Sociocultural Valuation of Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas : A Study Applied to Southeast Spain

• Autorzy: Belén López-Felices , Marina Schoenemann , Isabel M. Román-Sánchez , José A. Aznar-Sánchez
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Research background: Protected areas (PAs) play a fundamental role in the maintenance of ecosystem processes and in the flow of ecosystem services (ESs) they provide. However, the management of PAs is complex due to the existence of different stakeholders with disparate and, often, opposed preferences and valuations. The sociocultural assessment of ESs contributes to optimizing the management of scarce resources based on the preferences of the different stakeholders, taking into account the economic, environmental and social dimensions of the analysed area.
Purpose of the article: In this work, a sociocultural assessment of the ESs provided by a PA in southeast Spain is carried out. The objective is to identify which the various ESs provided by this PA are and to establish their degree of importance for all the stakeholders involved.
Methods: For this, different complementary methodologies have been used in successive phases, both qualitative and quantitative. Specifically, a literature review, in-depth interviews and an assessment questionnaire were used.
Findings & value added: Based on the results obtained, a series of measures are proposed to improve the sustainable management of the PA and the socioeconomic development of its environment. The results of this study may be useful for PAs whose management tries to find a balance between conservation measures and the design of models that contribute to the socioeconomic development of their area of influence. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Environmental resources management; Sustainable development; Behavioral economics; Ecosystem

PL

Zarządzanie zasobami środowiska; Rozwój zrównoważony; Ekonomia behawioralna; Ekosystem

• Czasopismo: Oeconomia Copernicana
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: 14
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 1257--1302

