IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v70y2024ics2212041624000871.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural ecosystem services and disservices in protected areas: Hotspots and influencing factors based on tourists’ digital footprints

Author

Listed:
  • Gan, Qiaochun
  • Liao, Lingyun
  • Kang, Xin
  • Xu, Zhenduo
  • Fu, Tianqi
  • Cao, Yue
  • Feng, Yunshuang
  • Dong, Jianwen
  • Lan, Siren

Abstract

Protected areas provide invaluable cultural ecosystem services, attracting increased attention. However, standardized evaluation criteria for cultural ecosystem services (CES) are still lacking, and the influencing factors remain largely unknown, making it difficult to fully understand the CES of protected areas. To address these limitations, we established a comprehensive framework for assessing the CES and selected Wuyishan National Park as a case study, a famous world heritage site attracting large numbers of visitors. A grounded approach was employed to analyze the composition of CES from visitors’ digital footprints data (N = 13,738), and kernel density estimation (KDE) and Geodetector were used to analyze spatial distribution and influencing factors. Results showed that recreation and leisure accounted for the highest proportion (47.63 %) of all the ten CES types derived from the coding of digital footprint data, while four categories of cultural ecosystem disservices (CEDS) constituted 13.15 % of the digital footprint coding count. Hot spots of CES were identified, which exhibited a pattern of higher values in the east and lower in the west. This pattern was primarily influenced by socio-economic factors such as GDP (q = 0.477), regional recreational popularity (q = 0.380), and population density (q = 0.363). The interaction between GDP and distance from the town center contributed significantly (q = 0.641). In the study, we expanded the methodology for quantitatively assessing CES in protected areas, revealing the spatial difference between CES and CEDS, offering scientific and well-founded references to achieve effective conservation and sustainable management for protected areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Gan, Qiaochun & Liao, Lingyun & Kang, Xin & Xu, Zhenduo & Fu, Tianqi & Cao, Yue & Feng, Yunshuang & Dong, Jianwen & Lan, Siren, 2024. "Cultural ecosystem services and disservices in protected areas: Hotspots and influencing factors based on tourists’ digital footprints," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:70:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000871
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000871
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101680?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. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    2. Víctor García-Díez & Marina García-Llorente & José A. González, 2020. "Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Madrid: Insights for Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Carucci, Tomaso & Whitehouse-Tedd, Katherine & Yarnell, Richard W. & Collins, Alan & Fitzpatrick, Fran & Botha, Andre & Santangeli, Andrea, 2022. "Ecosystem services and disservices associated with vultures: A systematic review and evidence assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    4. Ruxing Wang & Yechen Zhang & Hongmei Zhang & Hu Yu, 2022. "Social Value Assessment and Spatial Expression of National Park Ecosystems Based on Residents’ Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, April.
    5. Lei Yang & Fenglian Liu, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Service Value of Urban Agglomeration in Central Yunnan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Peng Wang & Nan Li & Yating He & Youjun He, 2022. "Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Service Functions in National Parks from the Perspective of Benefits of Community Residents," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-26, September.
    7. Teff-Seker, Yael & Rasilo, Terhi & Dick, Jan & Goldsborough, David & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "What does nature feel like? Using embodied walking interviews to discover cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    8. Stålhammar, Sanna & Pedersen, Eja, 2017. "Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 1-9.
    9. Cheng, Xin & Van Damme, Sylvie & Li, Luyuan & Uyttenhove, Pieter, 2019. "Evaluation of cultural ecosystem services: A review of methods," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Crouzat, Emilie & De Frutos, Angel & Grescho, Volker & Carver, Steve & Büermann, Andrea & Carvalho-Santos, Claudia & Kraemer, Roland & Mayor, Sarah & Pöpperl, Franziska & Rossi, Christian & Schröter, , 2022. "Potential supply and actual use of cultural ecosystem services in mountain protected areas and their surroundings," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    11. Cardoso, Ana Sofia & Renna, Francesco & Moreno-Llorca, Ricardo & Alcaraz-Segura, Domingo & Tabik, Siham & Ladle, Richard J. & Vaz, Ana Sofia, 2022. "Classifying the content of social media images to support cultural ecosystem service assessments using deep learning models," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    12. Kong, Inhye & Sarmiento, Fausto O., 2022. "Utilizing a crowdsourced phrasal lexicon to identify cultural ecosystem services in El Cajas National Park, Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    13. Van Berkel, Derek B. & Tabrizian, Payam & Dorning, Monica A. & Smart, Lindsey & Newcomb, Doug & Mehaffey, Megan & Neale, Anne & Meentemeyer, Ross K., 2018. "Quantifying the visual-sensory landscape qualities that contribute to cultural ecosystem services using social media and LiDAR," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 326-335.
