IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i10p1952-d1264831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends in High Nature Value Farmland and Ecosystem Services Valuation: A Bibliometric Review

Author

Listed:
  • Inês Girão

    (Centre of Geographical Studies (CEG), Associate Laboratory TERRA, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning (IGOT), Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Eduardo Gomes

    (Centre of Geographical Studies (CEG), Associate Laboratory TERRA, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning (IGOT), Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Paulo Pereira

    (Environmental Management Laboratory, Mykolas Romeris University, LT-08303 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Jorge Rocha

    (Centre of Geographical Studies (CEG), Associate Laboratory TERRA, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning (IGOT), Universidade de Lisboa, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

Abstract

High Nature Value farmland (HNVf) represents a rural landscape characterized by extensive farming practices. These lands not only deliver vital ecosystem services (ES) but also serve as significant harbors of biodiversity, underscoring their critical conservation status. Consequently, European Union countries have prioritized the identification, monitoring, and enhancement of HNVf systems in their policies. As governments and international organizations increasingly lean on green subsidies to promote sustainable environmental practices, the valuation of ecosystem services (VES) emerges as a crucial tool. This valuation offers both an economic rationale for conservation and aids in determining the optimal allocation of these subsidies for maximum environmental and economic return on investment. Given the potential for such valuations to shape and justify conservation subsidies, there is a growing imperative to understand the research trends and knowledge gaps in this realm. This article, through a bibliometric review, seeks to illuminate the size, growth trajectory, and thematic tendencies within HNVf and VES literature. Bibliometric analysis is recognized as promising in identifying research trends; thus, this article consists of a bibliometric review of HNVf and VES research. The objective is to identify the size, growth trajectory, and geographic distribution of HNVf and VES literature between the first publication until 2022, while assessing the critical publishing journals, authors, documents, and conceptual structure of the research fields (e.g., economic, social, and environmental). The analysis revealed a predominant concentration of research on HNVf in Europe, with limited studies conducted outside this continent. The primary focus of these studies revolved around subject areas such as environmental science, agriculture, and biological sciences. Conversely, regarding research on VES, there was no clear regional concentration. VES research publications mainly covered the interdisciplinary fields of economics, biology, and policymaking. As the fields of HNVf and VES have evolved, it is evident that there has been a stronger push towards data-driven approaches, emphasizing the need for tangible assessments and precise understanding. In examining the overlap between topics, the analysis revealed a gap between methodologies for HNVf monitoring and conservation and VES, highlighting the need for further development in crafting an integrated approach encompassing both areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Inês Girão & Eduardo Gomes & Paulo Pereira & Jorge Rocha, 2023. "Trends in High Nature Value Farmland and Ecosystem Services Valuation: A Bibliometric Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-28, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1952-:d:1264831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1952/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1952/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    2. Andrea G. Capodaglio & Arianna Callegari, 2018. "Can Payment for Ecosystem Services Schemes Be an Alternative Solution to Achieve Sustainable Environmental Development? A Critical Comparison of Implementation between Europe and China," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Koseoglu, Mehmet Ali & Rahimi, Roya & Okumus, Fevzi & Liu, Jingyan, 2016. "Bibliometric studies in tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 180-198.
    4. Yann Desjeux & Pierre Dupraz & Tom Kuhlman & Maria Luisa Paracchini & Rolf Michels & Élise Maigné & Stijn Reinhard, 2015. "Evaluating the impact of rural development measures on nature value indicators at different spatial levels: Application to France and The Netherlands," Post-Print hal-02638882, HAL.
    5. Philippe Mongeon & Adèle Paul-Hus, 2016. "The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 213-228, January.
    6. Regina Negri Pagani & João Luiz Kovaleski & Luis Mauricio Resende, 2015. "Methodi Ordinatio: a proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citation, and year of publication," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2109-2135, December.
    7. Jean A. Pratt & Karina Hauser & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2012. "Defining the intellectual structure of information systems and related college of business disciplines: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 279-304, November.
    8. David Elsweiler & Morgan Harvey, 2015. "Engaging and maintaining a sense of being informed: Understanding the tasks motivating twitter search," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(2), pages 264-281, February.
    9. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    10. 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.
