,该术语能够将科学信息传递给利益攸关方,特别是当地人民。结论表明,即使在这个迫切需要弥合CES和人类福祉研究中存在的差距的时候,一致性在合格CES和人类福祉指标方面的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contributing to the cultural ecosystem services and human wellbeing debate: a case study application on indicators and linkages
Inadequacies in the indication of cultural ecosystem services (CES) are a hindrance in assessing their comprehensive impacts on human wellbeing. Similarly, uncertainties about the quantity and quality of CES, in real time and space, have hampered the ability of resource managers to precisely take responsive management actions. The aim of the study is to demonstrate, how CES indicators can be identified and qualified in order to link CES to human wellbeing, and to integrate them into the ‘ecosystem services cascade’ and the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) models. A case study methodology is applied at the Nairobi-Kiambu (Kenya) peri-urban area. Primary data on CES was collected in the case study through survey, field observations and matrix tables. Secondary data originates from literature analysis. Results show that the participatory identification of CES and human wellbeing indicators could improve their transparencyand comprehensibility. The environmental policy formulation and implementation processes have been demonstrated. The tripartite framework of CES-human wellbeing-DPSIR has demonstrated more linkages and feedbacks than initially indicated in the cascade model. For policy formulation and implementation, appropriate communication of results is mandatory. This is illustrated by a terminology that enables the transfer of scientific messages to stakeholders, especially for the local people. The conclusion indicates the importance of consistency in qualifying CES and human wellbeing indicators even at this time of urgency to bridge the gaps existing in CES and human wellbeing research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Landscape Online
Landscape Online Environmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Landscape Online focuses on studies dealing with landscape research. The subject matter deals with any scientific, educational or applied aspect of processes, dynamics, indicators, controllers and visions related to landscapes. Furthermore, Landscape Online emphasizes the coupling of societal and natural systems, not only the involvement of human impact on landscape systems but also human perception of the landscape, its values and the evaluation of landscapes. Moreover, articles are appropriate that deal with landscape theory, system approaches and conceptual models of landscape, both their improvement and their discussion. Papers may be undisciplinary or multidisciplinary but have interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary appeal. All kinds of articles or parts of it must not be published beforehand in another journal
×
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