Are stakeholders’ social representations of nature and landscape compatible with the ecosystem service concept?

Rik De Vreese, Ann Van Herzele, Nicolas Dendoncker, Corentin M. Fontaine, Mark Leys

Résultats de recherche: Contribution à un journal/une revueArticle

Résumé

Background: Implementing ecosystem services (ES)-based planning and management processes in practice, and mainstreaming the results in decision-making, is limited. Literature suggests this can be explained by a limited overlap between the ES concept and stakeholders’ representations of nature. Aims: We introduce social representations theory as an approach to discuss whether the theoretical ES concept is compatible with stakeholders’ social representations of nature. Methods: Thirty-nine stakeholders actively involved in the use and management of a peri-urban study area in Belgium were interviewed about their representation of nature. Conclusions: Like the ES concept, stakeholders’ representation of nature includes an anthropocentric view, but stakeholders also stress the role and responsibility of humans in sustaining ecosystems and regulating nature (which is a relational value). From the qualitative analysis we conclude that the theoretical ES concept and ES classifications are not sufficiently reflecting stakeholders’ representations of nature, mainly on the human-nature relationship. The social representations technique provides handles to design ES-based processes according to stakeholders’ representations. This can result in more effective ES-based planning and management processes and improved understanding among stakeholders and between stakeholders and process managers.

langue originaleAnglais
Numéro d'article100911
journalEcosystem Services
Volume37
Les DOIs
étatPublié - 1 juin 2019

Empreinte digitale

ecosystem service
ecosystem services
stakeholders
Ecosystem
stakeholder
planning process
planning
management
social representation
Belgium
qualitative analysis
decision making
Decision Making
managers
manager
responsibility
ecosystems
ecosystem
methodology

Citer ceci

@article{62aebd668c1a429088c621be10856c87,
title = "Are stakeholders’ social representations of nature and landscape compatible with the ecosystem service concept?",
abstract = "Background: Implementing ecosystem services (ES)-based planning and management processes in practice, and mainstreaming the results in decision-making, is limited. Literature suggests this can be explained by a limited overlap between the ES concept and stakeholders’ representations of nature. Aims: We introduce social representations theory as an approach to discuss whether the theoretical ES concept is compatible with stakeholders’ social representations of nature. Methods: Thirty-nine stakeholders actively involved in the use and management of a peri-urban study area in Belgium were interviewed about their representation of nature. Conclusions: Like the ES concept, stakeholders’ representation of nature includes an anthropocentric view, but stakeholders also stress the role and responsibility of humans in sustaining ecosystems and regulating nature (which is a relational value). From the qualitative analysis we conclude that the theoretical ES concept and ES classifications are not sufficiently reflecting stakeholders’ representations of nature, mainly on the human-nature relationship. The social representations technique provides handles to design ES-based processes according to stakeholders’ representations. This can result in more effective ES-based planning and management processes and improved understanding among stakeholders and between stakeholders and process managers.",
keywords = "Ecosystem service valuation, Land-use planning, Natural resource management, Participatory ecosystem service assessment, Relational values, Shared values",
author = "{De Vreese}, Rik and {Van Herzele}, Ann and Nicolas Dendoncker and Fontaine, {Corentin M.} and Mark Leys",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100911",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
journal = "Ecosystem Services",
issn = "2212-0416",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Are stakeholders’ social representations of nature and landscape compatible with the ecosystem service concept? / De Vreese, Rik; Van Herzele, Ann; Dendoncker, Nicolas; Fontaine, Corentin M.; Leys, Mark.

Dans: Ecosystem Services, Vol 37, 100911, 01.06.2019.

Résultats de recherche: Contribution à un journal/une revueArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are stakeholders’ social representations of nature and landscape compatible with the ecosystem service concept?

AU - De Vreese, Rik

AU - Van Herzele, Ann

AU - Dendoncker, Nicolas

AU - Fontaine, Corentin M.

AU - Leys, Mark

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Background: Implementing ecosystem services (ES)-based planning and management processes in practice, and mainstreaming the results in decision-making, is limited. Literature suggests this can be explained by a limited overlap between the ES concept and stakeholders’ representations of nature. Aims: We introduce social representations theory as an approach to discuss whether the theoretical ES concept is compatible with stakeholders’ social representations of nature. Methods: Thirty-nine stakeholders actively involved in the use and management of a peri-urban study area in Belgium were interviewed about their representation of nature. Conclusions: Like the ES concept, stakeholders’ representation of nature includes an anthropocentric view, but stakeholders also stress the role and responsibility of humans in sustaining ecosystems and regulating nature (which is a relational value). From the qualitative analysis we conclude that the theoretical ES concept and ES classifications are not sufficiently reflecting stakeholders’ representations of nature, mainly on the human-nature relationship. The social representations technique provides handles to design ES-based processes according to stakeholders’ representations. This can result in more effective ES-based planning and management processes and improved understanding among stakeholders and between stakeholders and process managers.

AB - Background: Implementing ecosystem services (ES)-based planning and management processes in practice, and mainstreaming the results in decision-making, is limited. Literature suggests this can be explained by a limited overlap between the ES concept and stakeholders’ representations of nature. Aims: We introduce social representations theory as an approach to discuss whether the theoretical ES concept is compatible with stakeholders’ social representations of nature. Methods: Thirty-nine stakeholders actively involved in the use and management of a peri-urban study area in Belgium were interviewed about their representation of nature. Conclusions: Like the ES concept, stakeholders’ representation of nature includes an anthropocentric view, but stakeholders also stress the role and responsibility of humans in sustaining ecosystems and regulating nature (which is a relational value). From the qualitative analysis we conclude that the theoretical ES concept and ES classifications are not sufficiently reflecting stakeholders’ representations of nature, mainly on the human-nature relationship. The social representations technique provides handles to design ES-based processes according to stakeholders’ representations. This can result in more effective ES-based planning and management processes and improved understanding among stakeholders and between stakeholders and process managers.

KW - Ecosystem service valuation

KW - Land-use planning

KW - Natural resource management

KW - Participatory ecosystem service assessment

KW - Relational values

KW - Shared values

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063894773&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100911

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100911

M3 - Article

VL - 37

JO - Ecosystem Services

JF - Ecosystem Services

SN - 2212-0416

M1 - 100911

ER -