IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v46y2020ics2212041620301297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building resilient socio-ecological systems in Japan: Satoyama examples from Shiga Prefecture

Author

Listed:
  • Fukamachi, Katsue

Abstract

In environmental policy in Japan, the benefits derived from agro-ecosystems have traditionally been defined as “multiple functions of agricultural production activities.†Even after the concept “ecosystem services†was introduced to Japanese policy, it was not often used for agriculture and forestry where policy mostly evolves around the term “multiple functions.†Streamlining the concepts would clarify future policy. This paper aimed to identify future pathways for satoyama as resilient socio-ecological systems based on a review of past and current environmental policy that had an impact on secondary ecosystems in Shiga Prefecture, Japan. From case studies on two diverse satoyama landscapes, natural resource use and the impact of national and prefectural policy were examined. Based on these reviews, two directions to be taken were clarified: the first direction involves the use of grants and other legal support frameworks to ensure that agriculture, forestry, and fisheries industries and the local community conserve and enhance ecosystem services while implementing farmland consolidation and labor-saving measures. The second direction implies efforts to discover and identify values in traditional satoyama structures in areas where the conditions for agricultural activity are relatively unfavorable and unprofitable. The results showed that a better integrated regional policy framework is needed. It should comprise both directions while taking into account the natural and cultural features of each satoyama.

Suggested Citation

  • Fukamachi, Katsue, 2020. "Building resilient socio-ecological systems in Japan: Satoyama examples from Shiga Prefecture," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:46:y:2020:i:c:s2212041620301297
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041620301297
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101187?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Havas, Jarkko & Matsui, Takanori & Shaw, Robert N. & Machimura, Takashi, 2014. "Ecosystem services management tool development guidelines and framework revision for industries, industry policy makers and industry groups," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 187-200.
    2. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    3. Mann, Carsten & Loft, Lasse & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Governance of Ecosystem Services: Lessons learned for sustainable institutions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 275-281.
    4. Bouwma, Irene & Schleyer, Christian & Primmer, Eeva & Winkler, Klara Johanna & Berry, Pam & Young, Juliette & Carmen, Esther & Špulerová, Jana & Bezák, Peter & Preda, Elena & Vadineanu, Angheluta, 2018. "Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 213-222.
    5. Schleyer, Christian & Görg, Christoph & Hauck, Jennifer & Winkler, Klara Johanna, 2015. "Opportunities and challenges for mainstreaming the ecosystem services concept in the multi-level policy-making within the EU," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 174-181.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yongxun Zhang & Xiande Li, 2022. "Protecting Traditional Agricultural Landscapes by Promoting Industrial Integration Development: Practices from Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS) Sites in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Janet Dwyer, 2022. "AES presidential address, 2021: Policy analysis for rural resilience—Expanding the toolkit," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 3-19, February.
    3. Lulu He & Qingwen Min & Chuanchun Hong & Yongxun Zhang, 2021. "Features and Socio-Economic Sustainability of Traditional Chestnut Forestry Landscape in China: A Case of Kuancheng County, Hebei Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Alejandro Huertas Herrera & Mónica D. R. Toro-Manríquez & Cristian Lorenzo & María Vanessa Lencinas & Guillermo Martínez Pastur, 2023. "Perspectives on socio-ecological studies in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Neill, Andrew M. & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Stout, Jane C., 2022. "Conceptual integration of ecosystem services and natural capital within Irish national policy: An analysis over time and between policy sectors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    2. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    3. van Oudenhoven, Alexander P.E. & Aukes, Ewert & Bontje, Lotte E. & Vikolainen, Vera & van Bodegom, Peter M. & Slinger, Jill H., 2018. "‘Mind the Gap’ between ecosystem services classification and strategic decision making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 77-88.
    4. Simoncini, Riccardo & Ring, Irene & Sandström, Camilla & Albert, Christian & Kasymov, Ulan & Arlettaz, Raphael, 2019. "Constraints and opportunities for mainstreaming biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy: Insights from the IPBES assessment for Europe and Central Asia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Sattler, Claudia & Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Meyer, Claas, 2018. "Methods in ecosystem services governance analysis: An introduction," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 155-168.
    6. Stępniewska, Małgorzata & Lupa, Piotr & Mizgajski, Andrzej, 2018. "Drivers of the ecosystem services approach in Poland and perception by practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 59-67.
    7. repec:eee:ecoser:v:36:y:2019:i:c:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Keenan, Rodney J. & Pozza, Greg & Fitzsimons, James A., 2019. "Ecosystem services in environmental policy: Barriers and opportunities for increased adoption," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Hysing, Erik, 2021. "Challenges and opportunities for the Ecosystem Services approach: Evaluating experiences of implementation in Sweden," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    10. Sara Khoshkar & Monica Hammer & Sara Borgström & Berit Balfors, 2020. "Ways Forward for Advancing Ecosystem Services in Municipal Planning—Experiences from Stockholm County," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, August.
    11. Sarkki, Simo, 2017. "Governance services: Co-producing human well-being with ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 82-91.
    12. Winkler, Klara J. & Scown, Murray W. & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2018. "A classification to align social-ecological land systems research with policy in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 137-145.
    13. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    14. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    16. Valbuena, Diego & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Duncan, Alan & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Swain, Braja & Mekonnen, Kindu & Germaine, Ibro & Gérard, Bruno, 2015. "Identifying determinants, pressures and trade-offs of crop residue use in mixed smallholder farms in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 107-118.
    17. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    18. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    19. Shah, Syed Mahboob & Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Qing & Casazza, Marco & Agostinho, Feni & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2021. "Sustainability assessment of agriculture production systems in Pakistan: A provincial-scale energy-based evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    20. Sander Jacobs & Fernando Santos-Martín & Eeva Primmer & Fanny Boeraeve & Alejandra Morán-Ordóñez & Vânia Proença & Martin Schlaepfer & Lluis Brotons & Robert Dunford & Sandra Lavorel & Antoine Guisan , 2022. "Transformative Change Needs Direction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-9, November.
    21. Rocío Silva-Pérez & Gema González-Romero, 2022. "GIAHS as an Instrument to Articulate the Landscape and Territorialized Agrifood Systems—The Example of La Axarquía (Malaga Province, Spain)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:46:y:2020:i:c:s2212041620301297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.