Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 1269–1289 | Cite as

Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services in a transhumance social-ecological network

  • Elisa Oteros-Rozas
  • Berta Martín-López
  • José A. González
  • Tobias Plieninger
  • César A. López
  • Carlos Montes
Original Article


The ecosystem services framework is receiving increasing attention in the fields of policy and research. The assessment of human attitudes and perceptions regarding ecosystem services has been proposed as a promising tool for addressing complex problems associated with environmental change, particularly in the context of cultural landscapes. Transhumance is not only a farming practice responsible for shaping cultural landscapes but also an adaptive strategy based on mobility that may represent a useful approach to overcoming the growing challenges posed by accelerated environmental change. A socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services associated with the Conquense Drove Road, one of the major transhumant networks still in use in Mediterranean Spain, was conducted via the distribution of questionnaires to 416 local residents and visitors to capture their perceptions regarding the importance of 34 ecosystem services (10 provisioning, 12 regulating, and 12 cultural) for both social and personal well-being. Overall, the ecosystem services considered to be the most important for social well-being were fire prevention, air purification and livestock. Most of the ecosystem services in question were perceived as declining, with the exception of those associated with recreation, scientific knowledge and environmental education. This study revealed that perceptions regarding the value of ecosystem services differed among respondents, depending on their age, place of origin and gender. Several methodological issues, as well as the implications of socio-cultural valuation for policy making, are also discussed here.


Drove roads Ecosystem services Human well-being Perception Rangelands Spatial and temporal locations Value 



This research has been financed by the Spanish Ministry for the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs (Project 079/RN08/02.1) and the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Project CGL2011-30266). E.O.R. was partially funded by a grant by the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid and hosted by the Ecosystem Services Research Group at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities (Germany) during manuscript elaboration. T.P.’s contribution was funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (FKZ 01UU 0904A). We acknowledge all interviewees and respondents for kindly sharing their knowledge and time. We thank: Marina García-Llorente and Irene Iniesta-Arandia for comments on the survey design; Jessica Cobo, Isabel Díaz-Reviriego, Lucía Galeán, Erik Gómez- Baggethun, Esther González-Martín, Violeta Hevia, Irene Iniesta-Arandia and Ricardo Ontillera-Sánchez for field assistance; Sergio Puente for assistance with the survey coding; Ignacio Palomo for map design. We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their comments on a previous version.


