IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i18p7805-d416974.html

An Eco-GAME Meta-Evaluation of Existing Methods for the Appreciation of Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Maurizio Sajeva

    (Pellervo Economic Research PTT, Eerikinkatu 28 A, FI-00180 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Marjo Maidell

    (Pellervo Economic Research PTT, Eerikinkatu 28 A, FI-00180 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Jonne Kotta

    (Estonian Marine Institute, University of Tartu, Mäealuse 14, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia)

  • Anneliis Peterson

    (Estonian Marine Institute, University of Tartu, Mäealuse 14, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia)

Abstract

The isolation of science disciplines and the weak integration between science, policy and society represent main challenges for sustainable human development. If, on the one hand, the specialization of science has produced higher levels of knowledge, on the other hand, the whole picture of the complex interactions between systems has suffered. Economic and natural sciences are, on matters of sustainable development, strongly divergent, and the interface informing decision-making is weak. This downplays uncertainty and creates room for entrenched political positions, compromising evidence-based decision-making and putting the urgent need to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of Agenda 2030 at risk. This article presents the heterodox Eco-GAME framework for interconnecting science through trans-disciplinary social-learning and meta-evaluation of scientific knowledge in pursuit of SDGs. The framework is tested and refined in the BONUS MARES project by systematic literature analysis, participatory workshops, and semi-structured interviews, in relation to the specific habitats of Baltic Sea mussel reefs, seagrass beds and macroalgae ecosystem services produced and methods applied. The results, acknowledging the urgency of interfacing science, policy and society, validate the Eco-GAME as a framework for this purpose and present a multi-dimensional system of indicators as a further development.

Suggested Citation

  • Maurizio Sajeva & Marjo Maidell & Jonne Kotta & Anneliis Peterson, 2020. "An Eco-GAME Meta-Evaluation of Existing Methods for the Appreciation of Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-47, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7805-:d:416974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7805/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7805/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    3. Maurizio Sajeva & Andrew Mitchell & Mark Lemon, 2019. "Reconfiguring Household Management in Times of Discontinuity as an Open System: The Case of Agro-food Chains," International Journal of Food and Beverage Manufacturing and Business Models (IJFBMBM), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 4(1), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Amartya Sen, 1997. "Development and Thinking at the Beginning of the 21st Century," STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers 02, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    5. N. Gregory Mankiw, 1998. "Teaching the Principles of Economics," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 24(4), pages 519-524, Fall.
    6. Rene Kemp & Saeed Parto & Robert B. Gibson, 2005. "Governance for sustainable development: moving from theory to practice," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1/2), pages 12-30.
    7. Maurizio Sajeva & Marcelo Masera, 2006. "A strategic approach to risk governance of critical infrastructures," International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(4), pages 379-395.
    8. Konstantinos Mattas & Henk Kievit & George Baourakis & Constantin Zopounidis, 2020. "Sustainable Food Chains and Ecosystems," Post-Print hal-02880209, HAL.
    9. Sen, Amartya, 1997. "Development thinking at the beginning of the 21st century," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6711, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    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. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    2. Corsi, G. & Guarino, R. & Muñoz-Ulecia, E. & Grande, U. & Buonocore, E. & Sapio, A. & Franzese, P.P., 2026. "Has “Ecological Economics” betrayed its roots? Revealing its state, internal tensions and evolution through a multi-level and multi-scale bibliometric assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    3. Pistorius, Till & Schaich, Harald & Winkel, Georg & Plieninger, Tobias & Bieling, Claudia & Konold, Werner & Volz, Karl-Reinhard, 2012. "Lessons for REDDplus: A comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 4-12.
    4. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    5. Grilli, Gianluca & Fratini, Roberto & Marone, Enrico & Sacchelli, Sandro, 2020. "A spatial-based tool for the analysis of payments for forest ecosystem services related to hydrogeological protection," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Maurizio Sajeva & Marjo Maidell & Jonne Kotta, 2020. "A Participatory Geospatial Toolkit for Science Integration and Knowledge Transfer Informing SDGs Based Governance and Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Wakita, Kazumi & Kurokura, Hisashi & Oishi, Taro & Shen, Zhonghua & Furuya, Ken, 2019. "Exploring the effect of psychometric variables on willingness to pay for marine ecosystem services: A survey in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 130-138.
    8. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    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. Viput Ongsakul & Salil K. Sen, 2019. "Low Carbon Energy Symbiosis for Sustainability: Review of Shared Value-based Policy Metabolism to Enhance the Implementability of the Sustainable Development Goals in Asia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(2), pages 24-30.
    11. Villegas-Palacio, Clara & Berrouet, Lina & López, Connie & Ruiz, Aura & Upegui, Alba, 2016. "Lessons from the integrated valuation of ecosystem services in a developing country: Three case studies on ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 297-308.
    12. Polishchuk, Yuliana & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2012. "Beyond “benefits”? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 103-111.
    13. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    14. Nadeem Ul Haque & Durr-e-Nayab, 2022. "Opportunity to Excel: Now and the Future (Presidential Address)," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 61(1), pages 105-137.
    15. Pirgmaier, Elke, 2021. "The value of value theory for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    16. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.
    17. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.
    18. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    19. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    20. Deininger, Michaela & Koellner, Thomas & Brey, Thomas & Teschke, Katharina, 2016. "Towards mapping and assessing antarctic marine ecosystem services – The weddell sea case study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 174-192.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7805-:d:416974. 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.