Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.

The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners’ perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n = 246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dick, Jan, Turkelboom, Francis, Woods, Helen, Iniesta-Arandia, Irene, Primmer, Eeva, Sanna-Riikka, Saarela, Bezák, Peter, Mederly, Peter, Leone, Michael, Verheyden, Wim, Kelemen, Eszter, Hauck, Jennifer, Andrews, Chris, Antunes, Paula, Aszalós, Réka, Baró, Francesc, Barton, David N., Berry, Pam, Bugter, Rob., Carvalho, Laurence, Czúcz, Bálint, Dunford, Rob, Blanco Garcia, Gemma, Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta, Giuca˘, Relu, Grizzetti, Bruna, Izakovicˇová, Zita, Kertész, Miklós, Kopperoinen, Leena, Langemeyer, Johannes, Montenegro Lapola, David, Liquete, Camino, Luque, Sandra, Martinez Pastur, Guillermo José, Martin-Lopez, Berta, Mukhopadhyay, Raktima, Niemela, Jari, Odee, David, Peri, Pablo Luis, Pinho, Patricia, Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto, Preda, Elena, Priess, Joerg, Röckmann, Christine, Santos, Rui, Silaghi, Diana, Smith, Ron I., Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘, van der Wal, Jan Tjalling, Arany, Ildikó, Badea, Ovidiu, Bela, Györgyi, Boros, Emil, Bucur, Magdalena, Blumentrath, Stefan, Carmen, Esther, Clemente, Pedro, Fernandes, João, Ferraz, Diogo, Fongar, Claudia, García-Llorente, Marina, Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, Gundersen, Vegard, Haavardsholm, Oscar, Kalóczkai, Ágnes, Khalalwe, Thalma, Kiss, Gabriella, Köhler, Berit, Lazányi, Orsolya, Lellei-Kovács, Eszter, Lichungu, Rael, Lindhjem, Henrik, Magare, Charles, Mustajoki, Jyri, Ndege, Charles, Nowell, Megan, Nuss Girona, Sergi, Ochieng, John, Often, Anders, Palomo, Ignacio, Pataki, György, Reinvang, Rasmus, Rusch, Graciela Mónica, Saarikoski, Heli, Smith, Alison, Massoni, Emma Soy, Stange, Erik, Vågnes Traaholt, Nora, Vári, Ágnes, Verweij, Peter, Suvi, Vikström, Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa, Zulian, Grazia
Format: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo biblioteca
Language:eng
Published: Elsevier 2018-02-01
Subjects:Ecosystem Services, Surveys, Impact Assessment, Management, Policy Innovation, Communication, Plannig, Evaluation, Senses, Servicios de los Ecosistemas, Encuestas, Evaluación de Impacto, Gestión, Innovación Política, Comunicación, Planificación, Evaluación, Sentidos, Perception, Percepción,
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/9572
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212041616304661
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:localhost:20.500.12123-9572
record_format koha
institution INTA AR
collection DSpace
country Argentina
countrycode AR
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-inta-ar
tag biblioteca
region America del Sur
libraryname Biblioteca Central del INTA Argentina
language eng
topic Ecosystem Services
Surveys
Impact Assessment
Management
Policy Innovation
Communication
Plannig
Evaluation
Senses
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Encuestas
Evaluación de Impacto
Gestión
Innovación Política
Comunicación
Planificación
Evaluación
Sentidos
Perception
Percepción
Ecosystem Services
Surveys
Impact Assessment
Management
Policy Innovation
Communication
Plannig
Evaluation
Senses
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Encuestas
Evaluación de Impacto
Gestión
Innovación Política
Comunicación
Planificación
Evaluación
Sentidos
Perception
Percepción
spellingShingle Ecosystem Services
Surveys
Impact Assessment
Management
Policy Innovation
Communication
Plannig
Evaluation
Senses
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Encuestas
Evaluación de Impacto
Gestión
Innovación Política
Comunicación
Planificación
Evaluación
Sentidos
Perception
Percepción
Ecosystem Services
Surveys
Impact Assessment
Management
Policy Innovation
Communication
Plannig
Evaluation
Senses
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Encuestas
Evaluación de Impacto
Gestión
Innovación Política
Comunicación
Planificación
Evaluación
Sentidos
Perception
Percepción
Dick, Jan
Turkelboom, Francis
Woods, Helen
Iniesta-Arandia, Irene
Primmer, Eeva
Sanna-Riikka, Saarela
Bezák, Peter
Mederly, Peter
Leone, Michael
Verheyden, Wim
Kelemen, Eszter
Hauck, Jennifer
Andrews, Chris
Antunes, Paula
Aszalós, Réka
Baró, Francesc
Barton, David N.
