IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v98y2014icp72-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, Helen F.
  • Sullivan, Caroline A.

Abstract

A two way relationship exists between agricultural production and ecosystem services where farmers act as significant contributors to as well as potential detractors to societal well-being. To date, there has been a limited amount of research investigating farmers' values through the ecosystem services concept, particularly in Australia. In this paper we address this research gap through focusing on farmers' perceptions of four different attributes towards 12 ecosystem services. Results from our survey indicate that farmers place a high value on the importance of all ecosystem services, whilst perceiving most of them to be moderately manageable. The farmers identified a variety of threats towards ecosystem services that were mostly agricultural in origin, whilst perceiving themselves to be moderately vulnerable to the loss of services. To overcome any potential loss of services, market-based instruments such as schemes paying for ecosystem services can be applied. These economic tools do appear to be needed, as the farmers in this study directly identified the economic cost of maintaining native habitat as a threat. Through more explicit understanding of the social dimension of the two-way relationship between ecosystem services and agricultural production, natural resource policies to overcome this potential negative cycle can be implemented more effectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:98:y:2014:i:c:p:72-80
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913003637
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Kemkes, Robin J. & Farley, Joshua & Koliba, Christopher J., 2010. "Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2069-2074, September.
    2. Deal, Robert L. & Cochran, Bobby & LaRocco, Gina, 2012. "Bundling of ecosystem services to increase forestland value and enhance sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 69-76.
    3. 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.
    4. Ajayi, Oluyede C. & Jack, B. Kelsey & Leimona, Beria, 2012. "Auction Design for the Private Provision of Public Goods in Developing Countries: Lessons from Payments for Environmental Services in Malawi and Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 1213-1223.
    5. Gordon, Line J. & Finlayson, C. Max & Falkenmark, Malin, 2010. "Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(4), pages 512-519, April.
    6. Sandhu, Harpinder S. & Crossman, Neville D. & Smith, F. Patrick, 2012. "Ecosystem services and Australian agricultural enterprises," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 19-26.
    7. Dale, Virginia H. & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 286-296, December.
    8. Stallman, Heidi R., 2011. "Ecosystem services in agriculture: Determining suitability for provision by collective management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 131-139.
    9. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    10. Powlson, D.S. & Gregory, P.J. & Whalley, W.R. & Quinton, J.N. & Hopkins, D.W. & Whitmore, A.P. & Hirsch, P.R. & Goulding, K.W.T., 2011. "Soil management in relation to sustainable agriculture and ecosystem services," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 72-87, January.
    11. Ribaudo, Marc & Greene, Catherine & Hansen, LeRoy & Hellerstein, Daniel, 2010. "Ecosystem services from agriculture: Steps for expanding markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2085-2092, September.
    12. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod, 2009. "Investigating farmers' preferences for the design of agri-environment schemes: a choice experiment approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 631-647.
    13. Powlson, D.S. & Gregory, P.J. & Whalley, W.R. & Quinton, J.N. & Hopkins, D.W. & Whitmore, A.P. & Hirsch, P.R. & Goulding, K.W.T., 2011. "Soil management in relation to sustainable agriculture and ecosystem services," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 72-87.
    14. Gallai, Nicola & Salles, Jean-Michel & Settele, Josef & Vaissière, Bernard E., 2009. "Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 810-821, January.
    15. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    16. Dobbs, Thomas L. & Pretty, Jules, 2008. "Case study of agri-environmental payments: The United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 765-775, May.
    17. Garrick, D. & Siebentritt, M.A. & Aylward, B. & Bauer, C.J. & Purkey, A., 2009. "Water markets and freshwater ecosystem services: Policy reform and implementation in the Columbia and Murray-Darling Basins," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 366-379, December.
    18. repec:eee:ecoser:v:4:y:2013:i:c:p:60-72 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Derissen, Sandra & Quaas, Martin F., 2013. "Combining performance-based and action-based payments to provide environmental goods under uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 77-84.
    20. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    21. Raymond, Christopher M. & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Cast, Andrea & Strathearn, Sarah & Grandgirard, Agnes & Kalivas, Tina, 2009. "Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1301-1315, March.
    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. Ngouhouo Poufoun, Jonas & Abildtrup, Jens & Sonwa, Dénis Jean & Delacote, Philippe, 2016. "The value of endangered forest elephants to local communities in a transboundary conservation landscape," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 70-86.
    2. repec:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pa:p:37-44 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pa:p:258-269 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pa:p:183-196 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:eee:forpol:v:90:y:2018:i:c:p:67-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:527-:d:132110 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:eee:ecoser:v:13:y:2015:i:c:p:81-92 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Greenland-Smith, Simon & Brazner, John & Sherren, Kate, 2016. "Farmer perceptions of wetlands and waterbodies: Using social metrics as an alternative to ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 58-69.
    9. repec:eee:ecoser:v:23:y:2017:i:c:p:108-115 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    11. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:703-:d:134782 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:ecolec:v:98:y:2014:i:c:p:72-80. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.