    11. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    12. Rafaella Guimarães Porto & Rita Fernandes Almeida & Oswaldo Cruz-Neto & Marcelo Tabarelli & Blandina Felipe Viana & Carlos A. Peres & Ariadna Valentina Lopes, 2020. "Pollination ecosystem services: A comprehensive review of economic values, research funding and policy actions," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1425-1442, December.
    13. Paweł Wiśniewski & Roman Rudnicki & Mariusz Kistowski & Łukasz Wiśniewski & Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Kazimierz Niecikowski, 2021. "Mapping of EU Support for High Nature Value Farmlands, from the Perspective of Natural and Landscape Regions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-28, September.
    14. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    15. Ronald Vatananan-Thesenvitz & Amaury-Alexandre Schaller & Randall Shannon, 2019. "A Bibliometric Review of the Knowledge Base for Innovation in Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    16. Giles Atkinson & Ian Bateman & Susana Mourato, 2012. "Recent advances in the valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 22-47, Spring.
    17. Perianes-Rodriguez, Antonio & Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan, 2016. "Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1178-1195.
    18. Jinhui Wu & Haoxin Li & Huawei Wan & Yongcai Wang & Chenxi Sun & Hongmin Zhou, 2021. "Analyzing the Relationship between Animal Diversity and the Remote Sensing Vegetation Parameters: The Case of Xinjiang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-17, September.
    19. 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.
    20. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    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. Claudia Patricia Maldonado-Erazo & José Álvarez-García & María de la Cruz del Río-Rama & Amador Durán-Sánchez, 2021. "Scientific Mapping on the Impact of Climate Change on Cultural and Natural Heritage: A Systematic Scientometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Emilio Abad-Segura & Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña, 2021. "Implications for Sustainability of the Joint Application of Bioeconomy and Circular Economy: A Worldwide Trend Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    3. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Trautman, Dawn & Jeffrey, Scott R. & Unterschultz, James R., 2012. "Beneficial Management Practice (BMP) Adoption -- Direct Farm Cost/Benefit Tradeoffs," Project Report Series 139638, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    5. Nuria Rodríguez-López & M. Isabel Diéguez-Castrillón & Ana Gueimonde-Canto, 2019. "Sustainability and Tourism Competitiveness in Protected Areas: State of Art and Future Lines of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-32, November.
    6. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    7. Hunggul Yudono Setio Hadi Nugroho & Fitri Nurfatriani & Yonky Indrajaya & Tri Wira Yuwati & Sulistya Ekawati & Mimi Salminah & Hendra Gunawan & Subarudi Subarudi & Markus Kudeng Sallata & Merryana Kid, 2022. "Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services from Indonesia’s Remaining Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-39, September.
    8. Liu, Wenjing & Wang, Jingsheng & Li, Chao & Chen, Baoxiong & Sun, Yufang, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Analysis to Understand the Recent Progress in Agroecosystem Services Research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 293-305.
    9. Aliakbar Akbaritabar & Vincent Antonio Traag & Alberto Caimo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2020. "Italian sociologists: a community of disconnected groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2361-2382, September.
    10. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    11. Luisa F. Cabeza & Marta Chàfer & Érika Mata, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Web of Science and Scopus on the Energy Efficiency and Climate Impact of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    12. Loc, Ho Huu & Thi Hong Diep, Nguyen & Can, Nguyen Trong & Irvine, Kim N. & Shimizu, Yoshihisa, 2017. "Integrated evaluation of Ecosystem Services in Prawn-Rice rotational crops, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 377-387.
    13. Alcon, Francisco & Marín-Miñano, Cristina & Zabala, José A. & de-Miguel, María-Dolores & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2020. "Valuing diversification benefits through intercropping in Mediterranean agroecosystems: A choice experiment approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    14. Nekane Castillo-Eguskitza & María F. Schmitz & Miren Onaindia & Alejandro J. Rescia, 2019. "Linking Biophysical and Economic Assessments of Ecosystem Services for a Social–Ecological Approach to Conservation Planning: Application in a Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    15. Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & López-Cabarcos, M. Ángeles & Romero-Castro, Noelia María & Pérez-Pico, Ada María, 2020. "Innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge in the business scientific field: Mapping the research front," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 475-485.
    16. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    18. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    19. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    20. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.

    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:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1952-:d:1264831. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.