scholarly journals Exploring the relationship between ecosystems and human well-being by understanding the preferences for natural capital-based and produced capital-based ecosystem services

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keiko Hori ◽  
Chiho Kamiyama ◽  
Osamu Saito
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Brilha

<p>The concept of geodiversity, despite being in use for almost 30 years, still has little impact on society. It is not easy to explain the reason for this dissociation, considering that the elements that constitute geodiversity are intrinsically part of nature, play an essential role in ecosystem services and, consequently, in human well-being.</p><p>During the last decade we have seen a great development in the interest of the geoscientific community in this subject, represented by the increase in the publication of papers and doctoral and master theses all over the world. One of the main challenges is now to transpose all this scientific knowledge into society. Obviously, theoretical and conceptual discussions about geodiversity are an integral part of science and must continue, but if we want that society recognizes the importance and value of geodiversity, we must be able to demonstrate clearly how geodiversity can help to solve some of the problems we face today.</p><p>Among other priorities, the geoscientific community has to be able to demonstrate in an structured way:</p><ul><li>The importance of geodiversity in implementing nature conservation actions and its direct relationship with biodiversity;</li> <li><span>The contribution of geodiversity for ecosystems restoration and its accounting as part of natural capital;</span></li> <li><span>The need to quantify the role of geodiversity in ecosystem services;</span></li> <li><span>The urgency of make environmental impact assessments including all possible effects that may affect geodiversity elements and processes;</span></li> <li><span>The importance of integrate the concept of geodiversity in pre-university education curricula;</span></li> <li><span>That the information and environmental interpretation provided to visitors of protected areas and other conservation areas should always include geodiversity.</span></li> </ul><p>Once the importance of geodiversity is fully recognized by policy-makers, managers, and the society in general, the fulfilment of the UN Sustainable Development Goals will be for sure closer than it is today.</p>


2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 575-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion B. Potschin ◽  
Roy H. Haines-Young

The ‘ecosystem service’ debate has taken on many features of a classic Kuhnian paradigm. It challenges conventional wisdoms about conservation and the value of nature, and is driven as much by political agendas as scientific ones. In this paper we review some current and emerging issues arising in relation to the analysis and assessment of ecosystem services, and in particular emphasize the need for physical geographers to find new ways of characterizing the structure and dynamics of service providing units. If robust and relevant valuations are to be made of the contribution that natural capital makes to human well-being, then we need a deeper understanding of the way in which the drivers of change impact on the marginal outputs of ecosystem services. A better understanding of the trade-offs that need to be considered when dealing with multifunctional ecosystems is also required. Future developments must include methods for describing and tracking the stocks and flows that characterize natural capital. This will support valuation of the benefits estimation of the level of reinvestment that society must make in this natural capital base if it is to be sustained. We argue that if the ecosystem service concept is to be used seriously as a framework for policy and management then the biophysical sciences generally, and physical geography in particular, must go beyond the uncritical ‘puzzle solving’ that characterizes recent work. A geographical perspective can provide important new, critical insights into the place-based approaches to ecosystem assessment that are now emerging.


Author(s):  
Leon C. Braat

The concept of ecosystem services considers the usefulness of nature for human society. The economic importance of nature was described and analyzed in the 18th century, but the term ecosystem services was introduced only in 1981. Since then it has spurred an increasing number of academic publications, international research projects, and policy studies. Now a subject of intense debate in the global scientific community, from the natural to social science domains, it is also used, developed, and customized in policy arenas and considered, if in a still somewhat skeptical and apprehensive way, in the “practice” domain—by nature management agencies, farmers, foresters, and corporate business. This process of bridging evident gaps between ecology and economics, and between nature conservation and economic development, has also been felt in the political arena, including in the United Nations and the European Union (which have placed it at the center of their nature conservation and sustainable use strategies). The concept involves the utilitarian framing of those functions of nature that are used by humans and considered beneficial to society as economic and social services. In this light, for example, the disappearance of biodiversity directly affects ecosystem functions that underpin critical services for human well-being. More generally, the concept can be defined in this manner: Ecosystem services are the direct and indirect contributions of ecosystems, in interaction with contributions from human society, to human well-being. The concept underpins four major discussions: (1) Academic: the ecological versus the economic dimensions of the goods and services that flow from ecosystems to the human economy; the challenge of integrating concepts and models across this paradigmatic divide; (2) Social: the risks versus benefits of bringing the utilitarian argument into political debates about nature conservation (Are ecosystem services good or bad for biodiversity and vice versa?); (3) Policy and planning: how to value the benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services (Will this improve decision-making on topics ranging from poverty alleviation via subsidies to farmers to planning of grey with green infrastructure to combining economic growth with nature conservation?); and (4) Practice: Can revenue come from smart management and sustainable use of ecosystems? Are there markets to be discovered and can businesses be created? How do taxes figure in an ecosystem-based economy? The outcomes of these discussions will both help to shape policy and planning of economies at global, national, and regional scales and contribute to the long-term survival and well-being of humanity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 159 ◽  
pp. 07002
Author(s):  
Galiya Sansyzbayeva ◽  
Laura Ashirbekova ◽  
Kuralay Nurgaliyeva ◽  
Zhuldyz Ametova ◽  
Arailym Asanova