Berry, Pam
Bugter, Rob.
Carvalho, Laurence
Czúcz, Bálint
Dunford, Rob
Blanco Garcia, Gemma
Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta
Giuca˘, Relu
Grizzetti, Bruna
Izakovicˇová, Zita
Kertész, Miklós
Kopperoinen, Leena
Langemeyer, Johannes
Montenegro Lapola, David
Liquete, Camino
Luque, Sandra
Martinez Pastur, Guillermo José
Martin-Lopez, Berta
Mukhopadhyay, Raktima
Niemela, Jari
Odee, David
Peri, Pablo Luis
Pinho, Patricia
Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto
Preda, Elena
Priess, Joerg
Röckmann, Christine
Santos, Rui
Silaghi, Diana
Smith, Ron I.
Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘
van der Wal, Jan Tjalling
Arany, Ildikó
Badea, Ovidiu
Bela, Györgyi
Boros, Emil
Bucur, Magdalena
Blumentrath, Stefan
Carmen, Esther
Clemente, Pedro
Fernandes, João
Ferraz, Diogo
Fongar, Claudia
García-Llorente, Marina
Gómez-Baggethun, Erik
Gundersen, Vegard
Haavardsholm, Oscar
Kalóczkai, Ágnes
Khalalwe, Thalma
Kiss, Gabriella
Köhler, Berit
Lazányi, Orsolya
Lellei-Kovács, Eszter
Lichungu, Rael
Lindhjem, Henrik
Magare, Charles
Mustajoki, Jyri
Ndege, Charles
Nowell, Megan
Nuss Girona, Sergi
Ochieng, John
Often, Anders
Palomo, Ignacio
Pataki, György
Reinvang, Rasmus
Rusch, Graciela Mónica
Saarikoski, Heli
Smith, Alison
Massoni, Emma Soy
Stange, Erik
Vågnes Traaholt, Nora
Vári, Ágnes
Verweij, Peter
Suvi, Vikström
Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa
Zulian, Grazia
Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
description The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners’ perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n = 246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
topic_facet Ecosystem Services
Surveys
Impact Assessment
Management
Policy Innovation
Communication
Plannig
Evaluation
Senses
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Encuestas
Evaluación de Impacto
Gestión
Innovación Política
Comunicación
Planificación
Evaluación
Sentidos
Perception
Percepción
author Dick, Jan
Turkelboom, Francis
Woods, Helen
Iniesta-Arandia, Irene
Primmer, Eeva
Sanna-Riikka, Saarela
Bezák, Peter
Mederly, Peter
Leone, Michael
Verheyden, Wim
Kelemen, Eszter
Hauck, Jennifer
Andrews, Chris
Antunes, Paula
Aszalós, Réka
Baró, Francesc
Barton, David N.
Berry, Pam
Bugter, Rob.
Carvalho, Laurence
Czúcz, Bálint
Dunford, Rob
Blanco Garcia, Gemma
Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta
Giuca˘, Relu
Grizzetti, Bruna
Izakovicˇová, Zita
Kertész, Miklós
Kopperoinen, Leena
Langemeyer, Johannes
Montenegro Lapola, David
Liquete, Camino
Luque, Sandra
Martinez Pastur, Guillermo José
Martin-Lopez, Berta
Mukhopadhyay, Raktima
Niemela, Jari
Odee, David
Peri, Pablo Luis
Pinho, Patricia
Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto
Preda, Elena
Priess, Joerg
Röckmann, Christine
Santos, Rui
Silaghi, Diana
Smith, Ron I.
Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘
van der Wal, Jan Tjalling
Arany, Ildikó
Badea, Ovidiu
Bela, Györgyi
Boros, Emil
Bucur, Magdalena
Blumentrath, Stefan
Carmen, Esther
Clemente, Pedro
Fernandes, João
Ferraz, Diogo
Fongar, Claudia
García-Llorente, Marina
Gómez-Baggethun, Erik
Gundersen, Vegard
Haavardsholm, Oscar
Kalóczkai, Ágnes
Khalalwe, Thalma
Kiss, Gabriella
Köhler, Berit
Lazányi, Orsolya
Lellei-Kovács, Eszter
Lichungu, Rael
Lindhjem, Henrik
Magare, Charles
Mustajoki, Jyri
Ndege, Charles
Nowell, Megan
Nuss Girona, Sergi
Ochieng, John
Often, Anders
Palomo, Ignacio
Pataki, György
Reinvang, Rasmus
Rusch, Graciela Mónica
Saarikoski, Heli
Smith, Alison
Massoni, Emma Soy
Stange, Erik
Vågnes Traaholt, Nora
Vári, Ágnes
Verweij, Peter
Suvi, Vikström
Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa
Zulian, Grazia
author_facet Dick, Jan
Turkelboom, Francis
Woods, Helen
Iniesta-Arandia, Irene
Primmer, Eeva
Sanna-Riikka, Saarela
Bezák, Peter
Mederly, Peter
Leone, Michael
Verheyden, Wim
Kelemen, Eszter
Hauck, Jennifer
Andrews, Chris
Antunes, Paula
Aszalós, Réka
Baró, Francesc
Barton, David N.
Berry, Pam
Bugter, Rob.
Carvalho, Laurence
Czúcz, Bálint
Dunford, Rob
Blanco Garcia, Gemma
Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta
Giuca˘, Relu
Grizzetti, Bruna
Izakovicˇová, Zita
Kertész, Miklós
Kopperoinen, Leena
Langemeyer, Johannes
Montenegro Lapola, David
Liquete, Camino
Luque, Sandra
Martinez Pastur, Guillermo José
Martin-Lopez, Berta
Mukhopadhyay, Raktima
Niemela, Jari
Odee, David
Peri, Pablo Luis
Pinho, Patricia
Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto
Preda, Elena
Priess, Joerg
Röckmann, Christine
Santos, Rui
Silaghi, Diana
Smith, Ron I.
Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘
van der Wal, Jan Tjalling
Arany, Ildikó
Badea, Ovidiu
Bela, Györgyi
Boros, Emil
Bucur, Magdalena
Blumentrath, Stefan
Carmen, Esther
Clemente, Pedro
Fernandes, João
Ferraz, Diogo
Fongar, Claudia
García-Llorente, Marina
Gómez-Baggethun, Erik
Gundersen, Vegard
Haavardsholm, Oscar
Kalóczkai, Ágnes
Khalalwe, Thalma
Kiss, Gabriella
Köhler, Berit
Lazányi, Orsolya
Lellei-Kovács, Eszter
Lichungu, Rael
Lindhjem, Henrik
Magare, Charles
Mustajoki, Jyri
Ndege, Charles
Nowell, Megan
Nuss Girona, Sergi
Ochieng, John
Often, Anders
Palomo, Ignacio
Pataki, György
Reinvang, Rasmus
Rusch, Graciela Mónica
Saarikoski, Heli
Smith, Alison
Massoni, Emma Soy
Stange, Erik
Vågnes Traaholt, Nora
Vári, Ágnes
Verweij, Peter
Suvi, Vikström
Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa
Zulian, Grazia
author_sort Dick, Jan
title Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
title_short Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
title_full Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
title_fullStr Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
title_full_unstemmed Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.
title_sort stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: results from 27 case studies.
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2018-02-01
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/9572
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212041616304661
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015.
work_keys_str_mv AT dickjan stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT turkelboomfrancis stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT woodshelen stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT iniestaarandiairene stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT primmereeva stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT sannariikkasaarela stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT bezakpeter stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT mederlypeter stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT leonemichael stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT verheydenwim stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kelemeneszter stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT hauckjennifer stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT andrewschris stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT antunespaula stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT aszalosreka stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT barofrancesc stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT bartondavidn stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT berrypam stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT bugterrob stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT carvalholaurence stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT czuczbalint stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT dunfordrob stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT blancogarciagemma stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT geamananicoleta stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT giucarelu stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT grizzettibruna stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT izakovicˇovazita stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kerteszmiklos stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kopperoinenleena stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT langemeyerjohannes stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT montenegrolapoladavid stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT liquetecamino stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT luquesandra stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT martinezpasturguillermojose stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT martinlopezberta stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT mukhopadhyayraktima stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT niemelajari stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT odeedavid stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT peripabloluis stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT pinhopatricia stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT gleicianiburgerpatricioroberto stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT predaelena stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT priessjoerg stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT rockmannchristine stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT santosrui stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT silaghidiana stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT smithroni stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT vadineanuangheluta stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT vanderwaljantjalling stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT aranyildiko stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT badeaovidiu stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT belagyorgyi stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT borosemil stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT bucurmagdalena stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT blumentrathstefan stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT carmenesther stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT clementepedro stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT fernandesjoao stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT ferrazdiogo stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT fongarclaudia stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT garciallorentemarina stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT gomezbaggethunerik stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT gundersenvegard stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT haavardsholmoscar stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kaloczkaiagnes stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT khalalwethalma stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kissgabriella stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT kohlerberit stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT lazanyiorsolya stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT lelleikovacseszter stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT lichungurael stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT lindhjemhenrik stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT magarecharles stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT mustajokijyri stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT ndegecharles stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT nowellmegan stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT nussgironasergi stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT ochiengjohn stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT oftenanders stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT palomoignacio stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT patakigyorgy stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT reinvangrasmus stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT ruschgracielamonica stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT saarikoskiheli stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT smithalison stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT massoniemmasoy stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT stangeerik stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT vagnestraaholtnora stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT variagnes stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT verweijpeter stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT suvivikstrom stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT ylipelkonenvesa stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
AT zuliangrazia stakeholdersperspectivesontheoperationalisationoftheecosystemserviceconceptresultsfrom27casestudies
_version_ 1756008060383395840
spelling oai:localhost:20.500.12123-95722021-06-14T11:45:58Z Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies. Dick, Jan Turkelboom, Francis Woods, Helen Iniesta-Arandia, Irene Primmer, Eeva Sanna-Riikka, Saarela Bezák, Peter Mederly, Peter Leone, Michael Verheyden, Wim Kelemen, Eszter Hauck, Jennifer Andrews, Chris Antunes, Paula Aszalós, Réka Baró, Francesc Barton, David N. Berry, Pam Bugter, Rob. Carvalho, Laurence Czúcz, Bálint Dunford, Rob Blanco Garcia, Gemma Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta Giuca˘, Relu Grizzetti, Bruna Izakovicˇová, Zita Kertész, Miklós Kopperoinen, Leena Langemeyer, Johannes Montenegro Lapola, David Liquete, Camino Luque, Sandra Martinez Pastur, Guillermo José Martin-Lopez, Berta Mukhopadhyay, Raktima Niemela, Jari Odee, David Peri, Pablo Luis Pinho, Patricia Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto Preda, Elena Priess, Joerg Röckmann, Christine Santos, Rui Silaghi, Diana Smith, Ron I. Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘ van der Wal, Jan Tjalling Arany, Ildikó Badea, Ovidiu Bela, Györgyi Boros, Emil Bucur, Magdalena Blumentrath, Stefan Carmen, Esther Clemente, Pedro Fernandes, João Ferraz, Diogo Fongar, Claudia García-Llorente, Marina Gómez-Baggethun, Erik Gundersen, Vegard Haavardsholm, Oscar Kalóczkai, Ágnes Khalalwe, Thalma Kiss, Gabriella Köhler, Berit Lazányi, Orsolya Lellei-Kovács, Eszter Lichungu, Rael Lindhjem, Henrik Magare, Charles Mustajoki, Jyri Ndege, Charles Nowell, Megan Nuss Girona, Sergi Ochieng, John Often, Anders Palomo, Ignacio Pataki, György Reinvang, Rasmus Rusch, Graciela Mónica Saarikoski, Heli Smith, Alison Massoni, Emma Soy Stange, Erik Vågnes Traaholt, Nora Vári, Ágnes Verweij, Peter Suvi, Vikström Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa Zulian, Grazia Ecosystem Services Surveys Impact Assessment Management Policy Innovation Communication Plannig Evaluation Senses Servicios de los Ecosistemas Encuestas Evaluación de Impacto Gestión Innovación Política Comunicación Planificación Evaluación Sentidos Perception Percepción The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners’ perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n = 246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning. EEA Santa Cruz Fil: Dick, Jan. