4.7 Article

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

期刊

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
卷 29, 期 -, 页码 529-541

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021

关键词

Integrated valuation; Ecosystem service appraisal; Ecosystem service governance; Information costs; Uncertainty; Valuation; Eccosystem services cascade

资金

  1. European Union EU FP7 project OpenNESS [308428]
  2. Spanish National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology (INIA) - Social European Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

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