Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia

被引:19
作者
Matzek, Virginia [1 ]
Wilson, Kerrie A. [2 ,3 ]
Kragt, Marit [4 ]
机构
[1] Santa Clara Univ, Dept Environm Studies & Sci, Santa Clara, CA 95053 USA
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Biol Sci, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[3] ARC Ctr Excellence Environm Decis, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[4] Univ Western Australia, Sch Agr & Environm, Perth, WA, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会; 美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Conservation planning; Natural resource management; Prioritization; Stakeholders; Survey; Willingness to pay; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; PUBLIC PREFERENCES; BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES; SOCIAL PREFERENCES; DECISION-MAKING; TRADE-OFFS; VALUES; LANDSCAPES; VALUATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.005
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Conservation biology and restoration ecology have historically focused on promoting biodiversity and safeguarding endangered species. However, the ecosystem services (ES) concept has given these fields a new, anthropocentric rationale: promoting human wellbeing. Here we investigate how the ES concept has penetrated decision making and public support for ecological restoration in Australia, by examining the national government's funding priorities, land managers' project goals, and the public's willingness to pay for restoration. We find that national funding priorities and local project implementation have thoroughly mainstreamed the ES concept, and that the public is generally supportive of ES goals. More than half of projects awarded funding, and two-thirds of land managers' implemented projects, had explicit ES goals. Among managers who participated in semi-structured interviews, 45% rated ES aims as at least as important as biodiversity aims in their projects. The public was more willing to donate to a restoration scenario that included ES than one that did not, and 41% of the public chose an ES as the preferred outcome of restoration. Across all groups, provisioning services were the least preferred ES outcome, compared to regulating or cultural services. Our results indicate that ES are now important rationales for restoration funding and implementation.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 86
页数:8
相关论文
共 82 条
  • [1] Selecting cost-effective areas for restoration of ecosystem services
    Adame, M. F.
    Hermoso, V.
    Perhans, K.
    Lovelock, C. E.
    Herrera-Silveira, J. A.
    [J]. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2015, 29 (02) : 493 - 502
  • [2] Application of an ecosystem function framework to perceptions of community woodlands
    Agbenyega, Olivia
    Burgess, Paul J.
    Cook, Matthew
    Morris, Joe
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2009, 26 (03) : 551 - 557
  • [3] The relationship between ecological restoration and the ecosystem services concept
    Alexander, Sasha
    Aronson, James
    Whaley, Oliver
    Lamb, David
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2016, 21 (01):
  • [4] Using cultural ecosystem services to inform restoration priorities in the Laurentian Great Lakes
    Allan, J. David
    Smith, Sigrid D. P.
    McIntyre, Peter B.
    Joseph, Christine A.
    Dickinson, Caitlin E.
    Marino, Adrienne L.
    Biel, Reuben G.
    Olson, James C.
    Doran, Patrick J.
    Rutherford, Edward S.
    Adkins, Jeffrey E.
    Adeyemo, Adesola O.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2015, 13 (08) : 418 - 424
  • [5] Fern gathering on the San Bernardino National Forest: Cultural versus commercial values among Korean and Japanese participants
    Anderson, JA
    Blahna, DJ
    Chavez, DJ
    [J]. SOCIETY & NATURAL RESOURCES, 2000, 13 (08) : 747 - 762
  • [6] Designing coastal conservation to deliver ecosystem and human well-being benefits
    Annis, Gust M.
    Pearsall, Douglas R.
    Kahl, Katherine J.
    Washburn, Erika L.
    May, Christopher A.
    Taylor, Rachael Franks
    Cole, James B.
    Ewert, David N.
    Game, Edward T.
    Doran, Patrick J.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (02):
  • [7] [Anonymous], 2005, Ecosystems and Human Well being synthesis
  • [8] [Anonymous], 2010, EC EC BIOD MAINSTR E
  • [9] [Anonymous], 2015, J ENVIRON PLANN MAN, DOI DOI 10.1080/09640568.2013.875463
  • [10] Use of monetary wetland value estimates by EPA Clean Water Act Section 404 regulators
    Arnold, Gwen
    [J]. WETLANDS ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2013, 21 (02) : 117 - 129