Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services make an important and valuable contribution to human well-being. However, research efforts in relation to ecosystems do not reflect this value, with the majority focusing on provisioning service contributions in developed countries, with cultural services largely neglected. Consideration of the contribution and importance of these services in South Africa focuses on the more tangible cultural ecosystem services such as recreational and educational benefits, with a paucity of research on the more intangible aspects such as sense of identity, belonging and worship of the ancestors. This lack of research is out of keeping with evidence of an intimate and profound relationship between the land and traditional communities in South Africa. Here we reflect on the available evidence of the nature of cultural ecosystem services to traditional communities in South Africa, and consider one aspect of the global debate on cultural ecosystem services by analysing the suitability of two predominant methods of ascertaining their value – neoclassic economic valuation and deliberative approaches – in a South African context. The types and nature of the values associated with cultural ecosystems, and the way of life of traditional communities, suggest the use of deliberative approaches is better suited to this task. It is hoped that these discussions will encourage researchers from a range of disciplines to engage in furthering research efforts in this area, and improve the evidence base on identifying, assessing and valuing these services, which are of significant importance and value to many of the most marginalised and vulnerable members of South African society.
 Significance:
 
 Evidence from the literature suggests that cultural ecosystem services demonstrate a range of value types and ranges. The presence of a range of values puts cultural ecosystem services beyond the reach of neoclassical economic valuation methods.
 Deliberative approaches are the most suitable method for eliciting the range and dimensions of value associated with cultural ecosystem services. There is a need for research in a South African context to develop frameworks and methods to identify, assess and measure the range of values associated with cultural ecosystem services.

Highlights

  • Cultural ecosystem services (CES) make an important and valuable contribution to human well-being, yet extant research efforts are lacking.[1,2] In addition, there is under-representation of studies within an African context.[3]

  • Ignorance of the nature and magnitude of these benefits in South Africa suggests that current decisions on projects or policies that may significantly impact negatively on CES are at best sub-optimal

  • Such research should seek to ensure that there are clear links identified between the source of the CES, the types and nature of the benefits enjoyed, and the recipient of the CES

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) make an important and valuable contribution to human well-being, yet extant research efforts are lacking.[1,2] In addition, there is under-representation of studies within an African context.[3]. Arrow’s impossibility theorem showed that there is no single way that an aggregation of individual preferences can lead to the derivation of a sensible social ranking of choice.[54] The elicitation of such values is further complicated in situations in which respondents are involved in subsistence farming and so generally are unfamiliar with money, making it difficult to express values for complex non-market goods and services in such a metric.[56] Such situations characterise the lives of many rural communities in South Africa.[57,58] a reliance on monetary metrics may dilute the voice of the poor and the vulnerable by virtue of their limited ability to pay because of budget constraints – an important component in stated preference approaches.[5,56] Monetary aggregation can be used as what Ani[15,59] calls an aggregation weapon, often to the benefit of the rich and the detriment of the poor. Relying on the state for their source of power, they may have an incentive to support policies favoured by the government, rather than seeking what is in the best interests of their communities.[68]

Conclusions
19. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and human well-being
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call