Applying Cultural Ecosystem Services in Public Land and Water Management
Dates
Start Date
2016
End Date
2018
Summary
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) as “the non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences.” The ecosystems within which human cultures exist have always influenced the evolution of those cultures. At the same time, human systems continually shape their surrounding environment and modify the availability of certain valued services. While there are specific cultural ‘‘services’’ that ecosystems provide (such as aesthetic enjoyment, recreation, spiritual fulfillment, and intellectual development), it is difficult to separate these services or their combined influence on human [...]
Summary
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) as “the non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences.” The ecosystems within which human cultures exist have always influenced the evolution of those cultures. At the same time, human systems continually shape their surrounding environment and modify the availability of certain valued services. While there are specific cultural ‘‘services’’ that ecosystems provide (such as aesthetic enjoyment, recreation, spiritual fulfillment, and intellectual development), it is difficult to separate these services or their combined influence on human well-being (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). The importance of cultural services and values is not easily integrated into landscape planning and management. Public land and water management decision making processes could benefit from a better understanding of the way in which societies manipulate ecosystems and then relate that to cultural, spiritual, and religious belief systems.
Without considering the intangible dimensions of CES, management and policy decisions that are seeming desirable for a natural resource might be missing underlying complicated situations. If researchers and managers hope to fully understand these complicated situations, a broader range of social science tools, extending beyond economic valuation of ecosystem services, need to be applied. These broader methods are necessary to account for a more holistic understanding of: 1) the tangible benefits derived from traditional ecological knowledge (such as medicinal plants and local species of food); 2) the intangible benefits (such as spiritual and religious values) derived from ecosystems; and 3) the linkages between ecological processes and social processes.
This study has two specific objectives that will enable improved integration of CES information in federal ecological restoration decision-making. The first objective is to design a methodological approach that incorporates tools and best practices from previous CES research, as well as restoration planning protocols. Best practices include participatory research methods, which facilitate improved credibility and validity of indicators or categories identified to represent value in specific, localized cultural and ecological contexts. At the same time, inclusion of new and innovative methods for CES content-generation (e.g., identification, measurement, and/or representation of cultural values and services) can increase ease of integration of non-quantitative information in decision-making. The second objective of the proposed study is to pilot the resulting methodological framework to test its utility and feasibility within different sociocultural and ecological contexts. Case study locations will be determined based on identification of mutual interest with leaders of local organizations and governing bodies at several potential sites.
FY17 Objectives
Develop and refine a flexible methodological framework for participatory CES assessment;
Identify mutual interest in carrying out CES pilot stud(ies) associated with one or more restoration case stud(ies);
Pilot the methodological framework with communities and stakeholder groups associated with one or more restoration cases.
FY 17 Expected Deliverables
Literature review and development of a flexible methodological framework for use in participatory CES pilot stud(ies);
Presentation of the methodological framework at the 2016 ACES (A Community on Ecosystem Services) conference in Jacksonville, Florida (Dec. 5-9 2016);
A peer-reviewed journal article detailing the development and refinement of the methodological framework;