Twórcy

autor

Belén López-Felices

• University of Almeria, Spain

autor

Marina Schoenemann

• University of Almeria, Spain

autor

Isabel M. Román-Sánchez

• University of Almeria, Spain

autor

José A. Aznar-Sánchez

• University of Almeria, Spain

Bibliografia

• Abbass, K., Qasim, M. Z., Song, H., Murshed, M., Mahmood, H., & Younis, I. (2022). A review of the global climate change impacts, adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(28), 42539-42559. doi: 10.1007/S11356-022-19718-6.
• Acharya, R. P., Maraseni, T. N., & Cockfield, G. (2019). Local users and other stakeholders' perceptions of the identification and prioritization of ecosystem services in fragile mountains: A case study of Chure region of Nepal. Forests, 10(5), 421. doi: 10.3390/f10050421.
• Ahmed, S. F., Kumar, P. S., Kabir, M., Zuhara, F. T., Mehjabin, A., Tasannum, N., Hoang, A. T., Kabir, Z., & Mofijur, M. (2022). Threats, challenges and sustainable conservation strategies for freshwater biodiversity. Environmental Research, 214(P1), 113808. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113808.
• Álvarez-Lorente, T., & Entrena-Durán, F. (2021). Potential for sustainable development in the Southeastern Spanish region of Guadix. Sustainability, 13(2), 727. doi: 10.3390/SU13020727.
• Anadón, J. D., Pérez-García, J. M., Pérez, I., Royo, J., & Sánchez-Zapata, J. A. (2018). Disentangling the effects of habitat, connectivity and interspecific competition in the range expansion of exotic and native ungulates. Landscape Ecology, 33(4), 597-608. doi: 10.1007/s10980-018-0622-3.
• Asah, S. T., & Blahna, D. J. (2020). Involving stakeholders' knowledge in co-designing social valuations of biodiversity and ecosystem services: Implications for decision-making. Ecosystems, 23(2), 324-337. doi: 10.1007/s10021-019-00405-6.
• Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Belmonte-Ureña, L. J., López-Serrano, M. J., & Velasco-Muñoz, J. F. (2018). Forest ecosystem services: An analysis of worldwide research. Forests, 9(8), 453. doi: 10.3390/F9080453.
• Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., López-Felices, B., & del Moral-Torres, F. (2020). Barriers and facilitators for adopting sustainable soil management practices in Mediterranean olive groves. Agronomy, 10(4), 506. doi: 10.3390/AGRONOMY10040506.
• Baciu, G. E., Dobrotă, C. E., & Apostol, E. N. (2021). Valuing forest ecosystem services. Why is an integrative approach needed? Forests, 12(6), 677. doi: 10.3390/F12060677.
• Bagheri, A., & Teymouri, A. (2022). Farmers' intended and actual adoption of soil and water conservation practices. Agricultural Water Management, 259, 107244. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107244.
• Bidegain, Í., López-Santiago, C. A., González, J. A., Martínez-Sastre, R., Ravera, F., & Cerda, C. (2020). Social valuation of Mediterranean cultural landscapes: Exploring landscape preferences and ecosystem services perceptions through a visual approach. Land, 9(10), 390. doi: 10.3390/LAND9100390.
• Burke, R., Sherwood, O. L., Clune, S., Carroll, R., McCabe, P. F., Kane, A., & Kacprzyk, J. (2022). Botanical boom: A new opportunity to promote the public appreciation of botany. Plants, People, Planet, 4(4), 326-334. doi: 10.1002/PPP3.10257.
• CBD Secretariat (2010). The strategic plan for biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi biodiversity targets.
• Chen, D., Zhao, Q., Jiang, P., & Li, M. (2022). Incorporating ecosystem services to assess progress towards sustainable development goals: A case study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China. Science of The Total Environment, 806(P3), 151277. doi: 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.151277.
• Ciftcioglu, G. C. (2020). Using a combination of Q-methodology and survey-based approach for assessing forest ecosystem services of Five Finger Mountains in Northern Cyprus. Sustainability Science, 15(6), 1789-1805. doi: 10.1007/s11625-020-00824-8.
• Coelho-Junior, M. G., de Oliveira, A. L., da Silva-Neto, E. C., Castor-Neto, T. C., Tavares, A. A. d. O., Basso, V. M., Turetta, A. P. D., Perkins, P. E., & de Carvalho, A. G. (2021). Exploring plural values of ecosystem services: Local peoples' perceptions and implications for protected area management in the Atlantic forest of Brazil. Sustainability, 13(3), 1019. doi: 10.3390/SU13031019.
• Coopmans, I., Dessein, J., Accatino, F., Antonioli, F., Bertolozzi-Caredio, D., Gavrilescu, C., Gradziuk, P., Manevska-Tasevska, G., Meuwissen, M., Peneva, M., Pettit, A., Urquhart, J., & Wauters, E. (2021). Understanding farm generational renewal and its influencing factors in Europe. Journal of Rural Studies, 86, 398- 409. doi: 10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2021.06.023.
• De Meo, I., Cantiani, M. G., Ferretti, F., & Paletto, A. (2018). Qualitative assessment of forest ecosystem services: The stakeholders' point of view in support of landscape planning. Forests, 9(8), 465. doi: 10.3390/F9080465.
