(Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support

David Nicholas Barton, Eszter Kelemen, Jan Dick, Berta Martín-López , Erik Gomez-Baggethun, Sander Jacobs, C.M.A. Hendriks, Mette Termansen, M. Garcia-Llorente, Eeva Primmer, Rob Dunford, Paula Harrison, Francis Turkelboom, Heli Saarikoski, J. van Dijk, Graciela M. Rusch, Ignacio Palomo, Vesa Johannes Yli-Pelkonen, Laurence Carvalho, Francesc Baro & 17 muut Johannes Langemeyer, Jan Tjalling van der Wal, Peter Mederly, Joerg Priess, Sandra Luque, Pam Berry, Rui Santos, David Odee, Guillermo Martinez Pastur, Gemma Garcia Blanco, Sanna-Riikka Saarela, Diana Silaghi, György Pataki, Fabio Masi, Angheluta Vadineanu, Raktima Mukhopadhyay, David Lapola

Tutkimustuotos: ArtikkelijulkaisuArtikkeliTieteellinenvertaisarvioitu

Kuvaus

The operational challenges of integrated ecosystem service (ES) appraisals are determined by study purpose, system complexity and uncertainty, decision-makers' requirements for reliability and accuracy of methods, and approaches to stakeholder-science interaction in different decision contexts. To explore these factors we defined an information gap hypothesis, based on a theory of cumulative uncertainty in ES appraisals. When decision context requirements for accuracy and reliability increase, and the expected uncertainty of the ES appraisal methods also increases, the likelihood of methods being used is expected to drop, creating a potential information gap in governance. In order to test this information gap hypothesis, we evaluate 26 case studies and 80 ecosystem services appraisals in a large integrated EU research project. We find some support for a decreasing likelihood of ES appraisal methods coinciding with increasing accuracy and reliability requirements of the decision-support context, and with increasing uncertainty. We do not find that information costs are the explanation for this information gap, but rather that the research project interacted mostly with stakeholders outside the most decision-relevant contexts. The paper discusses how alternative definitions of integrated valuation can lead to different interpretations of decision-support information, and different governance approaches to dealing with uncertainty. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Alkuperäiskielienglanti
LehtiEcosystem Services
Vuosikerta29
Sivut529-541
Sivumäärä13
ISSN2212-0416
DOI - pysyväislinkit
TilaJulkaistu - 21 helmikuuta 2018
OKM-julkaisutyyppiA1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä, vertaisarvioitu

