Journal
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Volume 33, Issue -, Pages 77-88Publisher
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.09.003
Keywords
Ecological engineering; Nature-based solutions; Science-policy interface; Ambiguity; Boundary object; Coastal management
Categories
Funding
- Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) [12691]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Ecosystem services (ES) are increasingly embedded in policy agendas, but if and how policy actors are considering them is not often reported. This study assesses the extent to which ES were considered by key policy actors involved in the strategic decision-making process leading to an innovative large-scale Dutch coastal management project. We analysed retrospective interviews to ascertain which ES were considered and how they were described by policy actors. Over half of the quotes (118/228) and 16 out of the 17 interviewees referred to three broad ES categories, with high degrees of adoption: coastal safety, recreation and cognitive development (learning by doing). The broad terms 'nature' and 'spatial quality' were also referenced often (36 times). Our findings suggest that broad, unspecified ecosystem services were adopted highly by the policy actors, while specific ecosystem service categories were rarely considered. Relatable and comprehensible cultural ecosystem services also constituted critical arguments for policy actors in their strategic decision making. We reflect that ambiguous, broad terms can help to garner support and unite efforts across disciplinary and institutional boundaries. For ES to align with relevant aspects of decision making, a 'translation step' between ES research and decision making might be required and ambiguity should be acknowledged.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available