Skip to main content
Log in

Experts’ versus laypersons’ perception of urban cultural ecosystem services

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urban cultural ecosystem services are understood differently by experts and laypersons. Yet, unaccounted differences can lead to management problems for urban green spaces, as experts may recommend practices that do not meet the laypersons’ wishes. Qualitative research on the perception of cultural ecosystem services can be one tool to analyze these differences. We use expert and problem-centered interviews to assess differences in cultural ecosystem service perceptions for experts and laypersons in Berlin. Using an innovative approach, we combine inductive qualitative content analysis with a frequency analysis and multidimensional scaling. This explorative study innovatively merges qualitative and quantitative approaches to show new ways of analysis. Our results show that the experts’ perceptions of nature appear to be more practical, management-centered, whereas laypersons appear to prioritize enjoyment of nature. Overall, multidimensional scaling indicates different perceptions and conceptualizations of cultural ecosystem service bundles, emphasizing the diverging understandings. If these different perceptions are not accounted for it could lead to social and political contrast. They should therefore be acknowledged in decision-making and goal formulation for the management of urban green.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberts DJ (2007) Stakeholders or subject matter experts, who should be consulted? Energ Policy. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.08.006

    Google Scholar 

  • Amt für Statistik Berlin-Brandenburg (2014) http://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de. Accessed 16 May 2014

  • Andersson E, McPhearson T, Kremer P, Gomez-Baggethun E, Haase D, Tuvendal M, Wurster D (2015a) Scale and context dependence of ecosystem service providing. Ecosyst Serv 12:157–164. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson E, Tengö M, McPhearson T, Kremer P (2015b) Cultural ecosystem services as a gateway for improving urban sustainability. Ecosyst Serv. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.08.002

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus K, Erichson B, Weiber R (2006) Fortgeschrittene Multivariate Analysemethoden: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Beierle TC, Cayford J (2002) Democracy in practice: public participation in environmental decisions. Johns Hopkins, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendt P, Barthel S, Colding J (2013) Civic greening and environmental learning in public-access community gardens in berlin. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.003

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieling C (2014) Cultural ecosystem services as revealed through short stories from residents of the Swabian Alb (Germany). Ecosystem Services. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.04.002

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnes M, Uzzell D, Carrus G, Kelay K (2007) Inhabitants’ and experts’ assessments of environmental quality for urban sustainability. J Soc Issues. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00496.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan KMA, Satterfield T, Goldstein J (2012) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011

    Google Scholar 

  • Chrebah B (2009) Umweltbewusstsein und Umweltverhalten – Ein Vergleich von deutschen und syrischen Studierenden. Dissertation, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg. http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/892/. Accessed 12 Dec 2014

  • Churchman A, Sadan E (2004) Public participation in environmental design and planning. In: Spielberger C (ed) Encyclopedia of applied psychology. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 793–800

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Coeterier JF (2002) Lay people’s evaluation of historic sites. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00007-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey A, Atkinson P (1996) Making sense of qualitative data: complementary research strategies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming GS, Buerkert A, Hoffmann EM, Schlecht E, von Cramon-Taubadel S, Tscharntke T (2014) Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services. Nature. doi:10.1038/nature13945

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KMA, Costanza R et al (2012) Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem service agenda. P Natl Acad Sci USA. doi:10.1073/pnas.1114773109

    Google Scholar 

  • Demokratische Initiative 100% Tempelhofer Feld e. V. (2014) 100% Tempelhofer Feld 2014. http://www.thf100.de. Accessed 8 Oct 2014

  • Dooling S, Simon G, Yocom K (2006) Place-based urban ecology: a century of park planning in Seattle. Urban Ecosyst. doi:10.1007/s11252-006-0008-1

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernstson H (2013) The social production of ecosystem services: a framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.005

    Google Scholar 

  • Faehnle M, Bäcklund P, Tyrväinen L, Niemelä J, Yli-Pelkonen V (2014) How can residents’ experiences inform planning of urban green infrastructure? Case Finland. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.07.012

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2000) Citizens, experts, and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Duke, Durham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Flick U (2006) Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Einführung, Rowohlt

    Google Scholar 

  • Friggens M, Raish C, Finch D, McSweeney A (2014) The influence of personal belief, agency mission and city size on open space decision making processes in three southwestern cities. Urban Ecosyst. doi:10.1007/s11252-014-0419-3

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee K, Burkhard B (2010) Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: a case study from the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein. Ecol Complex. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.02.008

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Baggethun E, Barton DN (2013) Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol Econ. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould RK, Ardoin NM, Woodside U, Satterfield T, Hannahs N, Daily GC (2014) The forest has a story: cultural ecosystem services in Kona, Hawai‘i. Ecol Soc. doi:10.5751/ES-06893-190355

