IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

An indicator-based integrated assessment of ecosystem change and human-well-being: Selected case studies from Indonesia, China and Japan

Listed author(s):
  • Suneetha, M.S.
  • Rahajoe, Joeni S.
  • Shoyama, Kikuko
  • Lu, Xing
  • Thapa, Shubhechchha
  • Braimoh, Ademola K.
Registered author(s):

    The paper highlights the findings of a study from selected ecosystems in Indonesia, China and Japan. The study sought to trace changes to productive resources of ecosystems over a period of 50Â years; and trace the dependence of well-being of local populations on the ecosystems for the same time period. Data was collected from land-use maps, records and participatory rapid/rural appraisal (PRA) surveys in multistakeholder forums. To illustrate the changes, an indicator-based assessment framework was developed that integrates data from biophysical and socio-economic parameters. We observed that the approach (1) provides a better representation of the preferences of different stakeholders of ecosystem services, (2) fosters validation of data between the different stakeholders and (3) enables a communication and planning process among the stakeholders to sustainably utilize and manage their ecosystems. The use of spatial maps validates the relevance and utility of diachronic observations of communities and other stakeholders directly dependent on ecosystems. At the same time, they can be used to strengthen local planning processes for the development of services in the ecosystem. Such research thereby also acts as a catalyst to a social process of coordinated action to address local issues of global relevance.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 70 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 11 (September)
    Pages: 2124-2136

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:11:p:2124-2136
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Wilson, Matthew A. & Howarth, Richard B., 2002. "Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 431-443, June.
    2. Limburg, Karin E. & O'Neill, Robert V. & Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen, 2002. "Complex systems and valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 409-420, June.
    3. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:11:p:2124-2136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.