Tieteenalat

  • 1172 Ympäristötiede

Lainaa tätä

Barton, D. N., Kelemen, E., Dick, J., Martín-López , B., Gomez-Baggethun, E., Jacobs, S., ... Lapola, D. (2018). (Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. Ecosystem Services, 29, 529-541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021
Barton, David Nicholas ; Kelemen, Eszter ; Dick, Jan ; Martín-López , Berta ; Gomez-Baggethun, Erik ; Jacobs, Sander ; Hendriks, C.M.A. ; Termansen, Mette ; Garcia-Llorente, M. ; Primmer, Eeva ; Dunford, Rob ; Harrison, Paula ; Turkelboom, Francis ; Saarikoski, Heli ; van Dijk, J. ; Rusch, Graciela M. ; Palomo, Ignacio ; Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa Johannes ; Carvalho, Laurence ; Baro, Francesc ; Langemeyer, Johannes ; Tjalling van der Wal, Jan ; Mederly, Peter ; Priess, Joerg ; Luque, Sandra ; Berry, Pam ; Santos, Rui ; Odee, David ; Martinez Pastur, Guillermo ; Garcia Blanco, Gemma ; Saarela, Sanna-Riikka ; Silaghi, Diana ; Pataki, György ; Masi, Fabio ; Vadineanu, Angheluta ; Mukhopadhyay, Raktima ; Lapola, David. / (Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. Julkaisussa: Ecosystem Services. 2018 ; Vuosikerta 29. Sivut 529-541.
@article{7d3b9c9b64db4a838035f8feade30630,
title = "(Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support",
abstract = "The operational challenges of integrated ecosystem service (ES) appraisals are determined by study purpose, system complexity and uncertainty, decision-makers' requirements for reliability and accuracy of methods, and approaches to stakeholder-science interaction in different decision contexts. To explore these factors we defined an information gap hypothesis, based on a theory of cumulative uncertainty in ES appraisals. When decision context requirements for accuracy and reliability increase, and the expected uncertainty of the ES appraisal methods also increases, the likelihood of methods being used is expected to drop, creating a potential information gap in governance. In order to test this information gap hypothesis, we evaluate 26 case studies and 80 ecosystem services appraisals in a large integrated EU research project. We find some support for a decreasing likelihood of ES appraisal methods coinciding with increasing accuracy and reliability requirements of the decision-support context, and with increasing uncertainty. We do not find that information costs are the explanation for this information gap, but rather that the research project interacted mostly with stakeholders outside the most decision-relevant contexts. The paper discusses how alternative definitions of integrated valuation can lead to different interpretations of decision-support information, and different governance approaches to dealing with uncertainty. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "1172 Environmental sciences, ecosystem services, integrated valuation, ecosystem service appraisal, ecosystem service governance, information costs, uncertainty, valuation, ecosystem services cascade, economic valuation, decisions, cascade, management, framework, context, tool",
author = "Barton, {David Nicholas} and Eszter Kelemen and Jan Dick and Berta Mart{\'i}n-L{\'o}pez and Erik Gomez-Baggethun and Sander Jacobs and C.M.A. Hendriks and Mette Termansen and M. Garcia-Llorente and Eeva Primmer and Rob Dunford and Paula Harrison and Francis Turkelboom and Heli Saarikoski and {van Dijk}, J. and Rusch, {Graciela M.} and Ignacio Palomo and Yli-Pelkonen, {Vesa Johannes} and Laurence Carvalho and Francesc Baro and Johannes Langemeyer and {Tjalling van der Wal}, Jan and Peter Mederly and Joerg Priess and Sandra Luque and Pam Berry and Rui Santos and David Odee and {Martinez Pastur}, Guillermo and {Garcia Blanco}, Gemma and Sanna-Riikka Saarela and Diana Silaghi and Gy{\"o}rgy Pataki and Fabio Masi and Angheluta Vadineanu and Raktima Mukhopadhyay and David Lapola",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "21",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "529--541",
journal = "Ecosystem Services",
issn = "2212-0416",
publisher = "Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co",

}

Barton, DN, Kelemen, E, Dick, J, Martín-López , B, Gomez-Baggethun, E, Jacobs, S, Hendriks, CMA, Termansen, M, Garcia-Llorente, M, Primmer, E, Dunford, R, Harrison, P, Turkelboom, F, Saarikoski, H, van Dijk, J, Rusch, GM, Palomo, I, Yli-Pelkonen, VJ, Carvalho, L, Baro, F, Langemeyer, J, Tjalling van der Wal, J, Mederly, P, Priess, J, Luque, S, Berry, P, Santos, R, Odee, D, Martinez Pastur, G, Garcia Blanco, G, Saarela, S-R, Silaghi, D, Pataki, G, Masi, F, Vadineanu, A, Mukhopadhyay, R & Lapola, D 2018, '(Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support', Ecosystem Services, Vuosikerta 29, Sivut 529-541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021

(Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. / Barton, David Nicholas; Kelemen, Eszter; Dick, Jan; Martín-López , Berta; Gomez-Baggethun, Erik; Jacobs, Sander; Hendriks, C.M.A.; Termansen, Mette; Garcia-Llorente, M.; Primmer, Eeva; Dunford, Rob; Harrison, Paula; Turkelboom, Francis; Saarikoski, Heli; van Dijk, J.; Rusch, Graciela M.; Palomo, Ignacio; Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa Johannes; Carvalho, Laurence; Baro, Francesc; Langemeyer, Johannes; Tjalling van der Wal, Jan; Mederly, Peter; Priess, Joerg; Luque, Sandra; Berry, Pam; Santos, Rui; Odee, David; Martinez Pastur, Guillermo; Garcia Blanco, Gemma; Saarela, Sanna-Riikka; Silaghi, Diana; Pataki, György; Masi, Fabio; Vadineanu, Angheluta; Mukhopadhyay, Raktima; Lapola, David.

julkaisussa: Ecosystem Services, Vuosikerta 29, 21.02.2018, s. 529-541.