  1. Agrawal, A (2008). The role of local institutions in adaptation to climate change. Paper presented at the social dimensions of climate change workshop, World Bank, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacon CM, Getz C, Kraus S, Montenegro M, Holland K (2012) The social dimensions of sustainability and change in diversified farming systems. Ecol Soc 17(4):41Google Scholar
  3. Bateman I J, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann WB, Hanley N, Hett T, Lee MJ, Loomes G, Mourato S, Özdemiroglu E, Pearce DW (2002). Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: A manual. (E. Elgar Ed.). Publishing, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkes F, Jolly D (2001) Adapting to climate change: social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conserv Ecol 5(2):18Google Scholar
  5. Blondel J (2006) The “Design” of mediterranean landscapes: a millennial story of humans and ecological systems during the historic period. Hum Ecol 34:713–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bugalho MN, Caldeira MC, Pereira JS, Aronson J, Pausas JG (2011) Mediterranean cork oak savannas require human use to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ 9:278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bunce R, De Aranzabal I, Schmitz M, Pineda F (2006) A review of the role of Drove Roads (Cañadas) as ecological corridors. Alterra Reports 1428.Wageningen. Accessed 20 June 2012
  8. Cabell JF, Oelofse M (2012) An indicator framework for assessing agroecosystem resilience. Ecol Soc 17(1):18Google Scholar
  9. Caraveli H (2000) A comparative analysis on intensification and extensification in mediterranean agriculture: dilemmas for LFAs policy. J Rural Stud 16:231–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carmona CP, Azcárate FM, Oteros-Rozas E, González JA, Peco B (2013) Assessing the effects of seasonal grazing on holm oak regeneration: Implications for the conservation of Mediterranean dehesas. Bio Cons 159:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castro AJ, Martín-López B, García-Llorente M, Aguilera PA, López E, Cabello J (2011) Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region. J Arid Environ 75:1201–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cazorla A, De los Ríos-Carmenado I, Alier JL, Merino J (2008) A multicriteria assessment model for evaluating droving route networks. Biosyst Eng 100:601–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chan KMA, Satterfield T, Goldstein J (2012a) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ 74:8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chan KMA, Guerry AD, Balvanera P, Klain S, Satterfield T, Basurto X, Bostrom A et al (2012b) Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. Bioscience 62(8):744–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cowling RM, Egoh B, Knight AT, O’Farrell PJ, Reyers B, Rouget M, Roux DJ, Welz A, Wilhelm-Rechman A (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9483–9488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. Davies J, Hatfield R (2007) The economics of mobile pastoralism: a global summary. Nomadic Peoples 11:91–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RMJ (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41:393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dietz T, Kalof L, Stern PC (2002) Gender, values, and environmentalism. Soc Sci Quart 83:353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dong S, Wen L, Liu S, Zhang X, Social S, Systems E (2011) Vulnerability of worldwide pastoralism to global changes and interdisciplinary strategies for sustainable pastoralism. Ecol Soc 16(2):10Google Scholar
  22. Fernández-Giménez ME, Fillat F (2012) Pyrenean pastoralists’ ecological knowledge: documentation and application to natural resource management and adaptation. Hum Ecol 40(2):287–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fisher B, Turner R, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Galvin K (2009) Transitions: pastoralists living with change. Ann Rev Anthropol 38:185–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gordon LJ, Finlayson CM, Falkenmark M (2010) Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric Water Manage 97:512–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. García-Llorente M, Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, López-Santiago CA, Aguilera PA, Montes C (2012) The role of multi-functionality in social preferences toward semi-arid rural landscapes: an ecosystem service approach. Environ Sci Pol 19–20:136–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gómez-Baggethun E, de Groot R, Lomas PL, Montes C (2010) The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol Econ 69:1209–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harrison PA, Vandewalle M, Sykes MT, Berry PM, Bugter R, Bello F, Feld CK, Grandin U, Harrington R, Haslett JR, Jongman RHG, Luck GW, Silva PM, Moora M, Settele J, Sousa JP, Zobel M (2010) Identifying and prioritising services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. Biodivers Conserv 19:2791–2821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harrop SR (2007) Traditional agricultural landscapes as protected areas in international law and policy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 121:296–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hatfield R, Davies J, Wane A, Kerven C, Dutilly-Diane C, Biber JP, Merega JL, Odhiambo MO, Behnke R, Gura S (2006) Global review of the economics of pastoralism. World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism, UICN, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  31. Hauck J, Görg C, Varjopuro R, Ratamäki O, Jax K (2013) Benefits and limitations of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy and decision making: Some stakeholder perspectives. Environ Sci Pol 25:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heikkinen H, Sarkki S, Nuttall M (2012) Users or producers of ecosystem services? A scenario exercise for integrating conservation and reeindeer herding in northeast Finland. Pastoralism: Reserach. Policy Practice 2:11–24Google Scholar
  33. Janssen M, Bodin O, Anderies JM, Elmqvist T, Ernstson H, McAllister RRJ, Olsson P, Ryan P (2006) Towards a network perspective of the study of resilience in socio-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):15Google Scholar
  34. Johnson KA, Polasky S, Nelson E, Pennington D (2012). Uncertainty in ecosystem services valuation and implications for assessing land use tradeoffs: an agricultural case study in the Minnesota River Basin. Ecol Econ 35:71–79Google Scholar
  35. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL (1992) Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econom Manage 22:57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krätli S, Huelsebusch C, Brooks S, Kaufmann B (2012) Pastoralism: a critical asset for food security under global climate change. Animal Front 3(1):42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lamarque P, Tappeiner U, Turner C, Steinbacher M, Bardgett RD, Szukics U, Schermer M, Lavorel S (2011a) Stakeholder perceptions of grassland ecosystem services in relation to knowledge on soil fertility and biodiversity. Reg Environ Change 11:791–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lamarque P, Quétier F, Lavorel S (2011b) The diversity of the ecosystem services concept and its implications for their assessment and management. C R Biol 334:441–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ley 3/1995. Ley de Vías Pecuarias (Drove Roads Act).