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Turkelboom, Francis. Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO); Bélgica Fil: Woods, Helen. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Iniesta-Arandia, Irene. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Social-ecological Systems Lab, Department of Ecology; España Fil: Primmer, Eeva. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia Fil: Sanna-Riikka, Saarela. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia. Fil: Bezák, Peter. Slovak Academy of Sciences. Institute of Landscape Ecology; Eslovaquia Fil: Mederly, Peter. Constantine the Philosopher University. Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences; Eslovaquia Fil: Leone, Michael. Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO); Bélgica Fil: Verheyden, Wim. Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO); Bélgica Fil: Kelemen, Eszter. Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG Ltd.); Hungría Fil: Kelemen, Eszter. Corvinus University of Budapest. Department of Decision Sciences; Hungría Fil: Hauck, Jennifer. Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania Fil: Hauck, Jennifer. CoKnow Consulting. Coproducing Knowledge for Sustainability; Alemania Fil: Andrews, Chris. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Antunes, Paula. Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia. Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research; Portugal. Fil: Aszalós, Réka. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Baró, Francesc. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA); España Fil: Barton, David N. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Berry, Pam. Environmental Change Institute; Reino Unido Fil: Bugter, Rob. Wageningen University. Environmental Research; Países Bajos Fil: Carvalho, Laurence. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Czúcz, Bálint. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría. Fil: Czúcz, Bálint. Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle. European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity; Francia. Fil: Dunford, Rob. Environmental Change Institute; Reino Unido Fil: Dunford, Rob. Centre for Ecology & Hydrology; Reino Unido. Fil: Blanco Garcia, Gemma. Urban Environment and Territorial Sustainability Area. Energy and Environment Division. Parque Tecnológico de Bizkaia; España Fil: Geama˘na˘, Nicoleta. University of Bucharest. Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability; Rumania Fil: Giuca˘, Relu. University of Bucharest. Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability; Rumania Fil: Grizzetti, Bruna. European Commission – Joint Research Centre (JRC); Italia Fil: Izakovicˇová, Zita. Institute of Landscape Ecology. Slovak Academy of Sciences; Eslovaquia Fil: Kertész, Miklós. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA;Hungría Fil: Kopperoinen, Leena. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia. Fil: Langemeyer, Johannes. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA); España Fil: Montenegro Lapola, David. Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP). Ecology Department; Brasil. Fil: Liquete, Camino. European Commission – Joint Research Centre (JRC); Italia Fil: Luque, Sandra. National Research Institute of Science and Technology for Environment and Agriculturer; Francia. Fil: Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas (CADIC); Argentina. Fil: Martin-Lopez, Berta. Leuphana University of Lüneburg. Faculty of Sustainability. Institute of Ethics and Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research; Alemania Fil: Mukhopadhyay, Raktima. Indian Institute of Bio Social Research and Development (IBRAD), India. Fil: Niemela, Jari. University of Helsinki. Department of Environmental Sciences; Finlandia Fil: Odee, David. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Fil: Pinho, Patricia. Universidade de São Paulo. Interdisciplinary Climate Change Research Group; Brasil. Fil: Gleiciani Bürger, Patrício Roberto. Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP). Ecology Department; Brasil. Fil: Preda, Elena. University of Bucharest. Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability; Rumania Fil: Priess, Joerg. Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research; Alemania Fil: Röckmann, Christine. Wageningen University & Research – Marine (WUR); Países Bajos Fil: Santos, Rui. Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia. Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research (CENSE); Portugal. Fil: Silaghi, Diana. National Institute for Research and Development in Forestry ‘‘Marin Dracea”; Rumania Fil: Smith, Ron I. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Va˘dineanu, Anghelut_a˘. University of Bucharest. Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability; Rumania Fil: van der Wal, Jan Tjalling. Wageningen University & Research – Marine (WUR); Países Bajos Fil: Arany, Ildikó. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Badea, Ovidiu. National Institute for Research and Development in Forestry ‘‘Marin Dracea”; Rumania Fil: Bela, Györgyi. Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG Ltd.); Hungría Fil: Bela, Györgyi. Szent István University. Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management; Hungría Fil: Boros, Emil. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Bucur, Magdalena. University of Bucharest. Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability; Hungría Fil: Blumentrath, Stefan. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Carmen, Esther. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bush Estate; Reino Unido Fil: Clemente, Pedro. Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research (CENSE); Portugal. Fil: Fernandes, João. Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research (CENSE); Portugal. Fil: Ferraz, Diogo. Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research (CENSE); Portugal. Fil: Fongar, Claudia. Norwegian University of Life Science (NMBU); Noruega Fil: García-Llorente, Marina. Madrid Institute for Rural, Agricultural and Food Research and Development (IMIDRA). Department of Applied Research and Agricultural Extension; España Fil: García-Llorente, Marina. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Social-ecological Systems Lab. Department of Ecology; España Fil: Gómez-Baggethun, Erik. Norwegian University of Life Sciences. Department of International Environment and Development Studies (Noragric); Noruega Fil: Gómez-Baggethun, Erik. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Gómez-Baggethun, Erik. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA); España Fil: Gundersen, Vegard. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Haavardsholm, Oscar. VISTA Analyse A/S; Noruega Fil: Kalóczkai, Ágnes. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Khalalwe, Thalma. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Kiss, Gabriella. University of Budapest. Department of Decision Sciences; Hungría Fil: Köhler, Berit. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Lazányi, Orsolya. Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG Ltd.); Hungría Fil: Lazányi, Orsolya. University of Budapest. Department of Decision Sciences; Hungría Fil: Lellei-Kovács, Eszter. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Lichungu, Rael. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Lindhjem, Henrik. VISTA Analyse A/S; Noruega Fil: Magare, Charles. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Mustajoki, Jyri. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia. Fil: Ndege, Charles. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Nowell, Megan. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Nuss Girona, Sergi. University of Girona, Plaça de Sant Domènec; España Fil: Ochieng, John. Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI); Kenia. Fil: Often, Anders. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; España Fil: Pataki, György. Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG Ltd.); Hungría Fil: Pataki, György. University of Budapest. Department of Decision Sciences; Hungría Fil: Reinvang, Rasmus. VISTA Analyse A/S; Noruega Fil: Rusch, Graciela Mónica. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Saarikoski, Heli. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia Fil: Smith, Alison. Environmental Change Institute; Reino Unido Fil: Massoni, Emma Soy. University of Girona, Plaça de Sant Domènec; España Fil: Stange, Erik. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA); Noruega Fil: Vågnes Traaholt, Nora. De Økonomiske Råd; Dinamarca Fil: Vári, Ágnes. Centre for Ecological Research. Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA; Hungría Fil: Verweij, Peter. Wageningen University. Environmental Research; Países Bajos Fil: Suvi, Vikström. Finnish Environment Institute; Finlandia. Fil: Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa. University of Helsinki. Department of Environmental Sciences; Finlandia. Fil: Zulian, Grazia. European Commission – Joint Research Centre (JRC); Italia. 2021-06-14T11:13:30Z 2021-06-14T11:13:30Z 2018-02-01 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/9572 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212041616304661 Jan Dick, Francis Turkelboom, Helen Woods, Irene Iniesta-Arandia, Eeva Primmer, Sanna-Riikka Saarela, Peter Bezák, Peter Mederly, Michael Leone, Wim Verheyden, Eszter Kelemen, Jennifer Hauck, Chris Andrews, Paula Antunes, Réka Aszalós, Francesc Baró, David N. Barton, Pam Berry, Rob Bugter, Laurence Carvalho, Bálint Czúcz, Rob Dunford, Gemma Garcia Blanco, Nicoleta Geamănă, Relu Giucă, Bruna Grizzetti, Zita Izakovičová, Miklós Kertész, Leena Kopperoinen, Johannes Langemeyer, David Montenegro Lapola, Camino Liquete, Sandra Luque, Guillermo Martínez Pastur, Berta Martin-Lopez, Raktima Mukhopadhyay, Jari Niemela, David Odee, Pablo Luis Peri, Patricia Pinho, Gleiciani Bürger Patrício-Roberto, Elena Preda, Joerg Priess, Christine Röckmann, Rui Santos, Diana Silaghi, Ron Smith, Angheluţă Vădineanu, Jan Tjalling van der Wal, Ildikó Arany, Ovidiu Badea, Györgyi Bela, Emil Boros, Magdalena Bucur, Stefan Blumentrath, Marta Calvache, Esther Carmen, Pedro Clemente, João Fernandes, Diogo Ferraz, Claudia Fongar, Marina García-Llorente, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, Vegard Gundersen, Oscar Haavardsholm, Ágnes Kalóczkai, Thalma Khalalwe, Gabriella Kiss, Berit Köhler, Orsolya Lazányi, Eszter Lellei-Kovács, Rael Lichungu, Henrik Lindhjem, Charles Magare, Jyri Mustajoki, Charles Ndege, Megan Nowell, Sergi Nuss Girona, John Ochieng, Anders Often, Ignacio Palomo, György Pataki, Rasmus Reinvang, Graciela Rusch, Heli Saarikoski, Alison Smith, Emma Soy Massoni, Erik Stange, Nora Vågnes Traaholt, Ágnes Vári, Peter Verweij, Suvi Vikström, Vesa Yli-Pelkonen, Grazia Zulian, Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies, Ecosystem Services, Volume 29, Part C, 2018, Pages 552-565, ISSN 2212-0416, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015. 2212-0416 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015. eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess application/pdf Elsevier Ecosystem Services 29 Part C : 552-565 (February 2018)