• Dehghani Pour, M., Barati, A. A., Azadi, H., Scheffran, J., & Shirkhani, M. (2023). Analyzing forest residents' perception and knowledge of forest ecosystem services to guide forest management and biodiversity conservation. Forest Policy and Economics, 146, 102866. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102866.
• Ding, Y., Zhao, M., Li, Z., Xia, B., Atutova, Z., & Kobylkin, D. (2022). Impact of education for sustainable development on cognition, emotion, and behavior in protected areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 9769. doi: 10.3390/IJERPH19159769.
• Dou, Y., Zhen, L., De Groot, R., Du, B., & Yu, X. (2017). Assessing the importance of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas of Beijing municipality. Ecosystem Services, 24, 79-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.011.
• Ebner, M., Fontana, V., Schirpke, U., & Tappeiner, U. (2022). Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps. Ecosystem Services, 53, 101386. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101386.
• EUROPARC Federation (2022). European charter for sustainable tourism in protected areas. Retrieved from https://www.europarc.org/library/europarc-events-and-programmes/european-charter-for-sustainable-tourism/.
• European Commission (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal L 206, 22/07/1992 P. 0007 - 0050. Retrieved from https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31992L0043&from=EL.
• European Commission (2009). Directive 2009/147/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds. Document 02009L0147-20190626. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX 02009L0147-20190626.
• European Commission (2020). EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. Bringing nature back into our lives. Brussels, COM/2020/380 final. Document 52020DC0380. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex 52020DC0380.
• European Commission (2022). Attitudes of Europeans towards air quality. 2660 / SP524. Retrieved from https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2660.
• European Environment Agency (2022). EUNIS - Site factsheet for Sierra Maria - Los Vélez. Retrieved from https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/sites/ES6110003.
• Gardas, B. B., Raut, R. D., Cheikhrouhou, N., & Narkhede, B. E. (2019). A hybrid decision support system for analyzing challenges of the agricultural supply chain. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 18, 19-32. doi: 10.1016/J.SPC.2018.11.007.
• Giménez-Anaya, A., Bueno, C. G., Fernández-Llario, P., Fonseca, C., García-González, R., Herrero, J., Nores, C., & Rosell, C. (2020). What do we know about wild boar in Iberia? In F. M. Angelici & L. Rossi (Eds.). Problematic wildlife II: New conservation and management challenges in the human-wildlife interactions (pp. 251-271). Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-42335-3_9.
• Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr., F., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2011). Survey methodology. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Gusman, I., & Lois-González, R. C. (2021). Building common identities to promote territorial development in the north of Portugal. In R. J. Howlett & L. C. Jain (Eds.). Smart innovation, systems and technologies (pp. 1918-1927). Cham: Spring- er Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_181.
• Hasan, S. S., Zhen, L., Miah, M. G., Ahamed, T., & Samie, A. (2020). Impact of land use change on ecosystem services: A review. Environmental Development, 34, 100527. doi: 10.1016/J.ENVDEV.2020.100527.
• Hochmalová, M., Purwestri, R. C., Yongfeng, J., Jarský, V., Riedl, M., Yuanyong, D., & Hájek, M. (2022). Demand for forest ecosystem services: A comparison study in selected areas in the Czech Republic and China. European Journal of Forest Research, 141(5), 867-886. doi: 10.1007/s10342-022-01478-0.
• Ingram, J., Mills, J., Black, J. E., Chivers, C. A., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Elsen, A., Frac, M., López-Felices, B., Mayer-Gruner, P., Skaalsveen, K., Stolte, J., & Tits, M. (2022). Do agricultural advisory services in Europe have the capacity to support the transition to healthy soils? Land, 11(5), 599. doi: 10.3390/LAND11050599.
• Instituto Nacional de Estadística (2022a). Agrarian Cernsus 2020. Retrieved from https://www.ine.es/uc/eDjXL6At.
• Jamean, E. S., & Abas, A. (2023). Valuation of visitor perception of urban forest ecosystem services in Kuala Lumpur. Land, 12(3), 572. doi: 10.3390/land12030572.
• Janeczko, E., Banaś, J., Woźnicka, M., Zięba, S., Banaś, K. U., Janeczko, K., & Fialova, J. (2023). Sociocultural profile as a predictor of perceived importance of forest ecosystem services: A case study from Poland. Sustainability, 15(19), 14154. doi: 10.3390/su151914154.
• Kapsalis, V. C., Kyriakopoulos, G. L., & Aravossis, K. G. (2019). Investigation of ecosystem services and circular economy interactions under an inter-organizational framework. Energies, 12(9), 1734. doi: 10.3390/EN12091734.
• Karimi, A., Yazdandad, H., & Fagerholm, N. (2020). Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management. Ecosystem Services, 45, 101188. doi: 10.1016/J.ECOSER.2020.101188.
• Kičić, M., Haase, D., Marin, A. M., Vuletić, D., & Krajter Ostoić, S. (2022). Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of tree-based green infrastructure: A focus group participatory mapping in Zagreb, Croatia. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 78, 127767. doi: 10.1016/J.UFUG.2022.127767.
• Köninger, J., Panagos, P., Jones, A., Briones, M. J. I., & Orgiazzi, A. (2022). In defence of soil biodiversity: Towards an inclusive protection in the European Union. Biological Conservation, 268, 109475. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109475.
• Kyriakopoulos, G. L., & Kyriakopoulos, G. L. (2017). Ecosystems services valuation (ESV). Then and now: A review. In Advances in energy research (pp. 1-61). Nova Science Publishers.
• Kyriakopoulos, G. L., Solovev, D. B., Kuzora, S. S., & Terziev, V. (2020). Exploring research methods and dynamic systems toward economic development: An overview. In R. J. Howlett & L. C. Jain (Eds.). Smart innovation, systems and technologies (pp. 1-29). Cham: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-2244-4_1.
• Lazaridou, D. C., Michailidis, A., & Trigkas, M. (2021). Exploring environmental and economic costs and benefits of a forest-based circular economy: A literature review. Forests, 12(4), 436. doi: 10.3390/F12040436.
• Lin, J. C., Chiou, C. R., Chan, W. H., & Wu, M. S. (2021). Public perception of forest ecosystem services in Taiwan. Journal of Forest Research, 26(5), 344-350. doi: 10.1080/13416979.2021.1911023.
• López-Felices, B., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., & Piquer-Rodríguez, M. (2020). Contribution of irrigation ponds to the sustainability of agriculture. A review of worldwide research. Sustainability, 12(13), 5425. doi: 10.3390/su12135425.
• López-Sanz, J. M., Penelas-Leguía, A., Gutiérrez-Rodríguez, P., & Cuesta-Valiño, P. (2021). Rural tourism and the sustainable development goals. A study of the variables that most influence the behavior of the tourist. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 722973. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.722973.
• Maestre-Andrés, S., Calvet-Mir, L., & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2016). Sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services to improve protected area management: A multi-method approach applied to Catalonia, Spain. Regional Environmental Change, 16(3), 717-731. doi: 10.1007/s10113-015-0784-3.
• Maniatakou, S., Berg, H., Maneas, G., & Daw, T. M. (2020). Unravelling diverse values of ecosystem services: A socio-cultural valuation using Q methodology in Messenia, Greece. Sustainability, 12(24), 10320. doi: 10.3390/SU122410320.
• Mann, C., Loft, L., & Hernández-Morcillo, M. (2021). Assessing forest governance innovations in Europe: Needs, challenges and ways forward for sustainable forest ecosystem service provision. Ecosystem Services, 52, 101384. doi: 10.1016/J.ECOSER.2021.101384.
• Martín-López, B., Iniesta-Arandia, I., García-Llorente, M., Palomo, I., Casado- Arzuaga, I., Del Amo, D. G., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Oteros-Rozas, E., Palacios-Agundez, I., Willaarts, B., González, J. A., Santos-Martín, F., Onaindia, M., López-Santiago, C., & Montes, C. (2012). Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLOS ONE, 7(6), e38970. doi: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0038970.
• Meacham, M., Norström, A. V., Peterson, G. D., Andersson, E., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Crouzat, E., Cord, A. F., Enfors, E., Felipe-Lucia, M. R., Fischer, J., Hamann, M., Hanspach, J., Hicks, C., Jacobs, S., Lavorel, S., Locatelli, B., Martín-López, B., Plieninger, T., & Queiroz, C. (2022). Advancing research on ecosystem service bundles for comparative assessments and synthesis. Ecosystems and People, 18(1), 99-111. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2022.2032356.
• Meli, P., Vieli, L., Spirito, F., Reyes-Riveros, R., Gonzalez-Suhr, C., & Altamirano, A. (2023). The importance of considering human well-being to understand social preferences of ecosystem services. Journal for Nature Conservation, 72, 126344. doi: 10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126344.
• Mensah, S., Veldtman, R., Assogbadjo, A. E., Ham, C., Glèlè Kakaï, R., & Seifert, T. (2017). Ecosystem service importance and use vary with socio-environmental factors: a study from household-surveys in local communities of South Africa. Ecosystem Services, 23, 1-8. doi: 10.1016/J.ECOSER.2016.10.018.
