IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i11p1156-d82575.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region

Author

Listed:
  • Gerd Lupp

    (Chair for Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Bernhard Förster

    (Chair for Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Valerie Kantelberg

    (Department 7 “Forest ownership, Counseling, Forest policy“, Bavarian State Institute of Forestry, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Tim Markmann

    (Chair for Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Johannes Naumann

    (Chair for Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Carolina Honert

    (Department 7 “Forest ownership, Counseling, Forest policy“, Bavarian State Institute of Forestry, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Marc Koch

    (Department 7 “Forest ownership, Counseling, Forest policy“, Bavarian State Institute of Forestry, 85354 Freising, Germany)

  • Stephan Pauleit

    (Chair for Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany)

Abstract

Recreation is considered an important ecosystem services (ES) in urban woodlands and puts pressure on other ES. Visitor management strategies can be tools to safeguard biodiversity and ES. On-site data are necessary to evaluate the demand for outdoor recreation opportunities in urban woodlands, but also for providing more reliable values for monetization as a basis for multifunctional forest management, and for raising awareness for the importance of urban proximate forests. Such information can also be used for the assessment and monetization of socio-cultural ES, and hence, contribute to developing market-based mechanisms or to promoting these ES. In our paper, we demonstrate methods to describe recreational demand by collecting data from interviews and using camera traps in two forests in the north of Munich for visitor counting. Visitor numbers in the forests were much greater than rough estimations; visitors also had quite long travelling distances to the forests. Jogging or Nordic walking were proven to be important recreational activities. In some of the monitored locations, almost half of the recreationists carried out these sports. Depending on the method chosen, the calculative monetary value of recreation reached up to 15,440 Euro per hectare per year.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerd Lupp & Bernhard Förster & Valerie Kantelberg & Tim Markmann & Johannes Naumann & Carolina Honert & Marc Koch & Stephan Pauleit, 2016. "Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:11:p:1156-:d:82575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/11/1156/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/11/1156/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    2. Kumar, Manasi & Kumar, Pushpam, 2008. "Valuation of the ecosystem services: A psycho-cultural perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 808-819, February.
    3. Zandersen, Marianne & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 109-130, January.
    4. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    5. Elsasser, Peter & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Montagné, Claire & Stenger, Anne, 2009. "A bibliography and database on forest benefit valuation studies from Austria, France, Germany, and Switzerland - A possible base for a concerted European approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 93-107, January.
    6. Riera, Pere & Signorello, Giovanni & Thiene, Mara & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Navrud, Ståle & Kaval, Pamela & Rulleau, Benedicte & Mavsar, Robert & Madureira, Lívia & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Elsasser, Pe, 2012. "Non-market valuation of forest goods and services: Good practice guidelines," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 259-270.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Janis Arnold & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2018. "A Differentiated Spatial Assessment of Urban Ecosystem Services Based on Land Use Data in Halle, Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-29, August.
    2. Ahmed Nuru Zeleke & Tuğba Deniz, 2023. "The Impact of Visitor Profile on Effective Management of Protected Areas: A Case of Atatürk Arboretum," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, March.
    3. Jones, Benjamin A., 2021. "Planting urban trees to improve quality of life? The life satisfaction impacts of urban afforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. Monika Bachinger & Ion Holban & Rainer Luick & Matthias Schickhofer, 2025. "Changes in the Touristic Attractiveness of Wild Forests Due to Forestry Activities? The Case of Romania’s Făgăraş Mountains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-26, May.
    5. Karsten Grunewald & Olaf Bastian ., 2017. "Special Issue: “Maintaining Ecosystem Services to Support Urban Needs”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
    6. Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Markus Noack & Sabine Greulich & Kordula Schwarzwälder & Karl Matthias Wantzen & Stephan Pauleit, 2018. "Model-Based Evaluation of Urban River Restoration: Conflicts between Sensitive Fish Species and Recreational Users," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    7. Diogo C. Pavão & João Porteiro & Maria A. Ventura & Lurdes Borges Silva & António Medeiros & Ana Moniz & Mónica Moura & Francisco Moreira & Luís Silva, 2021. "Land cover along hiking trails in a nature tourism destination: the Azores as a case study," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16504-16528, November.
    8. Xinyu Ouyang & Xiangyu Luo, 2022. "Models for Assessing Urban Ecosystem Services: Status and Outlooks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, April.
    9. Anna Széchy & Zsuzsanna Szerényi, 2023. "Valuing the Recreational Services Provided by Hungary’s Forest Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, February.
    10. Sacher, Philipp & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Mayer, Marius, 2022. "Evidence of the association between deadwood and forest recreational site choices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Sandra Wajchman-Świtalska & Alina Zajadacz & Marcin Woźniak & Roman Jaszczak & Cezary Beker, 2022. "Recreational Evaluation of Forests in Urban Environments: Methodological and Practical Aspects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Claudio Fagarazzi & Carlotta Sergiacomi & Federico M. Stefanini & Enrico Marone, 2021. "A Model for the Economic Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services: The Recreational Hunting Function in the Agroforestry Territories of Tuscany (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-15, October.
    13. Gerd Lupp & Valerie Kantelberg & Bernhard Förster & Carolina Honert & Johannes Naumann & Tim Markmann & Stephan Pauleit, 2021. "Visitor Counting and Monitoring in Forests Using Camera Traps: A Case Study from Bavaria (Southern Germany)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, July.

