Coproduction of ecosystem services as human–nature interactions—An analytical framework. (March 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fischer, Anke; Eastwood, Antonia
• Is Part Of: Land use policy. Volume 52(2015:Nov.)
• Page Start: 41
• Page End: 50
• Publication Date: 2016-03
• Subjects: Cultural ecosystem services -- Capabilities -- Co-construction -- Disservices -- Identity -- Scotland -- Woodlands; Land use -- Periodicals; Land use -- Government policy -- Periodicals; Sol, Utilisation du -- Périodiques; Sol, Utilisation du -- Politique gouvernementale -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 333.7305
• DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.12.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0264-8377

Abstract

Graphical abstract: Highlights: Humans and ecosystems can be seen to co-produce ecosystem services. This often entails co-production of ecosystem structures. Co-production includes the making of 'things' and the making of meaning. People's identities and capabilities are important to understand diversity. Abstract: There seems to be widespread consensus in the ecosystem services literature that benefits from ecosystems are not produced by ecosystems independently of humans, but arise because of people's interactions with an ecosystem. Yet, these interactions are hardly ever explicitly investigated in a way that directly contributes to the ecosystem services debate. Here, we empirically examine the role of humans in the generation of ecosystem services, and the factors that might help us to understand diversity in these processes. We analyzed 47 qualitative interviews with people using a mixed woodland–farmland–upland ecosystem in Fife, Scotland, for a variety of activities. Interviewees mentioned a wide range of ecosystem services, especially provisioning and cultural services, which were closely connected to human activities in the place. We term the interactions between people and place that lead to ecosystem services here 'co-production', and distinguish between: (a) the co-production of ecosystem structures; (b) the co-production of the services proper and (c) the attribution, i.e., construction, of meaning to these structures and services. All three processes could be carried out by individuals or jointly, by groups of people, and the social nature of the interaction often added meaning and value to the co-production process. Two sets of factors, clustered under the headings of 'identities' and 'capabilities', shaped these interactions, and helped us to understand variation in people's engagement with the ecosystem as well as their views on ecosystem disservices. While further research is needed to explore the usefulness of our analytical framework in other contexts, our findings suggest that identities and capabilities of people have to be considered much more strongly than is currently the case in standard ecosystem services assessments, as these influence which ecosystem structures are eventually turned into benefits, and give important insights into the environmental justice related to the distribution of ecosystem benefits.