• Mills, J., Gaskell, P., Ingram, J., Dwyer, J., Reed, M., & Short, C. (2017). Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour. Agriculture and Human Values, 34(2), 283-299. doi: 10.1007/s10460-016-9705-4.
• Nardi, P. M. (2018). Developing a questionnaire. In P. M. Nardi (Ed.) Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods (pp. 71-113). New York: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315172231.
• Ochoa-Noriega, C., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., & López-Felices, B. (2022). Analysis of the acceptance of sustainable practices in water management for the intensive agriculture of the Costa de Hermosillo (Mexico). Agronomy, 12(1), 154. doi: 10.3390/AGRONOMY12010154/S1.
• Oldekop, J. A., Holmes, G., Harris, W. E., & Evans, K. L. (2016). A global assessment of the social and conservation outcomes of protected areas. Conservation Biology, 30(1), 133-141. doi: 10.1111/COBI.12568.
• Paing, J. N., van Bussel, L. G. J., Gomez, R. A., & Hein, L. G. (2022). Ecosystem services through the lens of indigenous people in the highlands of Cordillera Region, Northern Philippines. Journal of Environmental Management, 308, 114597. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114597.
• Panzera, E. (2022). Cultural heritage and territorial identity. Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-94468-1_5.
• Pastorella, F., Giacovelli, G., Maesano, M., Paletto, A., Vivona, S., Veltri, A., Pellicone, G., & Mugnozza, G. S. (2016). Social perception of forest multifunctionality in southern Italy: The case of Calabria region. Journal of Forest Science, 62(8), 366-379. doi: 10.17221/45/2016-JFS.
• Pérez-Calderón, E., Miguel-Barrado, V., & Sánchez-Cubo, F. (2022). Tourism business in Spanish National Parks: A multidimensional perspective of sustainable tourism. Land, 11(2), 190. doi: 10.3390/LAND11020190.
• Pérez-Sánchez, D., Montes, M., Cardona-Almeida, C., Vargas-Marín, L. A., Enríquez-Acevedo, T., & Suarez, A. (2021). Keeping people in the loop: Socioeconomic valuation of dry forest ecosystem services in the Colombian Caribbean region. Journal of Arid Environments, 188, 104446. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104446.
• Peter, S., Le Provost, G., Mehring, M., Müller, T., & Manning, P. (2022). Cultural worldviews consistently explain bundles of ecosystem service prioritisation across rural Germany. People and Nature, 4(1), 218-230. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10277.
• Purwestri, R. C., Palátová, P., Hájek, M., Dudík, R., Jarský, V., & Riedl, M. (2023). Public perception of the performance of Czech forest ecosystem services. Environmental Sciences Europe, 35(1), 89. doi: 10.1186/s12302-023-00802-8.
• Rastegar, R., Breakey, N., Driml, S., & Ruhanen, L. (2022). Does tourism development shift residents' attitudes to the environment and protected area management? Tourism Recreation Research. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/02508281.2022.2106100.
• Rosenthal, M. (2016). Qualitative research methods: Why, when, and how to conduct interviews and focus groups in pharmacy research. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(4), 509-516. doi: 10.1016/J.CPTL.2016.03.021.
• Sapbamrer, R., & Thammachai, A. (2021). A systematic review of factors influencing farmers' adoption of organic farming. Sustainability, 13(7), 3842. doi: 10.3390/SU13073842.
• Segado-Castro, G., & Zamora-Díaz, R. (2016). Forest conflicts and public intervention. The case of the forests of María and Vélez Blanco (Almeria, Spain). 1879-1901. Forest Policy and Economics, 70, 80-90. doi: 10.1016/J.FORPOL.2016.05.020.
• Schoonhoven, Y., & Runhaar, H. (2018). Conditions for the adoption of agro-ecological farming practices: A holistic framework illustrated with the case of almond farming in Andalusia. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 16(6), 442-454. doi:10.1080/14735903.2018.1537664.
• Shishany, S., Al-Assaf, A. A., Majdalawi, M., Tabieh, M., & Tadros, M. (2022). Factors influencing local communities relational values to forest protected areas in Jordan. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 41(8), 659-677. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2020.1847665.
• Silva, S., Silva, L. F., & Vieira, A. (2023). Protected areas and nature-based tourism: A 30-year bibliometric review. Sustainability, 15(15), 11698. doi: 10.3390/su151511698.
• Stipoljev, S., Safner, T., Gančević, P., Galov, A., Stuhne, T., Svetličić, I., Grignolio, S., Cassinello, J., & Šprem, N. (2021). Population structure and genetic diversity of non-native aoudad populations. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 12300, 1-9. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-91678-2.
• Stratton, S. J. (2018). Likert Data. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 33(2), 117-118. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X18000237.
• Streimikiene, D., Svagzdiene, B., Jasinskas, E., & Simanavicius, A. (2021). Sustainable tourism development and competitiveness: The systematic literature review. Sustainable Development, 29(1), 259-271. doi: 10.1002/SD.2133.
• Toro-Mujica, P., & Riveros, J. L. (2021). Sheep production systems in Chilean Patagonia. Characterization and typology. Small Ruminant Research, 204, 106516. doi: 10.1016/J.SMALLRUMRES.2021.106516.
• Tovar-Tique, Y. P., Escobedo, F. J., & Clerici, N. (2021). Community-based importance and quantification of ecosystem services, disservices, drivers, and neo-tropical dry forests in a rural Colombian municipality. Forests, 12(7), 919. doi: 10.3390/f12070919.
• UN General Assembly (2017). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, A/RES/70/1.
• UNEP-WCMC, & IUCN (2022). Protected planet: The world database on protected Areas (WDPA).
• Vanino, S., Pirelli, T., Di Bene, C., Bøe, F., Castanheira, N., Chenu, C., Cornu, S., Feiza, V., Fornara, D., Heller, O., Kasparinskis, R., Keesstra, S., Lasorella, M. V., Madenoğlu, S., Meurer, K. H. E., O'Sullivan, L., Peter, N., Piccini, C., Siebielec, G., Smreczak, B., Thorsøe, M. H., & Farina, R. (2023). Barriers and opportunities of soil knowledge to address soil challenges: Stakeholders' perspectives across Europe. Journal of Environmental Management, 325, 116581. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116581.
• Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., López-Felices, B., & Balacco, G. (2022a). Adopting sustainable water management practices in agriculture based on stakeholder preferences. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 68, 317-326. doi: 10.17221/203/2022-AGRICECON.
• Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Schoenemann, M., & López-Felices, B. (2022b). The economic valuation of ecosystem services: Bibliometric analysis. Oeconomia Copernicana, 13(4), 977-1014. doi: 10.24136/OC.2022.028.
• Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Schoenemann, M., & López-Felices, B. (2022c). An analysis of the worldwide research on the socio-cultural valuation of forest ecosystem services. Sustainability, 14(4), 2089. doi: 10.3390/SU14042089.
• Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Mendoza, J. M. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., & Gallego-Schmid, A. (2021). Circular economy implementation in the agricultural sector: Definition, strategies and indicators. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 170, 105618. doi: 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2021.105618.
• Vrontis, D., Christofi, M., Giacosa, E., & Serravalle, F. (2022). Sustainable development in tourism: A stakeholder analysis of the Langhe Region. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 46(5), 846-878. doi: 10.1177/1096348020982353.
• Walz, A., Schmidt, K., Ruiz-Frau, A., Nicholas, K. A., Bierry, A., de Vries Lentsch, A., Dyankov, A., Joyce, D., Liski, A. H., Marbà, N., Rosário, I. T., & Scholte, S. S. K. (2019). Sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services for operational ecosystem management: Mapping applications by decision contexts in Europe. Regional Environmental Change, 19(8), 2245-2259. doi: 10.1007/s10113-019-01506-7.
• Wiesli, T. X., Hammer, T., & Knaus, F. (2022). Improving quality of life for residents of biosphere reserves and nature parks: Management recommendations from Switzerland. Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy, 18(1), 601-615. doi: 10.1080/15487733.2022.2100128.
• Xu, W., Xiao, Y., Zhang, J., Yang, W., Zhang, L., Hull, V., Wang, Z., Zheng, H., Liu, J., Polasky, S., Jiang, L., Xiao, Y., Shi, X., Rao, E., Lu, F., Wang, X., Daily, G. C., & Ouyang, Z. (2017). Strengthening protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(7), 1601-1606. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1620503114.
• Zabala, J. A., Martínez-Paz, J. M., & Alcon, F. (2021). A comprehensive approach for agroecosystem services and disservices valuation. Science of the Total Environment, 768, 144859. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144859.
• Zhang, H., Pang, Q., Long, H., Zhu, H., Gao, X., Li, X., Jiang, X., & Liu, K. (2019). Local residents' perceptions for ecosystem services: A case study of Fenghe river watershed. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(19), 3602. doi: 10.3390/IJERPH16193602.
• Zoderer, B. M., Lupo Stanghellini, P. S., Tasser, E., Walde, J., Wieser, H., & Tappeiner, U. (2016). Exploring socio-cultural values of ecosystem service categories in the Central Alps: The influence of socio-demographic factors and landscape type. Regional Environmental Change, 16(7), 2033-2044. doi: 10.1007/S10113-015-0922-Y.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.24136/oc.2023.037