  40. López-Santiago C, Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Plieninger T, González E, González JA (in press) Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: the case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecol SocGoogle Scholar
  41. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. MAGRAMA (Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente) (2012). Incendios forestales del 1 de enero al 30 de noviembre de 2012.
  43. Manzano P, Malo JE (2006) Extreme long-distance seed dispersal via sheep. Front Ecol Environ 4(5):244–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. MARM (Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Medio Rural y Marino) (2011). Libro Blanco de la trashumancia. Dirección de Desarrollo Sostenible del Medio Rural, Ministerio del Medio Ambiente, y Medio Rural y MarinoGoogle Scholar
  45. Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado-Arzuaga I, Del Amo DDG, 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 7(6):e38970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E, García-Llorente M (2013) Trade-offs across value-domains in ecosystem services assessment. Ecol Ind 37(A):220–228Google Scholar
  47. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of Spain (2011) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of Spain (EME): managing biodiversity and ecosystem services for human well-being. Fundación Biodiversidad, MadridGoogle Scholar
  48. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GA, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mottet A, Ladet S, Coque′ N, Gibon A (2006) Agricultural land-use change and its drivers in mountain landscapes: a case study in the Pyrenees. Agric Ecosyst Environ 114:296–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nieto-Romero M, Oteros-Rozas E, González Nóvoa JA, Martín-López B (in press) Exploring the knowledge landscape of ecosystem services assessments in Mediterranean agroecosystems: insights for future research. Environ Sci Policy.
  51. Oteros-Rozas E, González JA, Martín-López B, López CA, Montes C (2012a) Ecosystem services and social-ecological resilience in transhumance cultural landscapes: learning from the past, looking for a future. In: Plieninger T, Bieling C (eds) Resilience and the cultural landscape. Understanding and managing change in human-shaped environments. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Oteros-Rozas E, González JA, Martín-López B, López CA, Zorrilla-Miras P, Montes C (2012b) Evaluating ecosystem services in transhumance cultural landscapes: an interdisciplinary and participatory framework. Gaia 21:185–193Google Scholar
  53. Oteros-Rozas E, Ontillera-Sánchez R, Sanosa P, Gómez-Baggethun E, Reyes-García V, González JA (2013a) Traditional Ecological Knowledge among transhumant pastoralists in Mediterranean Spain: learning for adaptation to global change. Eco Soc 18(3):33Google Scholar
  54. Oteros-Rozas E, González JA, Martín-López B, López CA, Palomo I, Montes C (2013b) Envisioning the future of transhumant pastoralism through participatory scenario planning: the Conquense Drove Road (Spain). Rangel J 35:251–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pereira E, Queiroz C, Pereira HM, Vicente L (2005) Ecosystem services and human well-being: a participatory study in a mountain community in Portugal. Ecol Soc 10(2):14Google Scholar
  56. Peterson MJ, Hall DM, Feldpausch-Parker AM, Peterson TR (2010) Obscuring ecosystem function with application of the ecosystem services concept. Conserv Biol 24:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Plieninger T, Bieling C, Ohnesorge B, Schaich H, Schleyer C, Wolff F (2013) Exploring futures of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes through participatory scenario development in the Swabian Alb, Germany. Ecol Soc 18(3):39Google Scholar
  58. Power AG (2010) Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philos Trans Roy Soc Lond Series B Biol Sci 365:2959–2971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Reyes-García V, Vila S, Aceituno-Mata L, Calvet-Mir L, Garnatje T, Jesh A, Lastra JJ, Parada M, Rigat M, Valles J, Pardo-de-Santayana M (2010) Gendered homegardens: a study in three mountain areas of the Iberian Peninsula. Econ Bot 64:235–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Robertson GP, Swinton SM (2005) Reconciling agricultural productivity and environmental integrity: a grand challenge for agriculture. Front Ecol Environ 3(1):38–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayer B, Wangari E (1996) Feminist political ecology: global issues and local experiences. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Ruben R, Pender J (2004) Rural diversity and heterogeneity in less-favored areas: the quest for policy targeting. Food Pol 29:303–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ruiz M, Ruiz J (1986) Ecological history of transhumance in Spain. Biol Conser 37:73–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sagoff M (1998) Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods: a look beyond contingent pricing. Ecol Econ 24:213–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schröter et al (2005) Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science 310:1333–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV, Lautenbach S, Schmidt S (2011) A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol 48:630–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Soini K, Vaarala H, Pouta E (2012) Residents’ sense of place and landscape perceptions at the rural–urban interface. Landscape Urban Plan 104:124–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Swinton SM, Lupi F, Robertson GP, Hamilton SK (2007) Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecol Econ 64:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Turner R, Daily G (2008) The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environ Resour Econ 39:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vatn A (2005) Rationality, institutions and environmental policy. Ecol Econ 55:203–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. van Berkel DB, Verburg PH (2014). Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape. Ecol Indic 37(A):163–174Google Scholar
  73. Vihervaara P, Rönkä M, Walls M (2010) Trends in ecosystem service research: early steps and current drivers. Ambio 39:314–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wittman H (2009) Reworking the metabolic rift: La Vía Campesina, agrarian citizenship, and food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 36(4):805–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhang W, Ricketts TH, Kremen C, Carney K, Swinton SM (2007) Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecol Econ 64:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zumbrunnen T, Menéndez P, Bugmann H, Conedera M, Gimmi U, Bürgi M (2012) Human impacts on fire occurrence: a case study of hundred years of forest fires in a dry alpine valley in Switzerland. Reg Environ Change 12(4):935–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Oteros-Rozas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Berta Martín-López
    • 1
  • José A. González
    • 1
  • Tobias Plieninger
    • 3
  • César A. López
    • 1
  • Carlos Montes
    • 1
  1. 1.Social-Ecological Systems LaboratoryUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Public Administration and Policy GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource ManagementUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations