View in EDS

Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice
Authors: Saarikoski, Heli, Primmer, Eeva, Saarela, Sanna-Riikka, Antunes, Paula, Aszalos, Reka, Baro, Francesc, Berry, Pam, Garcia Blanko, Gemma, Gomez-Baggethun, Erik, Carvalho, Laurence, Dick, Jan, Dunford, Robert, Hanzu, Mihail, Harrison, Paula A., Izakovicova, Zita, Kertesz, Miklos, Kopperoinen, Leena, Kohler, Berit, Langemeyer, Johannes, Lapola, David, Liquete, Camino, Luque, Sandra, Mederly, Peter, Niemelä, Jari, Palomo, Ignacio, Martinez Pastur, Guillermo, Luis Peri, Pablo, Preda, Elena, Priess, Joerg A., Santos, Rui, Schleyer, Christian, Turkelboom, Francis, Vadineanu, Angheluta, Verheyden, Wim, Vikstrom, Suvi, Young, Juliette
Contributors: Ecosystems and Environment Research Programme, Environmental Sciences
Publisher Information: Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co
Publication Year: 2021
Collection: Helsingfors Universitet: HELDA – Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto
Subject Terms: NET CLIMATE IMPACTS, DECISION-MAKING, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, EUROPEAN-UNION, POLICY, MANAGEMENT, LESSONS, GOVERNANCE, SCIENCE, CONSERVATION, Environmental sciences
Description: The promise that ecosystem service assessments will contribute to better decision-making is not yet proven. We analyse how knowledge on ecosystem services is actually used to inform land and water management in 22 case studies covering different social-ecological systems in European and Latin American countries. None of the case studies reported instrumental use of knowledge in a sense that ecosystem service knowledge would have served as an impartial arbiter between policy options. Yet, in most cases, there was some evidence of conceptual learning as a result of close interaction between researchers, practitioners and stakeholders. We observed several factors that constrained knowledge uptake, including competing interests and political agendas, scientific disputes, professional norms and competencies, and lack of vertical and horizontal integration. Ecosystem knowledge played a small role particularly in those planning and policy-making situations where it challenged established interests and the current distribution of benefits from ecosystems. The factors that facilitated knowledge use included application of transparent participatory methods, social capital, policy champions and clear synergies between ecosystem services and human well-being. The results are aligned with previous studies which have emphasized the importance of building local capacity, ownership and trust for the long-term success of ecosystem service research. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; Peer reviewed
Document Type: article in journal/newspaper
File Description: application/pdf
Language: English
Relation: The authors wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. Most importantly, we want to acknowledge the participants in the case studies whose input was instrumental for this research project. The research was carried out in the project Operationalisation of Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services: From Concepts to Real-world Applications (OpenNESS), funded by the European Union FP7 (EC-308428). Heli Saarikoski and Eeva Primmer also want to acknowledge the support of the Academy of Finland (project 275772).; http://hdl.handle.net/10138/324536; 85028981681; 000428532300014
Availability: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/324536
Rights: cc_by ; info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess ; openAccess
Accession Number: edsbas.DD5B2F29
Database: BASE
Description
Abstract:The promise that ecosystem service assessments will contribute to better decision-making is not yet proven. We analyse how knowledge on ecosystem services is actually used to inform land and water management in 22 case studies covering different social-ecological systems in European and Latin American countries. None of the case studies reported instrumental use of knowledge in a sense that ecosystem service knowledge would have served as an impartial arbiter between policy options. Yet, in most cases, there was some evidence of conceptual learning as a result of close interaction between researchers, practitioners and stakeholders. We observed several factors that constrained knowledge uptake, including competing interests and political agendas, scientific disputes, professional norms and competencies, and lack of vertical and horizontal integration. Ecosystem knowledge played a small role particularly in those planning and policy-making situations where it challenged established interests and the current distribution of benefits from ecosystems. The factors that facilitated knowledge use included application of transparent participatory methods, social capital, policy champions and clear synergies between ecosystem services and human well-being. The results are aligned with previous studies which have emphasized the importance of building local capacity, ownership and trust for the long-term success of ecosystem service research. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; Peer reviewed