IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i14p6388-d1700111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Distribution of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Rural Landscapes Using PGIS and SolVES

Author

Listed:
  • Yasin Yaman

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Agriculture, Sakarya University of Applied Science, 54580 Arifiye, Turkey
    Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Süleyman Demirel University, 32000 Isparta, Turkey)

  • Seda Örücü

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Süleyman Demirel University, 32000 Isparta, Turkey)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) play a vital role in rural well-being, yet their spatial patterns and local perceptions remain underexplored in many regions, including Türkiye. This study aims to assess the social values of CES in rural landscapes by focusing on the Şarkikaraağaç and Yenişarbademli districts of Isparta Province. Using Participatory Geographic Information Systems (PGIS) and the Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES) models, we collected and analyzed spatial data from 836 community surveys, mapping 3771 CES value points. Sentinel-2A imagery and derived indices (NDVI, NDWI, SAVI, NDBI) were used to classify landscape infrastructures into green, blue, yellow, and grey categories. The results show that aesthetic and recreational services were most highly valued, followed by biodiversity, spiritual, and therapeutic values. Chi-square and Kruskal–Wallis tests revealed significant demographic and spatial variation in CES preferences, while Principal Component Analysis highlighted two key dimensions of value perception. MaxEnt-based modeling within SolVES confirmed the spatial distribution of CES with high predictive accuracy (AUC > 0.93). Our findings underscore the importance of integrating CES into sustainable land-use planning and suggest that infrastructure type and proximity to natural features significantly influence CES valuation in rural settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Yasin Yaman & Seda Örücü, 2025. "Spatial Distribution of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Rural Landscapes Using PGIS and SolVES," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:14:p:6388-:d:1700111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/14/6388/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/14/6388/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. E. Seda Arslan & Paulina Nordström & Asko Ijäs & Reija Hietala & Nora Fagerholm, 2021. "Perceptions of Cultural Ecosystem Services: spatial differences in urban and rural areas of Kokemäenjoki, Finland," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(6), pages 828-844, August.
    2. Brianne A. Altmann & Greta Jordan & Eva Schlecht, 2018. "Participatory Mapping as an Approach to Identify Grazing Pressure in the Altay Mountains, Mongolia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Junchao Lei & Yi Xie & Yisi Chen & Tianyue Zhong & Yuancheng Lin & Min Wang, 2025. "The Transformation of Peri-Urban Agriculture and Its Implications for Urban–Rural Integration Under the Influence of Digital Technology," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Hui Li & Qingchun Guan & Yanguo Fan & Chengyang Guan, 2024. "Ecosystem Service Value Assessment of the Yellow River Delta Based on Satellite Remote Sensing Data," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    6. Yiting Zhu & Gengxin Sun, 2022. "Social Value Evaluation of Ecosystem Services in Global Geoparks Based on SolVES Model," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-13, April.
    7. Xiaodong Chen & Chengzhao Wu, 2025. "Mapping and Assessing the Supply and Demand of Rural Recreation Services in National Parks: A Case Study of Qianjiangyuan, Zhejiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, February.
    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. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    2. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    3. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    4. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    5. Gerner, Nadine V. & Nafo, Issa & Winking, Caroline & Wencki, Kristina & Strehl, Clemens & Wortberg, Timo & Niemann, André & Anzaldua, Gerardo & Lago, Manuel & Birk, Sebastian, 2018. "Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 327-338.
    6. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    7. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    8. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    9. Diane P. Dupont, 2019. "Editorial: Special Issue in Honour of Dr. Steven Renzetti," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-10, April.
    10. Chun-Chu Yeh & Cheng-Shen Lin & Chin-Huang Huang, 2018. "The Total Economic Value of Sport Tourism in Belt and Road Development—An Environmental Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    14. Aevermann Tim & Schmude Jürgen, 2015. "Quantification and monetary valuation of urban ecosystem services in Munich, Germany," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 188-200, December.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Cordier, Mateo & Pérez Agúndez, José A. & Hecq, Walter & Hamaide, Bertrand, 2014. "A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological–economic modeling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 86-96.
    18. Hahn, Thomas & McDermott, Constance & Ituarte-Lima, Claudia & Schultz, Maria & Green, Tom & Tuvendal, Magnus, 2015. "Purposes and degrees of commodification: Economic instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services need not rely on markets or monetary valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 74-82.
    19. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    20. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2009. "Governing of agro-ecosystem services - modes, efficiency, perspectives," MPRA Paper 99870, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:17:y:2025:i:14:p:6388-:d:1700111. 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.