Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Standard
In: Ecosystem Services, Vol. 29, No. C, 16.02.2018, p. 552-565.
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept
T2 - Results from 27 case studies
AU - Dick, Jan
AU - Turkelboom, Francis
AU - Woods, Helen
AU - Iniesta-Arandia, Irene
AU - Primmer, Eeva
AU - Saarela, Sanna Riikka
AU - Bezák, Peter
AU - Mederly, Peter
AU - Leone, Michael
AU - Verheyden, Wim
AU - Kelemen, Eszter
AU - Hauck, Jennifer
AU - Andrews, Chris
AU - Antunes, Paula
AU - Aszalós, Réka
AU - Baró, Francesc
AU - Barton, David N.
AU - Berry, Pam
AU - Bugter, Rob
AU - Carvalho, Laurence
AU - Czúcz, Bálint
AU - Dunford, Rob
AU - Garcia Blanco, Gemma
AU - Geamănă, Nicoleta
AU - Giucă, Relu
AU - Grizzetti, Bruna
AU - Izakovičová, Zita
AU - Kertész, Miklós
AU - Kopperoinen, Leena
AU - Langemeyer, Johannes
AU - Montenegro Lapola, David
AU - Liquete, Camino
AU - Luque, Sandra
AU - Martínez Pastur, Guillermo
AU - Martin-Lopez, Berta
AU - Mukhopadhyay, Raktima
AU - Niemela, Jari
AU - Odee, David
AU - Peri, Pablo Luis
AU - Pinho, Patricia
AU - Patrício-Roberto, Gleiciani Bürger
AU - Preda, Elena
AU - Priess, Joerg
AU - Röckmann, Christine
AU - Santos, Rui
AU - Silaghi, Diana
AU - Smith, Ron
AU - Vădineanu, Angheluţă
AU - van der Wal, Jan Tjalling
AU - Arany, Ildikó
AU - Badea, Ovidiu
AU - Bela, Györgyi
AU - Boros, Emil
AU - Bucur, Magdalena
AU - Blumentrath, Stefan
AU - Calvache, Marta
AU - Carmen, Esther
AU - Clemente, Pedro
AU - Fernandes, João
AU - Ferraz, Diogo
AU - Fongar, Claudia
AU - García-Llorente, Marina
AU - Gómez-Baggethun, Erik
AU - Gundersen, Vegard
AU - Haavardsholm, Oscar
AU - Kalóczkai, Ágnes
AU - Khalalwe, Thalma
AU - Kiss, Gabriella
AU - Köhler, Berit
AU - Lazányi, Orsolya
AU - Lellei-Kovács, Eszter
AU - Lichungu, Rael
AU - Lindhjem, Henrik
AU - Magare, Charles
AU - Mustajoki, Jyri
AU - Ndege, Charles
AU - Nowell, Megan
AU - Nuss Girona, Sergi
AU - Ochieng, John
AU - Often, Anders
AU - Palomo, Ignacio
AU - Pataki, György
AU - Reinvang, Rasmus
AU - Rusch, Graciela
AU - Saarikoski, Heli
AU - Smith, Alison
AU - Soy Massoni, Emma
AU - Stange, Erik
AU - Vågnes Traaholt, Nora
AU - Vári, Ágnes
AU - Verweij, Peter
AU - Vikström, Suvi
AU - Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa
AU - Zulian, Grazia
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2017
PY - 2018/2/16
Y1 - 2018/2/16
N2 - The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners' perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n=246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning.
AB - The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners' perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n=246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning.
KW - Stakeholder perceptions
KW - Place-based implementation
KW - Evaluation
KW - Ecosystem services operationalisation
KW - Sustainability Science
KW - Stakeholder perceptions
KW - place-based implementation
KW - Evaluation
KW - Ecosystem services operationalisation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031403911&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/ec2ab79d-5714-3ca1-ac49-819b74bca7fa/
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015
DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015
M3 - Journal articles
VL - 29
SP - 552
EP - 565
JO - Ecosystem Services
JF - Ecosystem Services
SN - 2212-0416
IS - C
ER -