The particular relevance of the study of issues related to global crises is determined by the fact that although they affect the whole of humanity as a whole, the least economically and socially protected layers of the population in the whole world suffer from their consequences. That is why the key concepts of a green economy are natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides. The main priorities of the green economy concept are to increase the well-being of society with minimal impact on the environment. The article discusses the theoretical aspects of the implementation of the concept of “green” economy in Kazakhstan. The main directions of the “green” economy are highlighted and the results of the transition to a green economy are analyzed. The main stages of development of green economy in Kazakhstan are described. The problems of Kazakhstan’s transition to a “green” course of economic development are studied and the need for innovative approaches in the development of green technologies in the country is substantiated.


2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 94
Author(s):  
JESÚS BALLESTEROS CORREA ◽  
JAIRO PÉREZ TORRES

 Functional diversity is one of the crucial aspects of the functioning of ecosystems and the provision of ecosystem services. In this review paper, we analyze how biodiversity contributes to human well-being through the provision of goods and ecosystem services, and related aspects of ecological processes and their relationship with the functional diversity of ecosystems are presented. It aims to explain in a simple way, the concepts related to functional diversity, the importance of the functional groups and the role of functional traits of the species as a key element in the responses of organisms to environmental changes. Understanding the relationship between ecosystem processes, functional diversity of species and providing ecosystem services, allow better management of natural ecosystems and their biodiversity, enabling conservation and sustainable use of different types of services provided by ecosystems.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Malik Ar-Rahiem

Ecosystem Services is an important concept to achieve Sustainable Development Goals 2030. For the past 20 years, this concept has grown exponentially and the metadata of these publications can be considered as big data. A bibliometric analysis was conducted to Ecosystem Services publications from Web of Science database, which are text-mining analysis, bibliographic coupling, and citation network analysis. Text-mining analysis results were a cluster map of keywords representing the content of abstract and title from 4203 publications in the dataset. Bibliographic coupling analysis results were a cluster of documents which analyzed using natural language processing to extract the main idea of the documents. Using these two analysis insight about ecosystem services are obtained. Ecosystem services in general can be divided into 6 big clusters: economic assessment of ecosystem services as natural capital, ecosystem services assessment in term of accounting and management, biodiversity conservation in term of species richness, biodiversity conservation in term of human well-being, climate change and ecosystem services, and ecosystem services in urban area. Finally, citation network analysis was performed. 5700 publications consist of publications from the dataset and cited references from the publications were analyzed and 50 most influential articles from 1977 to 2018 with highest citation score was plotted in chronological order, providing insight on how the topic has been developing over time and important publications to be read. Bibliometric analysis proved to be very useful, especially as the preliminary step before conducting literature review. This technique can be very beneficial for early career scientists who wanted to recognize a field of science or wanted to know the research gaps that could be worked on.


2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Agarwala ◽  
Giles Atkinson ◽  
BenjaminPalmer Fry ◽  
Katherine Homewood ◽  
Susana Mourato ◽  
...  

Wild Capital ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 12-37
Author(s):  
Barbara K. Jones

By failing to assign nature value in our current Anthropocene, the opportunity costs of diminishing biodiversity are not recognized in the marketplace, leading to significant negative consequences for both nature and humanity. Polluting water, destroying habitats, or exterminating species should each lessen nature’s value, but if nature has never been assigned a value, that loss is not recognized and development becomes the default. The words “wild capital” remind us that nature should be viewed as an asset like any other, and that in doing so we are better equipped to appreciate its long-term worth. Since the ecosystem services model (ES) ties together the ecological, social, and economic needs of human well-being, it is well situated to assign nature value and from that make a case for nature as natural capital. To assist in policy decisions, ES has offered a path based on the language of economics, making it appealing to economists, while to conservationists, it has turned an argument about the negative effects of development on wildlife into a more fruitful dialogue about how beneficial conservation is for human well-being. ES is also compatible with efforts at sustainability and the goals of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.


2021 ◽  
pp. 004728752110377
Author(s):  
Yang Zhang ◽  
Timothy J. Lee ◽  
Yu Xiong

This article explores the contribution of animal-based cultural ecosystem services to tourist well-being within the authentic cultural heritage experience. We assess the construction of tourists’ cultural ecosystem services through their cocreation of animal-based experience and its integrative direct links with objective authenticity, existential authenticity, and well-being. The objective is to provide empirical evidence of the cross-category tourist experiences of interactions with animals at cultural heritage sites within the context of those with the cats of the Forbidden City, China. Building on this relationship model, the study further examines and identifies the significant and important parallel mediation effects on the relationship between the cocreation experience and the well-being of the three combinations of (a) attention and objective authenticity, (b) involvement and existential authenticity, and (c) cultural ecosystem service and memorability. Theoretical and managerial implications are provided along with a discussion of research limitations and suggestions for future study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document