IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v62y2016icp7-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing cities reflexively—The biocultural diversity concept as an alternative to ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Buizer, Marleen
  • Elands, Birgit
  • Vierikko, Kati

Abstract

With the aim to embed ecology more forcefully into decision-making, the concept of Ecosystems Services (ES) has gained significant ground among policy-makers and researchers. The increasing recognition of the importance of urban green areas for the quality of life in growing cities has led proponents of ES approaches to argue for an uptake of the approach in urban environmental decision-making. However, the ES approach has been criticized for standing too much at a distance from local communities and their day-to-day practices and for insufficiently taking into account the potential trade-offs between different qualities or preferences. In this paper we argue that other concepts, doing other work, need to be added to the debate about futures of urban governance and research. Biocultural diversity is suggested as one such alternative concept. By its emphasis on diversity, biocultural diversity can account for the many ways in which people live with green areas in the urban landscape, acknowledges the different knowledges this involves, and can reveal conflicts and ambivalence that may be at stake. This sets up for a reflexive, transdisciplinary research process that questions and contextualizes knowledge and worldviews including those of researchers. A reflexive, transdisciplinary research, then, is a productive catalyst for forms of reflexive urban governance that recognise and respond to this diversity and provide platforms for contestation.

Suggested Citation

  • Buizer, Marleen & Elands, Birgit & Vierikko, Kati, 2016. "Governing cities reflexively—The biocultural diversity concept as an alternative to ecosystem services," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 7-13.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:7-13
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.03.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116300521
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.03.003?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ana Nikezić, 2022. "Enhancing Biocultural Diversity of Wild Urban Woodland through Research-Based Architectural Design: Case Study—War Island in Belgrade, Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Koen Arts & Maiara Thaisa Oliveira Rabelo & Daniela Maimoni De Figueiredo & Georgina Maffey & Antonio Augusto Rossotto Ioris & Pierre Girard, 2018. "Online and Offline Representations of Biocultural Diversity: A Political Ecology Perspective on Nature-Based Tourism and Indigenous Communities in the Brazilian Pantanal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Mariagiulia Mariani & Claire Cerdan & Iuri Peri, 2022. "Cultural biodiversity unpacked, separating discourse from practice," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 773-789, June.
    4. Maja Steen Møller & Anton Stahl Olafsson, 2018. "The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-10, September.
    5. Marjolein L.J. Mooij & Sabina Dessartre Mendonça & Koen Arts, 2018. "Conserving Biocultural Diversity through Community–Government Interaction: A Practice-Based Approach in a Brazilian Extractive Reserve," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Stålhammar, Sanna, 2021. "Polarised views of urban biodiversity and the role of socio-cultural valuation: Lessons from Cape Town," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    7. Chung-Shing Chan & Lawal M. Marafa, 2018. "Knowledge-Perception Bridge of Green-Smart Integration of Cities: An Empirical Study of Hong Kong," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    8. 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.
    9. Jacobs, Sander & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David Nicholas & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Boeraeve, Fanny & McGrath, Francesca L. & Vierikko, Kati & Geneletti, Davide & Sevecke, , 2016. "A new valuation school: Integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 213-220.
    10. Oleg Koefoed, 2019. "Urban nature as transformed practice – A case of multi-dimensional processing to increase public value in Copenhagen," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(6), pages 525-544, September.
    11. Fischer, L.K. & Honold, J. & Botzat, A. & Brinkmeyer, D. & Cvejić, R. & Delshammar, T. & Elands, B. & Haase, D. & Kabisch, N. & Karle, S.J. & Lafortezza, R. & Nastran, M. & Nielsen, A.B. & van der Ja, 2018. "Recreational ecosystem services in European cities: Sociocultural and geographical contexts matter for park use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 455-467.

    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:enscpo:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:7-13. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.