IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i19p8822-d1763275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural Ecosystem Services in Rural Areas: Assessing Demand and Supply for Ecologically Functional Areas (EFA)

Author

Listed:
  • Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Halina Lipińska

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Ilona Woźniak-Kostecka

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Komor

    (Department of Management and Marketing, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Kępkowicz

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Kamila Adamczyk-Mucha

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Ewelina Krukow

    (Department of Grassland Science and Landscaping, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka Street 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Duniewicz

    (Department of Architectural Design and History of Architecture, Institute of Architecture and Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture, Bialystok University of Technology, 15-351 Białystok, Poland)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) play a key role in the sustainable development of rural areas—yet they remain poorly quantified in planning practice. This study examines the relationship between the supply and demand of CES provided by various types of Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) in a rural landscape, using the municipality of Sosnowica (eastern Poland) as a case study. Landscapes such as forests, agricultural land, wetlands, and inland waters were evaluated using a set of biophysical and socio-economic indicators that reflect both their potential (supply) and actual use (demand) in terms of services such as recreation, landscape aesthetics, and cultural heritage. The findings reveal significant spatial disparities between CES supply and demand: forests and inland waters exhibit the highest supply potential, while agricultural land shows untapped opportunities in tourism and recreation. Wetlands, in particular, face notable service deficits—highlighting the need for targeted infrastructure and management interventions. Statistical analyses (Pearson correlation, Kruskal–Wallis test, Tukey HSD test) confirmed that the key factors shaping CES are accessibility and environmental attractiveness. The results indicate that CES mapping is a valuable tool for supporting sustainable rural planning, reinforcing local identity, counteracting depopulation, and stimulating socio-economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek & Halina Lipińska & Ilona Woźniak-Kostecka & Agnieszka Komor & Agnieszka Kępkowicz & Kamila Adamczyk-Mucha & Ewelina Krukow & Agnieszka Duniewicz, 2025. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in Rural Areas: Assessing Demand and Supply for Ecologically Functional Areas (EFA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-25, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8822-:d:1763275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8822/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8822/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gréta Vrbičanová & Dominika Kaisová & Matej Močko & František Petrovič & Peter Mederly, 2020. "Mapping Cultural Ecosystem Services Enables Better Informed Nature Protection and Landscape Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Balázsi, Ágnes & Dänhardt, Juliana & Collins, Sue & Schweiger, Oliver & Settele, Josef & Hartel, Tibor, 2021. "Understanding cultural ecosystem services related to farmlands: Expert survey in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Turkelboom, Francis & Leone, Michael & Jacobs, Sander & Kelemen, Eszter & García-Llorente, Marina & Baró, Francesc & Termansen, Mette & Barton, David N. & Berry, Pam & Stange, Erik & Thoonen, Marijke , 2018. "When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 566-578.
    4. Xiaohui Wang & Yao Wu & Kiril Manevski & Manqi Fu & Xiaogang Yin & Fu Chen, 2021. "A Framework for the Heterogeneity and Ecosystem Services of Farmland Landscapes: An Integrative Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    5. Milena Turčinović & Aleksandra Vujko & Nemanja Stanišić, 2025. "Community-Led Sustainable Tourism in Rural Areas: Enhancing Wine Tourism Destination Competitiveness and Local Empowerment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Shouhang Zhao & Yuqi Li & Ziqian Nie & Yunyuan Li, 2025. "Supply–Demand Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Urban Parks of Plateau River Valley City: A Case Study of Lhasa," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-28, June.
    7. Zhang, Yuxin & Fu, Bin & Sun, Juying & da Silva, Ramon Felipe Bicudo, 2025. "Quantifying supply and demand of cultural ecosystem services from a dynamic perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    8. Ying Yang & Li Jiang & Xiaoyan Ma & Song Liu & Lihua Wang, 2025. "A Comprehensive Approach to Identifying the Supply and Demand of Urban Park Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Megalopolis Area of Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Teresa Wyłupek & Halina Lipińska & Agnieszka Kępkowicz & Kamila Adamczyk-Mucha & Wojciech Lipiński & Stanisław Franczak & Agnieszka Duniewicz, 2025. "Cultural Ecosystem Services of Grassland Communities: A Case Study of Lubelskie Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-23, July.