    Google Scholar 

  • Green O, Garmestani AS, Albro S et al (2015) Urban Ecosyst. doi:10.1007/s11252-015-0476-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo Z, Zhang L, Li Y (2010) Increased dependence of humans on ecosystem services and biodiversity. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013113

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartel T, Fischer J, Câmpeanu C, Milcu AI, Hanspach J, Fazey I (2014) The importance of ecosystem services for rural inhabitants in a changing cultural landscape in Romania. Ecol Soc. doi:10.5751/ES-06333-190242

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslett JR, Berry PM, Bela G, Jongman RHG, Pataki G, Samways MJ, Zobel M (2010) Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodivers Conserv. doi:10.1007/s10531-009-9743-y

    Google Scholar 

  • Herringshaw CJ, Thompson JR, Stewart TW (2010) Learning about restoration of urban ecosystems: a case study integrating public participation, stormwater management, and ecological research. Urban Ecosyst. doi:10.1007/s11252-010-0134-7

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunziker M, Felber P, Gehring K, Buchecker M, Bauer N, Kienast F (2008) Evaluation of landscape change of different social groups. Results of two empirical studies in Swizerland. Mt Res Dev. doi:10.1659/mrd.0952

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabisch N, Haase D (2014) Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016

    Google Scholar 

  • La Rosa D, Spyra M, Inostroza L (2015). Indicators of Cultural Ecosystem Services for urban planning: a review. Ecol Indic. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.04.028

  • Lazo JK, Kinell JC, Fisher A (2000) Expert and layperson perceptions of ecosystem risk. Risk Anal. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.202019

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • López-Santiago CA, Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Plieninger T, González Martín E, González JA (2014) Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: the case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecol Soc. doi:10.5751/ES-06401-190227

    Google Scholar 

  • Louv R (2008) Last child in the woods: saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Algonquin, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado-Arzuaga I, Del Amo DG, Gómez-Baggethun E, Oteros-Rozas E, Palacios-Agundez I, Willaarts B, González JA, Santos-Martín F, Onaindia M, López-Santiago C, Montes C (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038970

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mayring P (2002) Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Anleitung zu qualitativem Denken. Weinheim, Beltz

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring P (2008) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken, 10th edn. Weinheim, Beltz

    Google Scholar 

  • MEA: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Melichar J, Kaprová K (2013) Revealing preferences of Prague’s homebuyers toward greenery amenities: the empirical evidence of distance–size effect. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.09.003

    Google Scholar 

  • Milcu AI, Hanspach J, Abson D, Fischer J (2013) Cultural ecosystem services: a literature review and prospects for future research. Ecol Soc. doi:10.5751/ES-05790-180344

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton LR, Inwood H, Crowe A, Baker A (2012) Trialling a method to quantify the ‘cultural services’ of the English landscape using countryside survey data. Land Use Policy. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.09.002

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001) Engaging citizens in policy-making: Information, consultation and public participations. PUMA Policy Brief 10. OECD, Paris

  • Petts J, Brooks C (2006) Expert conceptualisations of the role of lay knowledge in environmental decisionmaking: challenges for deliberative democracy. Environ Plann A. doi:10.1068/a37373

    Google Scholar 

  • Plieninger T, Dijks S, Oteros-Rozas E, Bieling C (2013) Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.013

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T, Rakel H, Dienel P, Johnson B (1993) Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Policy Sci. doi:10.1007/BF00999716

    Google Scholar 

  • Riechers M, Barkmann J, Tscharntke T (2016) Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green. Ecosyst Serv. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.007

    Google Scholar 

  • Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt (2014a) Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de. Accessed 8 Oct 2014

  • Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt (2014b) Antwort auf die Schriftliche Anfrage Nr. 17 t13888 vom 26. Mai 2014 über Welche Kosten hat der “Masterplan Tempelhofer Freiheit” bisher verursacht? (Response to the written inquiry No. 17 t13888 from Mai 26, 2014 about Which costs has the “Masterplan Tempelhofer Freiheit” already incurred?) https://www.piratenfraktion-berlin.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/PIRATEN-Schriftliche-Anfrage-Kosten-Masterplan-THF-.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2014

  • Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt (2015a) Öffentliche Grünflächen in Berlin. Tabelle: Flächen im Berliner Stadtgebiet Stand: 31.12.2013. http://stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/stadtgruen/gruenanlagen/de/daten_fakten/downloadd/ausw_4.pdf. Accessed 11 Aug 2015

  • Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt (2015b) Tempelhofer Feld https://tempelhofer-feld.berlin.de/. Accessed 11 Aug 2015

