Mapping cultural ecosystem services: A framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU
Introduction
The MA, 2005 and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity initiative (TEEB, 2010) have greatly contributed to the introduction of the ecosystem service concept in multiple policies and initiatives at global and European level. Examples include the Aichi Targets of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, and the EU Blueprint to safeguard Europe's Waters. This has created the need to operationalise the concept, both in terms of geographical mapping and economic valuation, so that ecosystem services can be effectively incorporated into policy-making. Many initiatives are supporting the difficult path to an effective and harmonised use of the ecosystem service concept, as a key step towards resource efficiency as a common goal of the above mentioned policy actions (EC, 2011).
Among the main ecosystem services groups identified by the (MA, 2005) and CiCES (Maes at al., 2013; Haines-Young and Potschin, 2013) cultural ecosystem services are those that due to their intangible nature and dependence from social constructs are particularly challenging to map and assess (Daniel et al., 2012).
Cultural ecosystem services are defined as “non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation and aesthetic experience“(MA, 2003, Chapter 2, p. 58). Examples of cultural ecosystem services are: appreciation of natural scenery; opportunities for tourism and recreational activities; inspiration for culture, art and design; sense of place and belonging; spiritual and religious inspiration; education and science (De Groot et al., 2010).
The work presented in this paper aims to provide a framework for addressing outdoor recreation as an example of cultural ecosystem services, and it is part of a larger effort to set up tools and methods for the spatially explicit evaluation of ecosystem services in support of the Biodiversity Strategy 2020 (Maes et al., 2011a). Therefore, a model is developed, to assess the availability of outdoor recreation potential to citizens, at the continental scale. Outdoor recreation was selected due to its importance for millions of people and because it is a service for which the geographical distribution of ecosystems is particularly important. More specifically, the type of recreation addressed in the paper concerns outdoor activities generating benefits in daily life (day leisure visits), spanning from having a walk in the closest green urban area, to a short bike ride in a local natural park, to a day trip with the sole purpose to experience nature. Long distance (>100 km) travelling is not included in the exercise as the presented analysis focuses on resident population and day trips.
The proposed methodology is based on three components:
- •
the modelling of the ecosystem function, through a recreation potential index;
- •
the characterisation of the ecosystem service through the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum;
- •
an assessment of potential demand.
In combination these components are used to evaluate the extent to which European citizens can benefit from ecosystems through recreation.
Section snippets
Characterising outdoor recreation as an ecosystem service
Outdoor recreation is addressed in this paper from the perspective of ecosystem services; therefore, we include all ecosystem types in the analysis, irrespective of intensity of use and alteration by humans, including natural, semi-natural and more intensively managed ecosystems. All ecosystems are considered to be potential providers of the recreation service, irrespective from their conservation status, though the range of provision changes according to ecosystem characteristics.
The
Results
The results will be presented in the following order: (1) modelling the potential of ecosystems to provide outdoor recreation as ecosystem function, (2) characterising the spatial distribution of the potential ecosystem service, and (3) assessing the distribution of the potential demand.
Fig. 3 shows the RPI, which corresponds to the ecosystem function. It is a ranking of the potential recreation provision in the EU, independently whether such potential is or can be used. Ecosystems highly
Discussion
The approach presented in this paper couples an analysis of potential recreation provision, accessibility and potential demand. In our view this is an important aspect because visitor surveys clearly show that people typically do not travel long distances for this type of activities. Therefore they often choose their destinations among a limited set of options available around their homes. Choices on where to actually go are driven by many factors (available time, age, purpose of the trip,
Conclusions
In this paper we propose a method for mapping and assessing outdoor recreation as an ecosystem service at continental level. This is measured in terms of extent and quality of citizens’ access to nature, considering all ecosystems as potential providers of the service.
The mapping is carried out in three separate steps, each of which provides insight to the major components of the ecosystem service flow:
- •
mapping of the ecosystem function (the recreation potential) illustrates the degree to which
Acknowledgements
This study was developed in the frame of the PEER Research on EcoSystem Services (PRESS) project. We wish to thank the two reviewers for their thorough reading and their insightful comments and suggestions.
References (56)
- et al.
Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: the case of Poland
Forest Pol. Econ.
(2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed
Biol. Conservat.
(2008)- et al.
Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making
Ecol. Complex.
(2010) - et al.
Evaluating change in agricultural landscape pattern between 1980 and 2000 in the Loess hilly region of Ansai County, China
Agr. Ecosyst. Environ.
(2006) - et al.
A method for automatic generation of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum in New Zealand
Appl. Geogr.
(2009) - et al.
GIS-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(2012) - et al.
Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe
Biol. Conservat.
(2012) - et al.
Active-transport walking behavior: destinations, durations, distances
J. Transport Geogr.
(2013) - et al.
Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference
J. Environ. Manag.
(2009) - et al.
An aggregation framework to link indicators associated with multifunctional land use to the stakeholder evaluation of policy options
Ecol. Indicat.
(2011)
Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: a literature review
Landsc. Urban Plann.
J. Environ. Manage.
Linking pattern and process in cultural landscapes. An empirical study based on spatially explicit indicators
Land Use Pol.
Walking distance by trip purpose and population subgroups
Am. J. Prev. Med.
Spatial covariance between biodiversity and other ecosystem service priorities
J. Appl. Ecol.
CORINE Land Cover Technical Guide–Addendum 2000. Technical report No 40
A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments
BMC Public Health
Assessing Future Recreation Demand. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 404
Estimating the aggregate value of forest recreation in a regional context
J. Forest Econ.
The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Framework for Planning, Management, and Research. General Technical Report PNW-98 December 1979
Experiencing the restorative components of wilderness environments: does congestion interfere and does length of exposure Matter?
Environ. Behav.
Cultural ecosystem services: potential contributions to the ecosystems services science and policy agenda
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
COM(2011)21 Final – a resource-efficient Europe–flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy
COM(2013)249 Final - green infrastructure (GI) — enhancing Europe's natural capital
European inventory of nationally designated areas
A population density grid of the European Union
Popul. Environ.
Accessibility Measures: Review and Applications. RIVM report 408505 006
Assessing quality of rural areas in the Netherlands: finding the most important indicators for recreation
Landsc. Urban Plann.
Cited by (362)
Utilizing supply-demand bundles in Nature-based Recreation offers insights into specific strategies for sustainable tourism management
2024, Science of the Total EnvironmentConsistent ecosystem service bundles emerge across global mountain, island and delta systems
2024, Ecosystem ServicesAssessing grassland cultural ecosystem services supply and demand for promoting the sustainable realization of grassland cultural values
2024, Science of the Total Environment