IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v12y2025i1d10.1057_s41599-025-05946-x.html

Social valuation of urban ecosystem services using the SolVES model: a case study of Dalian City

Author

Listed:
  • Junchao JIANG

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University
    Dalian Key Laboratory of Agro-Meteorological Disaster Risk Prevention and Control, Liaoning Normal University)

  • Cailing LI

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University)

  • Leting LYU

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University
    Dalian Key Laboratory of Agro-Meteorological Disaster Risk Prevention and Control, Liaoning Normal University)

  • Defeng ZHENG

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University
    Dalian Key Laboratory of Agro-Meteorological Disaster Risk Prevention and Control, Liaoning Normal University)

  • Yanhui HU

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Liaoning Normal University)

Abstract

This study evaluates and quantifies the social values of aesthetic, biodiversity, and cultural significance in the urban ecosystems of five districts in Dalian, based on the subjective perceptions and preferences of various respondents. Utilizing the Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES) model, the research analyzes the spatial distribution of these social values and investigates the factors influencing them. The findings indicate that: (1) Respondents show a pronounced preference for aesthetic, cultural, biodiversity, and ecological sustainability values, while expressing lower interest in recreational, educational, spiritual, and therapeutic values. (2) The spatial distribution of peak values for each social value type is uneven, with aesthetic values covering the largest area, whereas other values have more limited distributions; spiritual and therapeutic values exhibit particularly insignificant spatial extents. (3) Each social value type demonstrates a distinct spatial clustering pattern, with significant correlations between hotspots and coldspots for different values. For instance, respondents who prioritize aesthetic values also tend to appreciate biodiversity, recreational, spiritual, and therapeutic values. Similarly, those who value cultural significance often show an interest in educational and bio-sustainability values. (4) Respondents prefer areas with appealing hydrophilic landscapes, convenient transportation, low elevation, and gentle slopes, as these characteristics are more conducive to recreation and relaxation. Understanding the social valuation of Dalian’s urban ecosystems provides valuable insights for city managers and planners to inform spatial planning and optimize resource allocation and utilization efficiently.

Suggested Citation

  • Junchao JIANG & Cailing LI & Leting LYU & Defeng ZHENG & Yanhui HU, 2025. "Social valuation of urban ecosystem services using the SolVES model: a case study of Dalian City," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05946-x
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-025-05946-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-025-05946-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-025-05946-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Hongjuan & Gao, Yan & Hua, Yawei & Zhang, Yue & Liu, Kang, 2019. "Assessing and mapping recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services in the Qinling Mountains, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Zhicheng Zhang & Hongjuan Zhang & Juan Feng & Yirong Wang & Kang Liu, 2021. "Evaluation of Social Values for Ecosystem Services in Urban Riverfront Space Based on the SolVES Model: A Case Study of the Fenghe River, Xi’an, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-26, March.
    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. Peng Zhang & Huize Ren & Xiaobin Dong & Xuechao Wang & Mengxue Liu & Ying Zhang & Yufang Zhang & Jiuming Huang & Shuheng Dong & Ruiming Xiao, 2023. "Understanding and Applications of Tensors in Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of the Manas River Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Yuan Liu & Sihai Liu & Kun Xing, 2024. "Assessment of Ecosystem Services and Exploration of Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships in Arid Areas: A Case Study of the Kriya River Basin in Xinjiang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    4. Yuliang Li & Ran Yi & Lin Liu & Feng Chen, 2023. "Sustainable Ecosystem Services of a Time-Honored Artificial River Ecosystem—Enlightenments from the Carp Brook, in Northern Fujian Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-13, February.
    5. 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).
    6. Ping Shen & Lijuan Wu & Ziwen Huo & Jiaying Zhang, 2023. "A Study on the Spatial Pattern of the Ecological Product Value of China’s County-Level Regions Based on GEP Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Loc, Ho Huu & Park, Edward & Thu, Tran Ngoc & Diep, Nguyen Thi Hong & Can, Nguyen Trong, 2021. "An enhanced analytical framework of participatory GIS for ecosystem services assessment applied to a Ramsar wetland site in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    9. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    10. 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.
    11. Jennifer Hodbod & Emma Tebbs & Kristofer Chan & Shubhechchha Sharma, 2019. "Integrating Participatory Methods and Remote Sensing to Enhance Understanding of Ecosystem Service Dynamics Across Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-30, August.
    12. Liu, Peng & Jiang, Shiwei & Zhao, Lianjun & Li, Yunxi & Zhang, Pingping & Zhang, Li, 2017. "What are the benefits of strictly protected nature reserves? Rapid assessment of ecosystem service values in Wanglang Nature Reserve, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 70-78.
    13. Xujie Gong & Chein-chi Chang, 2025. "Correlation and trade-off analysis of ecosystem service value and human activity intensity: a case study of Changsha, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 3081-3102, February.
    14. Yipeng Ge & Shubo Chen & Yueshan Ma & Yitong Wang & Yafei Guo & Qizheng Gan, 2024. "Ecosystem Services and Public Perception of Green Infrastructure from the Perspective of Urban Parks: A Case Study of Luoyang City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-25, September.
    15. Larson, Silva & Stoeckl, Natalie & Neil, Barbara & Welters, Riccardo, 2013. "Using resident perceptions of values associated with the Australian Tropical Rivers to identify policy and management priorities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 9-18.
    16. Maciej Dobrzyñski & Krzysztof Dziekoñski & Arkadiusz Jurczuk, 2015. "Stakeholders Mapping - A Case Of International Logistics Project," Polish Journal of Management Studies, Czestochowa Technical University, Department of Management, vol. 11(2), pages 17-26, June.
    17. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    18. van Oort, Bob & Bhatta, Laxmi Dutt & Baral, Himlal & Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Dhakal, Madhav & Rucevska, Ieva & Adhikari, Ramesh, 2015. "Assessing community values to support mapping of ecosystem services in the Koshi river basin, Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 70-80.
    19. Sofía Monroy-Sais & Eduardo García-Frapolli & Francisco Mora & Margaret Skutsch & Alejandro Casas & Peter Rijnaldus Wilhelmus Gerritsen & David González-Jiménez, 2018. "Exploring How Land Tenure Affects Farmers’ Landscape Values: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    20. Vorstius, Anne Carolin & Spray, Christopher J., 2015. "A comparison of ecosystem services mapping tools for their potential to support planning and decision-making on a local scale," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 75-83.

    More about this item

    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:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05946-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/palcomms/ .

    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.