Tutkimustuotos: ArtikkelijulkaisuArtikkeliTieteellinenvertaisarvioitu

TY - JOUR

T1 - (Dis) integrated valuation - Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support

AU - Barton, David Nicholas

AU - Kelemen, Eszter

AU - Dick, Jan

AU - Martín-López , Berta

AU - Gomez-Baggethun, Erik

AU - Jacobs, Sander

AU - Hendriks, C.M.A.

AU - Termansen, Mette

AU - Garcia-Llorente, M.

AU - Primmer, Eeva

AU - Dunford, Rob

AU - Harrison, Paula

AU - Turkelboom, Francis

AU - Saarikoski, Heli

AU - van Dijk, J.

AU - Rusch, Graciela M.

AU - Palomo, Ignacio

AU - Yli-Pelkonen, Vesa Johannes

AU - Carvalho, Laurence

AU - Baro, Francesc

AU - Langemeyer, Johannes

AU - Tjalling van der Wal, Jan

AU - Mederly, Peter

AU - Priess, Joerg

AU - Luque, Sandra

AU - Berry, Pam

AU - Santos, Rui

AU - Odee, David

AU - Martinez Pastur, Guillermo

AU - Garcia Blanco, Gemma

AU - Saarela, Sanna-Riikka

AU - Silaghi, Diana

AU - Pataki, György

AU - Masi, Fabio

AU - Vadineanu, Angheluta

AU - Mukhopadhyay, Raktima

AU - Lapola, David

PY - 2018/2/21

Y1 - 2018/2/21

N2 - The operational challenges of integrated ecosystem service (ES) appraisals are determined by study purpose, system complexity and uncertainty, decision-makers' requirements for reliability and accuracy of methods, and approaches to stakeholder-science interaction in different decision contexts. To explore these factors we defined an information gap hypothesis, based on a theory of cumulative uncertainty in ES appraisals. When decision context requirements for accuracy and reliability increase, and the expected uncertainty of the ES appraisal methods also increases, the likelihood of methods being used is expected to drop, creating a potential information gap in governance. In order to test this information gap hypothesis, we evaluate 26 case studies and 80 ecosystem services appraisals in a large integrated EU research project. We find some support for a decreasing likelihood of ES appraisal methods coinciding with increasing accuracy and reliability requirements of the decision-support context, and with increasing uncertainty. We do not find that information costs are the explanation for this information gap, but rather that the research project interacted mostly with stakeholders outside the most decision-relevant contexts. The paper discusses how alternative definitions of integrated valuation can lead to different interpretations of decision-support information, and different governance approaches to dealing with uncertainty. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

AB - The operational challenges of integrated ecosystem service (ES) appraisals are determined by study purpose, system complexity and uncertainty, decision-makers' requirements for reliability and accuracy of methods, and approaches to stakeholder-science interaction in different decision contexts. To explore these factors we defined an information gap hypothesis, based on a theory of cumulative uncertainty in ES appraisals. When decision context requirements for accuracy and reliability increase, and the expected uncertainty of the ES appraisal methods also increases, the likelihood of methods being used is expected to drop, creating a potential information gap in governance. In order to test this information gap hypothesis, we evaluate 26 case studies and 80 ecosystem services appraisals in a large integrated EU research project. We find some support for a decreasing likelihood of ES appraisal methods coinciding with increasing accuracy and reliability requirements of the decision-support context, and with increasing uncertainty. We do not find that information costs are the explanation for this information gap, but rather that the research project interacted mostly with stakeholders outside the most decision-relevant contexts. The paper discusses how alternative definitions of integrated valuation can lead to different interpretations of decision-support information, and different governance approaches to dealing with uncertainty. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

KW - 1172 Environmental sciences

KW - ecosystem services

KW - integrated valuation

KW - ecosystem service appraisal

KW - ecosystem service governance

KW - information costs

KW - uncertainty

KW - valuation

KW - ecosystem services cascade

KW - economic valuation

KW - decisions

KW - cascade

KW - management

KW - framework

KW - context

KW - tool

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 529

EP - 541

JO - Ecosystem Services

JF - Ecosystem Services

SN - 2212-0416

ER -