Abstract

Integrating the concept of ecosystem services (ES) into spatial planning is an opportunity to make land use and management choices that maximize the delivery of multiple ES. The assessment of social demand can be useful for the identification of priority areas or potential conflicts among stakeholders. We used Q-methodology to understand stakeholder perspectives on ES to facilitate their integration into spatial planning in the canton of Vaud, Switzerland. Three perspectives, utilitarian, cultural and protective, were analyzed and used to discuss potential implications for spatial planning. First, ecosystem multifunctionality and synergies among ES should be emphasized. Second, the food production system should move away from a productive-only approach, to a system that protects soils and their functions. Providing a paradigm change, arable land could be protected to the same level as forests and farmers could be incentivized further to change their practices. Finally, our findings show a potential over-interpretation of the importance of cultural ES in current planning policies, as most participants would be ready to change their behaviors to preserve biological functions. It would be useful to conduct a similar study in other cantons to ensure that the results are fully representative of the current situation in Switzerland.

Highlights

  • IntroductionEcosystem services (hereafter ecosystem services (ES)) can be defined as “the benefits that people derive from biodiversity and ecosystem functions” [1]

  • Ecosystem services can be defined as “the benefits that people derive from biodiversity and ecosystem functions” [1]

  • Ecosystem multifunctionality and synergies should be integrated into planning

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ecosystem services (hereafter ES) can be defined as “the benefits that people derive from biodiversity and ecosystem functions” [1]. While the concept of ES is considered complementary to current spatial planning practices, there is increasing awareness that benefits provided by natural and land systems were often overlooked or underestimated in planning decisions [4,5,6]. To overcome this issue, work has been conducted to develop integrated assessment of ES requiring different values, interdisciplinarity, use of multiple methodologies (qualitative and quantitative) at various temporal and spatial scales [7,8]. ES tradeoffs could be addressed by the assessment of ES supply at various planning levels, to assist stakeholders in making

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: 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.