IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v127y2023ics0264837723000406.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citizen perceptions and values associated with ecosystem services from European grassland landscapes

Author

Listed:
  • Tindale, Sophie
  • Vicario-Modroño, Victoria
  • Gallardo-Cobos, Rosa
  • Hunter, Erik
  • Miškolci, Simona
  • Price, Paul Newell
  • Sánchez-Zamora, Pedro
  • Sonnevelt, Martijn
  • Ojo, Mercy
  • McInnes, Kirsty
  • Frewer, Lynn J.

Abstract

European permanent grasslands are multifunctional landscapes that deliver an important mix of ecosystem services. The effectiveness of future policies linked to landscape and agricultural practices requires consideration of citizen perceptions of, and priorities for, benefits (e.g. ecosystem services) demanded from permanent grasslands. This exploratory research aimed to expand understanding of citizens’ perceptions and socio-cultural valuation of grassland landscapes, ecosystem service provision and management across Europe in order to inform future research. Fifteen focus groups with residents of rural areas, urban areas, and young adults from rural areas (aged 18–26) (N = 104), were conducted across five European countries (Spain, Sweden, UK, Switzerland and the Czech Republic) between 2020 and 2021. Overall, participants perceived grassland landscapes positively, describing connection to the landscape through experience, emotions, environmental characteristics, activity, access, and cultural identity. Prioritisation of ecosystem services from grassland varied between countries, influenced by grassland system diversity, and complex socio-cultural and socio-economic differences. Rural dwellers, including rural youth, perceived more benefits from grasslands than urban dwellers. Perceptions of problems were related to reduction, degradation and abandonment of grassland, and varied between urban and rural dwellers. Consumer education about the value of grasslands was perceived as vital in ensuring sustainable management and use of these landscapes. Citizens across different countries shared farming ideals relating to farming for biodiversity. These findings can help ensure that policies surrounding landscape and agricultural practices align with societal perspectives and priorities to effectively deliver multifunctional, valued, sustainable grassland systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Tindale, Sophie & Vicario-Modroño, Victoria & Gallardo-Cobos, Rosa & Hunter, Erik & Miškolci, Simona & Price, Paul Newell & Sánchez-Zamora, Pedro & Sonnevelt, Martijn & Ojo, Mercy & McInnes, Kirsty & , 2023. "Citizen perceptions and values associated with ecosystem services from European grassland landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:127:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000406
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723000406
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106574?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. Cundill, Georgina & Bezerra, Joana Carlos & De Vos, Alta & Ntingana, Nokuthula, 2017. "Beyond benefit sharing: Place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 140-148.
    2. Rong-Zhi Guo & Yao-Bin Song & Ming Dong, 2022. "Progress and Prospects of Ecosystem Disservices: An Updated Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-11, August.
    3. Alison Pritchard & Miles Richardson & David Sheffield & Kirsten McEwan, 2020. "The Relationship Between Nature Connectedness and Eudaimonic Well-Being: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 1145-1167, March.
    4. Rod MacRae & Michelle Szabo & Kalli Anderson & Fiona Louden & Sandi Trillo, 2012. "Empowering the Citizen-Consumer: Re-Regulating Consumer Information to Support the Transition to Sustainable and Health Promoting Food Systems in Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-30, September.
    5. Howley, Peter, 2011. "Landscape aesthetics: Assessing the general publics' preferences towards rural landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 161-169.
    6. Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode, 2016. "Psychographic profile affects willingness to pay for ecosystem services provided by Mediterranean high nature value farmland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 232-245.
    7. Ramkissoon, Haywantee & Graham Smith, Liam David & Weiler, Betty, 2013. "Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 552-566.
    8. Joanna T. Storie & Enri Uusna & Zane Eglāja & Teele Laur & Mart Külvik & Monika Suškevičs & Simon Bell, 2019. "Place Attachment and Its Consequence for Landscape-Scale Management and Readiness to Participate: Social Network Complexity in the Post-Soviet Rural Context of Latvia and Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-24, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Schmitt, Thomas M. & Martín-López, Berta & Kaim, Andrea & Früh-Müller, Andrea & Koellner, Thomas, 2021. "Ecosystem services from (pre-)Alpine grasslands: Matches and mismatches between citizens’ perceived suitability and farmers’ management considerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    11. Richter, Franziska & Jan, Pierrick & El Benni, Nadja & Lüscher, Andreas & Buchmann, Nina & Klaus, Valentin H., 2021. "A guide to assess and value ecosystem services of grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    12. Vanwindekens, Frédéric M. & Stilmant, Didier & Baret, Philippe V., 2013. "Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 352-362.
    13. Gould, Rachelle K. & Lincoln, Noa Kekuewa, 2017. "Expanding the suite of Cultural Ecosystem Services to include ingenuity, perspective, and life teaching," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 117-127.
    14. Kovács, Eszter & Kelemen, Eszter & Kalóczkai, Ágnes & Margóczi, Katalin & Pataki, György & Gébert, Judit & Málovics, György & Balázs, Bálint & Roboz, Ágnes & Krasznai Kovács, Eszter & Mihók, Barbara, 2015. "Understanding the links between ecosystem service trade-offs and conflicts in protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 117-127.
    15. Jacobs, Sander & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David Nicholas & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Boeraeve, Fanny & McGrath, Francesca L. & Vierikko, Kati & Geneletti, Davide & Sevecke, Ka, 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.