    14. Maund, Phoebe R. & Irvine, Katherine N. & Dallimer, Martin & Fish, Robert & Austen, Gail E. & Davies, Zoe G., 2020. "Do ecosystem service frameworks represent people’s values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    15. António Azevedo, 2023. "Pull and Push Drivers of Giant-Wave Spectators in Nazaré, Portugal: A Cultural Ecosystem Services Assessment Based on Geo-Tagged Photos," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    16. Dou, Yuehan & Liu, Mengxiao & Bakker, Martha & Yu, Xiubo & Carsjens, Gerrit J. & De Groot, Rudolf & Liu, Junguo, 2021. "Influence of human interventions on local perceptions of cultural ecosystem services provided by coastal landscapes: Case study of the Huiwen wetland, southern China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kaiser, Nina N. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Feld, Christian K. & Hershkovitz, Yaron & Palt, Martin & Stoll, Stefan, 2021. "Societal benefits of river restoration – Implications from social media analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    3. Depietri, Yaella & Ghermandi, Andrea & Campisi-Pinto, Salvatore & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2021. "Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    4. Tandarić, Neven & Ives, Christopher D. & Watkins, Charles, 2022. "From city in the park to “greenery in plant pots”: The influence of socialist and post-socialist planning on opportunities for cultural ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Beata Fornal-Pieniak & Agnieszka Mandziuk & Dagmara Stangierska & Stanisław Parzych & Pedro Miguel Ramos Arsénio, 2023. "Preferences of Young Adult Visitors to Manor Parks in South Poland: A Study on Ecosystem Services and Scenic Quality," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-12, January.
    6. Flood, Kate & Mahon, Marie & McDonagh, John, 2024. "A process perspective of conceptual innovation: Integrating equity in applications of the ecosystem services concept in Ireland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Richard Smardon, 2021. "Ecosystem Services for Scenic Quality Landscape Management: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-10, October.
    8. Cabana, David & Ryfield, Frances & Crowe, Tasman P. & Brannigan, John, 2020. "Evaluating and communicating cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    9. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Zapata-Caldas, Emmanuel & Calcagni, Fulvia & Baró, Francesc & Langemeyer, Johannes, 2022. "Using crowdsourced imagery to assess cultural ecosystem services in data-scarce urban contexts: The case of the metropolitan area of Cali, Colombia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    11. Felipe-Lucia, María R. & de Frutos, Ángel & Crouzat, Emilie & Grescho, Volker & Heuschele, Jonna M. & Marselle, Melissa & Heurich, Marco & Pöpperl, Franziska & Porst, Florian & Portela, Ana Paula & Ro, 2024. "Differences in the experience of cultural ecosystem services in mountain protected areas by clusters of visitors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Shi, Qinqin & Chen, Hai & Liang, Xiaoying & Zhang, Hang & Liu, Di, 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services valuation and its multilevel drivers: A case study of Gaoqu Township in Shaanxi Province, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    13. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Mocior, Ewelina & Hibner, Joanna & Tokarczyk, Natalia, 2020. "Human perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of semi-natural grasslands: The influence of plant communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    14. Broome, James David & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2024. "Heavenly lights: An exploratory review of auroral ecosystem services and disservices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. Jianxiong Bao & Wen Wang & Tianqing Zhao, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Values in Response to Land Cover Dynamics in China from 1992 to 2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Huai, Songyao & Chen, Fen & Liu, Song & Canters, Frank & Van de Voorde, Tim, 2022. "Using social media photos and computer vision to assess cultural ecosystem services and landscape features in urban parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    17. Ebner, Manuel & Fontana, Veronika & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    18. Claire Burch & Michelle Busch & Edward Higgins & Steven Bittner & Nuwanthika Perera & Kevin Neal & Lawrence Burkett & Antonio J. Castro & Christopher Anderson, 2020. "Revisiting a Water Conflict in Southeastern Oklahoma 6 Years Later: A New Valuation of the Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-30, January.
    19. Schirpke, Uta & Ghermandi, Andrea & Sinclair, Michael & Van Berkel, Derek & Fox, Nathan & Vargas, Leonardo & Willemen, Louise, 2023. "Emerging technologies for assessing ecosystem services: A synthesis of opportunities and challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Schirpke, Uta & Ebner, Manuel & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2024. "Effects of climate-related environmental changes on non-material benefits from human-nature interactions: A literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).

    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:70:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000871. 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.