Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

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

Abstract

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.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. 1.

    Particularly in the summering area, the ditches (where herbaceous vegetation tends to proliferate due to higher humidity) are grazed by sheep, hence avoiding accumulation of potentially inflammable biomass and facilitating the drainage of rain so that roads are not flooded. The cleaning of biomass from the ditches is usually performed mechanically, but sheep grazing also delivers this service.

References

  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, USA

  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):41

  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, Cheltenham

  4. Berkes F, Jolly D (2001) Adapting to climate change: social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conserv Ecol 5(2):18

  5. Blondel J (2006) The “Design” of mediterranean landscapes: a millennial story of humans and ecological systems during the historic period. Hum Ecol 34:713–729

  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 9:278–286

  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. http://www.alterra.wur.nl/UK/publications/Alterra+Reports. Accessed 20 June 2012

  8. Cabell JF, Oelofse M (2012) An indicator framework for assessing agroecosystem resilience. Ecol Soc 17(1):18

  9. Caraveli H (2000) A comparative analysis on intensification and extensification in mediterranean agriculture: dilemmas for LFAs policy. J Rural Stud 16:231–242

  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 159:240–247

  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 75:1201–1208

  12. Cazorla A, De los Ríos-Carmenado I, Alier JL, Merino J (2008) A multicriteria assessment model for evaluating droving route networks. Biosyst Eng 100:601–611

  13. Chan KMA, Satterfield T, Goldstein J (2012a) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ 74:8–18

  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):744–756

  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 105:9483–9488

  16. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington

  17. Davies J, Hatfield R (2007) The economics of mobile pastoralism: a global summary. Nomadic Peoples 11:91–116

  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 7:260–272

  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 41:393–408

  20. Dietz T, Kalof L, Stern PC (2002) Gender, values, and environmentalism. Soc Sci Quart 83:353–364

  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):10

  22. Fernández-Giménez ME, Fillat F (2012) Pyrenean pastoralists’ ecological knowledge: documentation and application to natural resource management and adaptation. Hum Ecol 40(2):287–300

  23. Fisher B, Turner R, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653

  24. Galvin K (2009) Transitions: pastoralists living with change. Ann Rev Anthropol 38:185–198

  25. Gordon LJ, Finlayson CM, Falkenmark M (2010) Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric Water Manage 97:512–519

  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 19–20:136–146

  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 69:1209–1218

  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 19:2791–2821

  29. Harrop SR (2007) Traditional agricultural landscapes as protected areas in international law and policy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 121:296–307

  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, Nairobi

  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 25:13–21

  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 2:11–24

  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):15

  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 35:71–79

  35. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL (1992) Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econom Manage 22:57–70

  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):42–50

  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 11:791–804

  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 334:441–449

  39. Ley 3/1995. Ley de Vías Pecuarias (Drove Roads Act). http://www.boe.es/buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-1995-7241

  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 Soc

  41. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

  42. MAGRAMA (Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente) (2012). Incendios forestales del 1 de enero al 30 de noviembre de 2012. http://www.magrama.gob.es/es/biodiversidad/temas/defensa-contra-incendios-forestales/avance_informativo_1_enero_30_noviembre_2012_tcm7-235101.pdf

  43. Manzano P, Malo JE (2006) Extreme long-distance seed dispersal via sheep. Front Ecol Environ 4(5):244–248

  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 Marino

  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):e38970

  46. Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E, García-Llorente M (2013) Trade-offs across value-domains in ecosystem services assessment. Ecol Ind 37(A):220–228

  47. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of Spain (2011) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of Spain (EME): managing biodiversity and ecosystem services for human well-being. Fundación Biodiversidad, Madrid

  48. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GA, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858

  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 114:296–310

  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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.09.003

  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, Cambridge

  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 21:185–193

  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):33

  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 35:251–272

  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):14

  56. Peterson MJ, Hall DM, Feldpausch-Parker AM, Peterson TR (2010) Obscuring ecosystem function with application of the ecosystem services concept. Conserv Biol 24:113–119

  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):39

  58. Power AG (2010) Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philos Trans Roy Soc Lond Series B Biol Sci 365:2959–2971

  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 64:235–247

  60. Robertson GP, Swinton SM (2005) Reconciling agricultural productivity and environmental integrity: a grand challenge for agriculture. Front Ecol Environ 3(1):38–46

  61. Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayer B, Wangari E (1996) Feminist political ecology: global issues and local experiences. Routledge, London

  62. Ruben R, Pender J (2004) Rural diversity and heterogeneity in less-favored areas: the quest for policy targeting. Food Pol 29:303–320

  63. Ruiz M, Ruiz J (1986) Ecological history of transhumance in Spain. Biol Conser 37:73–86

  64. Sagoff M (1998) Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods: a look beyond contingent pricing. Ecol Econ 24:213–230

  65. Schröter et al (2005) Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science 310:1333–1337

  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 48:630–636

  67. Soini K, Vaarala H, Pouta E (2012) Residents’ sense of place and landscape perceptions at the rural–urban interface. Landscape Urban Plan 104:124–134

  68. Swinton SM, Lupi F, Robertson GP, Hamilton SK (2007) Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecol Econ 64:245–252

  69. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. Earthscan, London

  70. Turner R, Daily G (2008) The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environ Resour Econ 39:25–35

  71. Vatn A (2005) Rationality, institutions and environmental policy. Ecol Econ 55:203–217

  72. van Berkel DB, Verburg PH (2014). Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape. Ecol Indic 37(A):163–174

  73. Vihervaara P, Rönkä M, Walls M (2010) Trends in ecosystem service research: early steps and current drivers. Ambio 39:314–324

  74. Wittman H (2009) Reworking the metabolic rift: La Vía Campesina, agrarian citizenship, and food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 36(4):805–826

  75. Zhang W, Ricketts TH, Kremen C, Carney K, Swinton SM (2007) Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecol Econ 64:253–260

  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):935–949

Download references

Acknowledgments

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.

Author information

Correspondence to Elisa Oteros-Rozas.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table 3.

Table 3 Classification of ecosystem services assessed, descriptions, examples and correspondence classification according to Millennium Assessment (MA; description based on de Groot et al. 2002)

Appendix 2

See Table 4.

Table 4 Panels used in the survey for the identification of ecosystem services

Appendix 3

See Table 5.

Table 5 Ecosystem service preferences

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., González, J.A. et al. Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services in a transhumance social-ecological network. Reg Environ Change 14, 1269–1289 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0571-y

Download citation

Keywords

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