    16. Christopher M. Raymond & Matteo Giusti & Stephan Barthel, 2018. "An embodied perspective on the co-production of cultural ecosystem services: toward embodied ecosystems," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(5-6), pages 778-799, May.
    17. Alexander Wezel & Sibylle Stöckli & Erich Tasser & Heike Nitsch & Audrey Vincent, 2021. "Good Pastures, Good Meadows: Mountain Farmers’ Assessment, Perceptions on Ecosystem Services, and Proposals for Biodiversity Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.
    18. Orenstein, Daniel E. & Groner, Elli, 2014. "In the eye of the stakeholder: Changes in perceptions of ecosystem services across an international border," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 185-196.
    19. Carine Pachoud & Riccardo Da Re & Maurizio Ramanzin & Stefano Bovolenta & Damiano Gianelle & Enrico Sturaro, 2020. "Tourists and Local Stakeholders’ Perception of Ecosystem Services Provided by Summer Farms in the Eastern Italian Alps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Singh, Neera M., 2015. "Payments for ecosystem services and the gift paradigm: Sharing the burden and joy of environmental care," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 53-61.
    21. Zoderer, Brenda Maria & Tasser, Erich & Carver, Steve & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2019. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem service supply and ecosystem service demand bundles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    22. Sarah C Klain & Paige Olmsted & Kai M A Chan & Terre Satterfield, 2017. "Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, August.
    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. Cuni-Sanchez, Aida & Ngute, Alain Senghor K. & Sonké, Bonaventure & Sainge, Moses Nsanyi & Burgess, Neil D. & Klein, Julia A. & Marchant, Rob, 2019. "The importance of livelihood strategy and ethnicity in forest ecosystem services’ perceptions by local communities in north-western Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Ndayizeye, Gaëlle & Imani, Gerard & Nkengurutse, Jacques & Irampagarikiye, Rosette & Ndihokubwayo, Noël & Niyongabo, Ferdinand & Cuni-Sanchez, Aida, 2020. "Ecosystem services from mountain forests: Local communities’ views in Kibira National Park, Burundi," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    3. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    4. 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).
    5. Íñigo Bidegain & César A. López-Santiago & José A. González & Rodrigo Martínez-Sastre & Federica Ravera & Claudia Cerda, 2020. "Social Valuation of Mediterranean Cultural Landscapes: Exploring Landscape Preferences and Ecosystem Services Perceptions through a Visual Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-22, October.
    6. Breyne, Johanna & Dufrêne, Marc & Maréchal, Kevin, 2021. "How integrating 'socio-cultural values' into ecosystem services evaluations can give meaning to value indicators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    7. Cusens, Jarrod & Barraclough, Alicia D. & Måren, Inger Elisabeth, 2024. "Socio-cultural values and biophysical supply: How do afforestation and land abandonment impact multiple ecosystem services?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    8. Schmitt, Thomas M. & Martín-López, Berta & Kaim, Andrea & Früh-Müller, Andrea & Koellner, Thomas, 2021. "Ecosystem services from (pre-)Alpine grasslands: Matches and mismatches between citizens’ perceived suitability and farmers’ management considerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    9. Marcondes G. Coelho-Junior & Athila L. de Oliveira & Eduardo C. da Silva-Neto & Thayanne C. Castor-Neto & Ana A. de O. Tavares & Vanessa M. Basso & Ana P. D. Turetta & Patricia E. Perkins & Acacio G. , 2021. "Exploring Plural Values of Ecosystem Services: Local Peoples’ Perceptions and Implications for Protected Area Management in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    11. Rodríguez-Morales, Beatriz & Roces-Díaz, José V. & Kelemen, Eszter & Pataki, György & Díaz-Varela, Emilio, 2020. "Perception of ecosystem services and disservices on a peri-urban communal forest: Are landowners’ and visitors’ perspectives dissimilar?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    12. Daněk, Jan & Blättler, Linda & Leventon, Julia & Vačkářová, Davina, 2023. "Beyond nature conservation? Perceived benefits and role of the ecosystem services framework in protected landscape areas in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    13. Lhoest, Simon & Dufrêne, Marc & Vermeulen, Cédric & Oszwald, Johan & Doucet, Jean-Louis & Fayolle, Adeline, 2019. "Perceptions of ecosystem services provided by tropical forests to local populations in Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Negev, Maya & Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E. & Zemah Shamir, Shiri & Hassan, Yousef & Amasha, Hani & Raviv, Orna & Fares, Nasrin & Lotan, Alon & Peled, Yoav & Wittenberg, Lea & Izhaki, Ido, 2019. "Using the ecosystem services framework for defining diverse human-nature relationships in a multi-ethnic biosphere reserve," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    17. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    18. Hausner, Vera Helene & Engen, Sigrid & Muñoz, Lorena & Fauchald, Per, 2021. "Assessing a nationwide policy reform toward community-based conservation of biological diversity and ecosystem services in the Alpine North," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    19. Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode & Clemetsen, Morten & Eik, Lars Olav & Faccioni, Georgia & Ramanzin, Maurizio & Ripoll-Bosch, Raimon & Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Sturaro, Enrico, 2019. "Exploring social preferences for ecosystem services of multifunctional agriculture across policy scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    20. Amy Phillips & Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Canters, 2021. "Use-Related and Socio-Demographic Variations in Urban Green Space Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.

    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:lauspo:v:127:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000406. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-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.