    10. 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).
    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. Lia Laporta & Tiago Domingos & Cristina Marta-Pedroso, 2021. "Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems Services under the Proposed MAES European Common Framework: Methodological Challenges and Opportunities," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-28, October.
    2. Sonia Delphin & Katherine A. Snyder & Sophia Tanner & Karim Musálem & Stuart E. Marsh & José R. Soto, 2022. "Obstacles to the Development of Integrated Land-Use Planning in Developing Countries: The Case of Paraguay," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Ying Yang & Li Jiang & Xiaoyan Ma & Song Liu & Lihua Wang, 2025. "A Comprehensive Approach to Identifying the Supply and Demand of Urban Park Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Megalopolis Area of Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    5. Antonio J. Castro & Cristina Quintas-Soriano & Jodi Brandt & Carla L. Atkinson & Colden V. Baxter & Morey Burnham & Benis N. Egoh & Marina García-Llorente & Jason P. Julian & Berta Martín-López & Feli, 2018. "Applying Place-Based Social-Ecological Research to Address Water Scarcity: Insights for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    6. Aibo Jin & Gachen Zhang & Ping Ma & Xiangrong Wang, 2024. "Ecosystem Services Trade-Offs in the Chaohu Lake Basin Based on Land-Use Scenario Simulations," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-29, December.
    7. Jie Yang & Jiashuo Zhang & Chenyang Li & Jianhua Gao, 2025. "Spatio-Temporal Patterns and Trade-Offs/Synergies of Land Use Functions at the Township Scale in Special Ecological Functional Zones," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-27, September.
    8. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Van Oijstaeijen, Wito & Van Passel, Steven & Back, Phil & Cools, Jan, 2022. "The politics of green infrastructure: A discrete choice experiment with Flemish local decision-makers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    10. Hani Amir Aouissi & Alexandru-Ionuţ Petrişor & Mostefa Ababsa & Maria Boştenaru-Dan & Mahmoud Tourki & Zihad Bouslama, 2021. "Influence of Land Use on Avian Diversity in North African Urban Environments," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Montoya, Daniel & Gaba, Sabrina & de Mazancourt, Claire & Bretagnolle, Vincent & Loreau, Michel, 2020. "Reconciling biodiversity conservation, food production and farmers’ demand in agricultural landscapes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 416(C).
    12. Armands Auzins & Uchendu Eugene Chigbu, 2021. "Values-Led Planning Approach in Spatial Development: A Methodology," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.
    13. Han, Bo & Jin, Xiaobin & Sun, Rui & Li, Hanbing & Liang, Xinyuan & Zhou, Yinkang, 2023. "Understanding land-use sustainability with a systematical framework: An evaluation case of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    14. Miroslav Knežević & Aleksandra Vujko & Dušan Borovčanin, 2025. "Community-Centered Farm-Based Hospitality in Agriculture: Fostering Rural Tourism, Well-Being, and Sustainability," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, July.
    15. Jiao Zhang & Qian Wang & Yiping Xia & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Knowledge Map of Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development: A Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-24, February.
    16. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    17. Dehghani Pour, Milad & Barati, Ali Akbar & Azadi, Hossein & Scheffran, Jürgen & Shirkhani, Mehdi, 2023. "Analyzing forest residents' perception and knowledge of forest ecosystem services to guide forest management and biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    18. Aleksandra Vujko & Martina Arsić & Radmila Bojović, 2025. "From Local Product to Destination Identity: Leveraging Cave-Aged Cheese for Sustainable Rural Tourism Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-28, May.
    19. Langemeyer, Johannes & Benra, Felipe & Nahuelhual, Laura & Zoderer, Brenda Maria, 2024. "Ecosystem Services Justice: The Emergence of a Critical Research Field," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    20. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis E. & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2022. "Farm diversity and fine scales matter in the assessment of ecosystem services and land use scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    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:19:p:8822-:d:1763275. 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.