Abstract
The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES), widely understood as the “benefits that humans receive from the natural functioning of healthy ecosystems” (Jeffers et al., 2015), depicts a one-way flow of services from ecosystems to people. We argue that this conceptualisation is overly simplistic and largely inaccurate, neglecting the reality that humans often contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of ecosystems, as often evidenced (but not exclusively) in many traditional and Indigenous societies. Management interventions arising from Ecosystem Services research are thus potentially damaging to both ecosystems and indigenous rights. We present the concept of ‘Services to Ecosystems’ (S2E) to address this, closing the loop of the reciprocal relationship between humans and ecosystems. Case studies from the biocultural ecosystems of Amazonia and the Pacific Northwest of North America (Cascadia) are used to illustrate the concept and provide examples of Services to Ecosystems in past and current societies. Finally, an alternative framework is presented, advancing the existing framework for Ecosystem Services by incorporating this reconceptualization and the loop of reciprocity. The framework aims to facilitate the inclusion of Services to Ecosystems in management strategies based upon Ecosystem Services, and highlights the need for ethnographic research in Ecosystem Service-based interventions.
Highlights
While the concept of ecosystem services (ES) has been successful in raising awareness of the value of natural systems and their importance for humanity (Chan et al, 2012a), critical gaps remain (Plieninger et al, 2014)
We show that humans often play an important role in cultivating and enhancing ES, or providing what we term ‘Services to Ecosystems’ (S2E); by which we mean, Actions humans have taken in the past and currently that modify ecosystems to enhance the quality or quantity of the services they provide, whilst maintaining the general health of the cognised ecosystem over time
These document a diversity of practices to illustrate the role of reciprocal relationships between humans and their environment in shaping ecosystems and the services they provide—a dimension often missed in contemporary management systems, We suggest that neglecting this reciprocal dimension undermines the utility of the current ES framework and management practices based upon it
Summary
While the concept of ecosystem services (ES) has been successful in raising awareness of the value of natural systems and their importance for humanity (Chan et al, 2012a), critical gaps remain (Plieninger et al, 2014) These relate to its insufficient treatment of the group of services classed as ‘cultural ecosystem services’ (CES; Daniel et al, 2012); and a more fundamental oversight, namely the lack of recognition of the roles of humans in actively cultivating, improving and positively contributing to ES. When environmental management based on the concept lacks critical connections and feedbacks, unintended and potentially negative consequences can result (Patterson and Coelho, 2008; Norgaard, 2010) To reduce these risks, the role of humans as existing within and as an integral part of ecosystems, contributing to their structure and composition over historical timeperiods, and often increasing their services and functioning We develop a concept of ‘Services to Ecosystems’ (S2E) to achieve this, and incorporate the concept into ES-based interventions
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.
