IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Ecosystem services in agriculture: Determining suitability for provision by collective management

  • Stallman, Heidi R.
Registered author(s):

    Agricultural ecosystems provide many ecosystem services (ES) which are essential to human health and well-being. In turn, some ES affect agricultural productivity. Managing agricultural lands to provide more ES and higher quality ES may be essential for the long-term sustainability of agricultural ecosystems. Most agricultural lands, however, are managed for the short-term production of food, fiber, and fuel, often at the expense of other ES. Proposed solutions to the underprovision of ES often involve government regulation or market incentives. A growing number of scholars, however, recognize the potential for a third approach—cooperative solutions. One important element in determining if an ES is a suitable candidate for cooperative solutions is its resource characteristics. Accordingly, this paper: 1.) provides a framework for determining an ES's suitability for collective management based on its resource characteristics, 2.) provides an in-depth analysis of three agricultural-based ES to show how the framework differentiates between ES and 3.) uses the framework to analyze fourteen agricultural-based ES for their suitability for collective management. Ten out of the fourteen ES analyzed may be well suited (e.g. pollination), suited (e.g. flood control), or moderately suited (e.g. nature recreation) for collective management under current incentive systems in agricultural ecosystems.

    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): 71 (2011)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 131-139

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:71:y:2011:i:c:p:131-139
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    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:71:y:2011:i:c:p:131-139. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

    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.