Stakeholder perceptions of agricultural landscape services, biodiversity, and drivers of change in four European case studies

IF 6.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecosystem Services Pub Date : 2023-10-06 DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101563
Monika Suškevičs , Katrin Karner , Claudia Bethwell , Florian Danzinger , Sonja Kay , Takamasa Nishizawa , Johannes Schuler , Kalev Sepp , Rando Värnik , Michael Glemnitz , Maaria Semm , Christina Umstätter , Tobias Conradt , Felix Herzog , Noëlle Klein , Thomas Wrbka , Peter Zander , Martin Schönhart
{"title":"Stakeholder perceptions of agricultural landscape services, biodiversity, and drivers of change in four European case studies","authors":"Monika Suškevičs ,&nbsp;Katrin Karner ,&nbsp;Claudia Bethwell ,&nbsp;Florian Danzinger ,&nbsp;Sonja Kay ,&nbsp;Takamasa Nishizawa ,&nbsp;Johannes Schuler ,&nbsp;Kalev Sepp ,&nbsp;Rando Värnik ,&nbsp;Michael Glemnitz ,&nbsp;Maaria Semm ,&nbsp;Christina Umstätter ,&nbsp;Tobias Conradt ,&nbsp;Felix Herzog ,&nbsp;Noëlle Klein ,&nbsp;Thomas Wrbka ,&nbsp;Peter Zander ,&nbsp;Martin Schönhart","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Many studies have explored farmers’ perspectives on biodiversity and ecosystem services, but fewer qualitative and cross-country comparisons exist. We develop a socio-ecological system to analyse agricultural landscape services, biodiversity, and drivers that have affected these services in recent decades. Via a systematic stakeholder mapping and 49 semi-structured interviews, we identify stakeholder perceptions of this system. We compare the perceptions across four regional case studies (Austria, Estonia, Germany, Switzerland), and two stakeholder groups (land managers and administrators). The case studies share certain commonalities in perceptions (e.g., provisioning and regulating services discussed in all of them) but also show differences (e.g., changes in biodiversity and landscape services more often perceived in the Swiss and German cases, but less in the Austrian and Estonian case studies). Across all case studies, typical land use change can be attributed to multiple drivers of various strengths, with climate change being the most often perceived driver directly affecting landscape services, followed by policies and market-based drivers, which affect services and biodiversity indirectly via land use. Compared to the administrators (e.g., decision-makers, scientists), the managers (e.g., farmers, NGOs) discuss more often the drivers, like various biodiversity and landscape service categories, as well as climate change, markets, and technologies. However, the administrators focus more on cultural services, policies as drivers, and consider more often links between drivers and landscape services and/or biodiversity. Hence, both of the groups’ (administrators and managers) perceptions partly complement each other. Since policy making should be based on the best knowledge of different stakeholder groups, active knowledge exchange between managers and administrators should be supported and outcome considered in decision making. The resulting regional differences in stakeholder perceptions of the drivers and their respective impact on agricultural landscapes suggest that future agricultural policies need regional targeting and the consideration of landscape-specific characteristics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000566","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many studies have explored farmers’ perspectives on biodiversity and ecosystem services, but fewer qualitative and cross-country comparisons exist. We develop a socio-ecological system to analyse agricultural landscape services, biodiversity, and drivers that have affected these services in recent decades. Via a systematic stakeholder mapping and 49 semi-structured interviews, we identify stakeholder perceptions of this system. We compare the perceptions across four regional case studies (Austria, Estonia, Germany, Switzerland), and two stakeholder groups (land managers and administrators). The case studies share certain commonalities in perceptions (e.g., provisioning and regulating services discussed in all of them) but also show differences (e.g., changes in biodiversity and landscape services more often perceived in the Swiss and German cases, but less in the Austrian and Estonian case studies). Across all case studies, typical land use change can be attributed to multiple drivers of various strengths, with climate change being the most often perceived driver directly affecting landscape services, followed by policies and market-based drivers, which affect services and biodiversity indirectly via land use. Compared to the administrators (e.g., decision-makers, scientists), the managers (e.g., farmers, NGOs) discuss more often the drivers, like various biodiversity and landscape service categories, as well as climate change, markets, and technologies. However, the administrators focus more on cultural services, policies as drivers, and consider more often links between drivers and landscape services and/or biodiversity. Hence, both of the groups’ (administrators and managers) perceptions partly complement each other. Since policy making should be based on the best knowledge of different stakeholder groups, active knowledge exchange between managers and administrators should be supported and outcome considered in decision making. The resulting regional differences in stakeholder perceptions of the drivers and their respective impact on agricultural landscapes suggest that future agricultural policies need regional targeting and the consideration of landscape-specific characteristics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利益相关者对农业景观服务、生物多样性和四个欧洲案例研究中变化驱动因素的看法
许多研究探讨了农民对生物多样性和生态系统服务的看法,但很少有定性和跨国比较。我们开发了一个社会生态系统来分析农业景观服务、生物多样性以及近几十年来影响这些服务的驱动因素。通过系统的利益相关者映射和49次半结构化访谈,我们确定了利益相关者对该系统的看法。我们比较了四个区域案例研究(奥地利、爱沙尼亚、德国、瑞士)和两个利益相关者群体(土地管理者和行政人员)的看法。案例研究在认知上有一些共同点(例如,所有案例研究中都讨论了提供和监管服务),但也显示出差异(例如,生物多样性和景观服务的变化在瑞士和德国的案例中更常见,但在奥地利和爱沙尼亚的案例研究中较少)。在所有案例研究中,典型的土地利用变化可归因于各种优势的多种驱动因素,气候变化是最常见的直接影响景观服务的驱动因素,其次是政策和基于市场的驱动因素。这些驱动因素通过土地利用间接影响服务和生物多样性。与行政人员(如决策者、科学家)相比,管理人员(如农民、非政府组织)更经常讨论驱动因素,如各种生物多样性和景观服务类别,以及气候变化、市场和技术。然而,管理者更多地关注文化服务,将政策作为驱动因素,并更多地考虑驱动因素与景观服务和/或生物多样性之间的联系。因此,这两个群体(管理者和管理者)的看法在一定程度上是相辅相成的。由于政策制定应基于不同利益相关者群体的最佳知识,因此应支持管理人员和行政人员之间的积极知识交流,并在决策中考虑结果。由此产生的利益相关者对驱动因素的看法及其各自对农业景观的影响的区域差异表明,未来的农业政策需要针对区域,并考虑到景观的具体特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
14.90
自引率
7.90%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.
期刊最新文献
The role of Earth observation in ecosystem accounting: A review of advances, challenges and future directions Accounting for water-related ecosystem services to provide information for water policy and management: An Australian case study Auroral ecosystem services: A cascade model and investigation of co-production processes Impacts of commercial and subsistence fishing on marine and cultural ecosystem services important to the wellbeing of an Indigenous community in Hawai'i Birdwatching preferences reveal synergies and tradeoffs among recreation, carbon, and fisheries ecosystem services in Pacific Northwest estuaries, USA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1