IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i4p513-d1375127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integration of Acceptability Analyses into an Adaptive Landscape Co-Design and Management Approach—The Acceptability and Landscape Design Cycle (ALDC)

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Busse

    (Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Eberswalder Str. 84, 15374 Müncheberg, Germany)

  • Jana Zscheischler

    (Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Eberswalder Str. 84, 15374 Müncheberg, Germany
    Department of Geography, Faculty II, University of Vechta, Driverstraße 22, 49377 Vechta, Germany)

  • Nico Heitepriem

    (State Office for Environment of the Federal State of Brandenburg (LfU), Department for Large Nature Reserves and Regional Development, UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Spreewald, Schulstrasse 9, 03222 Lübbenau/Spreewald, Germany)

  • Rosemarie Siebert

    (Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Eberswalder Str. 84, 15374 Müncheberg, Germany)

Abstract

Acceptability analyses of place–based innovations provide crucial in-depth knowledge (e.g., perceptions and values on landscapes) for the social–ecological transformation of landscapes. However, previous acceptability analyses often neglected complex and ongoing processes. We argue that, for the design of a sustainability-oriented transformation and to address spatial and temporal dynamics in landscapes, an operational heuristic is needed; one that integrates acceptability analyses into an adaptive landscape co-design and management approach. Therefore, this conceptual–empirical paper introduces the concept of the ‘acceptability and landscape design cycle’ (ALDC), which is based on findings from various transdisciplinary innovation processes in the Spreewald region (Germany). It is composed of four iterative phases: (1) defining the preconditions for acceptability analysis, (2) conducting the acceptability analysis, (3) integrating the results into the landscape development strategy, and (4) re-designing and refining it. We illustrate the application of these phases using a case study of the cultural landscape in Spreewald. The paper provides practical implementation guidelines of the ALDC and contributes to a better understanding of the dynamics of acceptability decisions regarding the transformation processes of landscapes. Furthermore, it can advance the understanding of how co-evolution of socio-ecological systems occurs.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Busse & Jana Zscheischler & Nico Heitepriem & Rosemarie Siebert, 2024. "Integration of Acceptability Analyses into an Adaptive Landscape Co-Design and Management Approach—The Acceptability and Landscape Design Cycle (ALDC)," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:513-:d:1375127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/513/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/513/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jørgen Primdahl & Teresa Pinto‐Correia & Bas Pedroli, 2019. "European Landscapes in Transition: Implications for Policy Integration and Landscape Governance," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 18(3), pages 18-23, December.
    2. Maria Busse & Nico Heitepriem & Rosemarie Siebert, 2019. "The Acceptability of Land Pools for the Sustainable Revalorisation of Wetland Meadows in the Spreewald Region, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Bas Pedroli & Teresa Pinto Correia & Jørgen Primdahl, 2016. "Challenges for a shared European countryside of uncertain future. Towards a modern community-based landscape perspective," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 450-460, May.
    4. Kenter, Jasper O. & O'Brien, Liz & Hockley, Neal & Ravenscroft, Neil & Fazey, Ioan & Irvine, Katherine N. & Reed, Mark S. & Christie, Michael & Brady, Emily & Bryce, Rosalind & Church, Andrew & Cooper, 2015. "What are shared and social values of ecosystems?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 86-99.
    5. Maarten Wolsink, 2018. "Co-production in distributed generation: renewable energy and creating space for fitting infrastructure within landscapes," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 542-561, May.
    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. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    2. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    3. Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Ros & Church, Andrew, 2016. "Deliberative Democratic Monetary Valuation to implement the Ecosystem Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 308-318.
    4. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Tomas Balezentis, 2023. "Energy-space concept for the transition to a low-carbon energy society," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(12), pages 14953-14973, December.
    6. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    7. 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.
    8. Osberg, Gustav & Schulz, Felix & Bretter, Christian, 2024. "Navigating sustainable futures: The role of terminal and instrumental values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    12. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    13. Enrico Gottero & Claudia Cassatella & Federica Larcher, 2021. "Planning Peri-Urban Open Spaces: Methods and Tools for Interpretation and Classification," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, July.
    14. Angelika Zimmermann & Nora Albers & Jasper O. Kenter, 2022. "Deliberating Our Frames: How Members of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives Use Shared Frames to Tackle Within-Frame Conflicts Over Sustainability Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 757-782, July.
    15. 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).
    16. Lisiak-Zielińska, Marta & Jałoszyńska, Sylwia & Borowiak, Klaudia & Budka, Anna & Dach, Jacek, 2023. "Perception of biogas plants: A public awareness and preference - A case study for the agricultural landscape," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    17. Sandra Waddock, 2020. "Reframing and Transforming Economics around Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    18. Hoelting, Kristin R. & Morse, Joshua W. & Gould, Rachelle K. & Martinez, Doreen E. & Hauptfeld, Rina S. & Cravens, Amanda E. & Breslow, Sara J. & Bair, Lucas S. & Schuster, Rudy M. & Gavin, Michael C., 2024. "Opportunities for improved consideration of cultural benefits in environmental decision-Making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    19. Meinard, Yves & Remy, Alice & Schmid, Bernhard, 2017. "Measuring Impartial Preference for Biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 45-54.
    20. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.

    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:13:y:2024:i:4:p:513-:d:1375127. 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.