RT Journal Article
T1 (Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support
A1 Barton, D. N.
A1 Kelemen, E.
A1 Dick, J.
A1 Martin-Lopez, B.
A1 Gómez-Baggethun, E.
A1 Jacobs, S.
A1 Hendriks, C. M.A.
A1 Termansen, M.
A1 García-Llorente, M.
A1 Primmer, E.
A1 Dunford, R.
A1 Harrison, P. A.
A1 Turkelboom, F.
A1 Saarikoski, H.
A1 van Dijk, J.
A1 Rusch, G. M.
A1 Palomo, I.
A1 Yli-Pelkonen, V. J.
A1 Carvalho, L.
A1 Baró, F.
A1 Langemeyer, J.
A1 van der Wal, J. Tjalling
A1 Mederly, P.
A1 Priess, J. A.
A1 Luque, S.
A1 Berry, P.
A1 Santos, R.
A1 Odee, D.
A1 Pastur, G. Martines
A1 García Blanco, G.
A1 Saarela, S. R.
A1 Silaghi, D.
A1 Pataki, G.
A1 Masi, F.
A1 Vădineanu, A.
A1 Mukhopadhyay, R.
A1 Lapola, D. M.
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.
SN 2212-0416
YR 2018
FD 2018-02
LK https://hdl.handle.net/11556/4463
UL https://hdl.handle.net/11556/4463
LA eng
NO Barton , D N , Kelemen , E , Dick , J , Martin-Lopez , B , Gómez-Baggethun , E , Jacobs , S , Hendriks , C M A , Termansen , M , García-Llorente , M , Primmer , E , Dunford , R , Harrison , P A , Turkelboom , F , Saarikoski , H , van Dijk , J , Rusch , G M , Palomo , I , Yli-Pelkonen , V J , Carvalho , L , Baró , F , Langemeyer , J , van der Wal , J T , Mederly , P , Priess , J A , Luque , S , Berry , P , Santos , R , Odee , D , Pastur , G M , García Blanco , G , Saarela , S R , Silaghi , D , Pataki , G , Masi , F , Vădineanu , A , Mukhopadhyay , R & Lapola , D M 2018 , ' (Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support ' , Ecosystem Services , vol. 29 , pp. 529-541 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021
NO Publisher Copyright: © 2017 Elsevier B.V.
NO This research was funded by the European Union EU FP7 project OpenNESS (Grant agreement no. 308428). MGL was fund by a grant from the Spanish National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology (INIA), which is co-funded by the Social European Fund.
DS TECNALIA Publications
RD 31 ago 2024