    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. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    2. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    4. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    5. 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.
    6. Sarkki, Simo & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2015. "Ecosystem service valuation in a governance debate: Practitioners' strategic argumentation on forestry in northern Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 13-22.
    7. Riera, Pere & Signorello, Giovanni & Thiene, Mara & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Navrud, Ståle & Kaval, Pamela & Rulleau, Benedicte & Mavsar, Robert & Madureira, Lívia & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Elsasser, Pe, 2012. "Non-market valuation of forest goods and services: Good practice guidelines," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 259-270.
    8. Singh, Neera M., 2015. "Payments for ecosystem services and the gift paradigm: Sharing the burden and joy of environmental care," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 53-61.
    9. Wakita, Kazumi & Shen, Zhonghua & Oishi, Taro & Yagi, Nobuyuki & Kurokura, Hisashi & Furuya, Ken, 2014. "Human utility of marine ecosystem services and behavioural intentions for marine conservation in Japan," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 53-60.
    10. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    11. Emel Baylan & Sanem Şehribanoğlu & Onur Şatır, 2025. "Contributions of cultural ESs to human well-being, landscape planning and rural development in border landscapes: Local Insights from the Bendimahi River Basin (Eastern Anatolia, Türkiye)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 5397-5419, February.
    12. Bagdon, Benjamin A. & Huang, Ching-Hsun & Dewhurst, Stephen, 2016. "Managing for ecosystem services in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests using a novel simulation-to-optimization methodology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 324(C), pages 11-27.
    13. 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).
    14. Willemen, Louise & Hein, Lars & Verburg, Peter H., 2010. "Evaluating the impact of regional development policies on future landscape services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2244-2254, September.
    15. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    16. Pröpper, Michael & Haupts, Felix, 2014. "The culturality of ecosystem services. Emphasizing process and transformation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 28-35.
    17. Blayac, Thierry & Mathé, Syndhia & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Fontaine, Pascal, 2014. "Perceptions of the services provided by pond fish farming in Lorraine (France)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 115-123.
    18. 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.
    19. Mihai Voda & Adrian Torpan & Lucian Moldovan, 2017. "Wild Carpathia Future Development: From Illegal Deforestation to ORV Sustainable Recreation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Raymond, Christopher M. & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Cast, Andrea & Strathearn, Sarah & Grandgirard, Agnes & Kalivas, Tina, 2009. "Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1301-1315, March.

    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:8:y:2016:i:11:p:1156-:d:82575. 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.