4.7 Article

The Effects of Aquaculture and Marine Conservation on Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Integrated Hedonic - Eudaemonic Approach

期刊

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
卷 176, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106757

关键词

Cultural ecosystem services; Marine ecosystem services; Aquaculture; Hedonic pricing; Integrated valuation; Eudaemonic well-being; Relational values

资金

  1. UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Marine Ecosystem Services Research Programme [NE/L003058/1]
  2. NERC [NE/L003058/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the cultural contributions of ecosystems is essential for recognising how environmental policy impacts on human well-being. We developed an integrated cultural ecosystem services (CES) valuation approach involving non-monetary valuation through a eudaemonic well-being questionnaire and monetary valuation through hedonic pricing. This approach was applied to assess CES values on the west coast of Scotland. The impact of scenic area and marine protected area (MPA) designations on CES values and potential trade-offs with aquaculture, an increasingly important provisioning ecosystem service in the region, were investigated. Results confirmed a eudaemonic well-being value structure of seven factors: engagement and interaction with nature, place identity, therapeutic value, spiritual value, social bonds, memory/transformative value, and challenge and skill. Visibility of, but not proximity to aquaculture negatively influenced housing prices. In contrast, proximity to MPAs and visibility of scenic areas increased property values. All eudaemonic well-being value factors were positively and significantly associated with scenic areas and a subset of these with MPAs. The integration of the two methods can provide decision-makers with a more comprehensive picture of CES values, their relation to conservation policies and interactions and trade-offs with other activities and services.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据