Abstract
The relationship between nature and cultural ecosystem service (CES) benefits is well accepted but poorly understood, as is the potential role of biodiversity in the relationship. By means of a public questionnaire survey in Wiltshire, UK, the relationship between the presence of a range of common species groups, species group ‘charisma’, group abundance in the landscape, and the benefit that people felt that they derived from the species groups was investigated for a lowland multifunctional landscape.Findings showed that species group charisma influenced the benefit reported by respondents for current abundance levels, and influenced their response to potential increases or decreases in abundance. Respondents reported high levels of benefit from species groups hypothesised to be charismatic (birds, flowering plants, butterflies) and there was high consistency in the pattern of response. Respondents reported less benefit from groups hypothesised to be less charismatic (beetles/bugs, brambles and nettles), the latter response patterns showing much greater variation. These results could be used to promote a more holistic understanding of the value of biodiversity by educating and informing the public so that they derive benefit not just from the charismatic, but also from the everyday, the commonplace and less obviously charismatic species.
Highlights
The existence of a relationship between nature, wildlife, ‘green space’ or biodiversity on the one hand, and human well-being on the other is widely assumed and accepted (MacKerron and Mourato, 2013; Russell et al, 2013; Lovell et al, 2014a,b; Alcock et al, 2015; Wheeler et al, 2015)
Response rates for each species group are provided in Appendix 1, Supplementary Information)
The results demonstrate the ability of members of the public to express their enjoyment and satisfaction with the presence of various common species groups in their local landscape, to articulate the effect of varying levels of abundance in the landscape, and demonstrate how they discriminate between different species groups
Summary
The existence of a relationship between nature, wildlife, ‘green space’ or biodiversity on the one hand, and human well-being on the other is widely assumed and accepted (MacKerron and Mourato, 2013; Russell et al, 2013; Lovell et al, 2014a,b; Alcock et al, 2015; Wheeler et al, 2015). Indicators of quality of life (level of human well-being) often include metrics such as composite trends of farmland bird species because of the assumed relationship between natural features and the benefits that humans derive from nature (BirdLife International, 2004). This relationship between the natural world and human well-being is not well characterised or understood (Church et al, 2011, 2014). The potential impact of biodiversity loss or enhancement on human well-being is an area of concern and active research (Bullock et al, 2011; Keniger et al, 2013).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