  • Tengberg A, Fredholm S, Eliasson I, Knez I, Saltzman K, Wetterberg O (2012) Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: assessment of heritage values and identity. Ecosyst Serv. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.006

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner KG, Odgaard MV, Bøcher PK, Dalgaard T, Svenning JC (2014) Bundling ecosystem services in Denmark: trade-offs and synergies in a cultural landscape. Landsc Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.007

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban D (1986) Was ist Umweltbewußtsein? Exploration eines mehrdimensionalen Einstellungskonstruktes. Z Soziol 15:363–377 http://www.zfs-online.org/index.php/zfs/article/view/2598. Accessed 12 Dec 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Vouligny È, Domon G, Ruiz J (2009) An assessment of ordinary landscapes by an expert and by its residents: landscape values in areas of intensive agriculture use. Land Use Policy. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.10.016

    Google Scholar 

  • Witzel A (2000) Das problemzentrierte Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung 1(1):22

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their useful and constructive comments that improved the first version of the manuscript. Also, we thank all interviewees for their participation. We are grateful to our workgroup on qualitative research at the Section for Environmental and Resource Economics at the Georg-August Universität Göttingen for continuous support before and after data collection, to Dr. Jan. Barkmann for his help designing the interview guidelines and comments on earlier versions of the draft, as well as to PD Dr. Micha Strack for her very helpful statistical advice. The research was kindly funded by the Foundation under Public Law of Georg-August Universität Göttingen on behalf of Professor Dr. Rainer Marggraf.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maraja Riechers.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 3 Occupational areas of experts
Table 4 Information on participants of expert interviews
Table 5 Information on participants of problem-centered interviews

Example of an interview guideline

The interview begins with an informed consent about the recording and an explanation about the confidentiality of the interview. Following is a rough and easy to understand description of the first author’s project. I therefore are very interested in your valuation of nature here in Berlin.

  1. 1.

    Do you do occasionally trips „into the green“ here in Berlin?

    1. a.

      Which places do you usually go?

    2. b.

      Why do you choose to go to these places? What do you like particularly about these places?

    3. c.

      What do you do there?

  1. 2.

    Does your trip differ between ones after work and those on the weekend?

    1. a.

      How do they differ?

  2. 3.

    When you consider these places, do you remember more what might be important for you when in nature?

    1. a.

      How do you think this is for other people? Are there more reasons why nature would be important for someone?

(Following questions were asked as ‘follow up’ if the topic (even broadly) has not been covered at all.)

  1. 4.

    Do you think that nature could be a basis for knowledge that you not necessarily learn in school, or similar?

    1. a.

      What could be such knowledge?

    2. b.

      How is it taught?

  2. 5.

    How do you see weight of nature and research in general?

  3. 6.

    Do you know of instances where nature can inspire?

    1. a.

      How is that for you?

  4. 7.

    Is there something in nature that you consider especially beautiful?

    1. a.

      Can you described that in detail?

  5. 8.

    Do you personally connect religiosity or spirituality with nature experiences?

    1. a.

      Can you describe that in detail??

  6. 9.

    Can you imagine that nature has an impact on relations between humans?

Example if hesitant: Places on which you can meet; certain behavior

  1. a.

    Do you have examples for this? Which would that be?

  1. 10.

    For some a sense of place and nature is connected. Do you think nature as an influence on sense of place?

    1. a.

      How is that for you?

  2. 11.

    Do you think that nature has an influence on the impact of cultural assets? With cultural assets I mean here (return to previously named places by the interviewee, or local examples)

    1. a.

      What kind of cultural assets to you think of spontaneously now?

  3. 12.

    Can you imagine humans of groups that use nature differently?

    1. a.

      Do you know of instances here in Berlin?

  4. 13.

    In how far do you need nature for recreation?

    1. a.

      Do you do vacation in regions which you value for their nature?

Introduction Sentence in regard to the place they are living in: You live here rather/very rural/ urban

  1. 14.

    How would you characterize your living area? Rather rural, urban or suburban?

  2. 15.

    Do you identify rather with city life or with rural life?

  3. 16.

    Which influence has your relation with nature on your residence?

  4. 17.

    Have you ever lived in the center of a big city/ in the suburb of a big city?

(If interviewees changed from rural/urban):

  1. 18.

    When you think about the change rural/urban, can you think of something which became more important of less important for you in regard of nature?

    1. a.

      What is this precisely? Can you describe that?

    2. b.

      Can you say, why there has been such a change?

  2. 19.

    Does something else come to mind regarding nature in general or here in Berlin which you want to add?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Riechers, M., Noack, E.M. & Tscharntke, T. Experts’ versus laypersons’ perception of urban cultural ecosystem services. Urban Ecosyst 20, 715–727 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0616-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0616-3

Keywords

Navigation