Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Social-ecological drivers of multiple ecosystem services: what variables explain patterns of ecosystem services across the Norrstrom drainage basin?
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre. Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences, Sweden.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Number of Authors: 4
2016 (English)In: Ecology & society, ISSN 1708-3087, E-ISSN 1708-3087, Vol. 21, no 1, 14Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In human dominated landscapes many diverse, and often antagonistic, human activities are intentionally and inadvertently determining the supply of various ecosystem services. Understanding how different social and ecological factors shape the availability of ecosystem services is essential for fair and effective policy and management. In this paper, we evaluate how well alternative social-ecological models of human impact on ecosystems explain patterns of 16 ecosystem services (ES) across the 62 municipalities of the Norrstrom drainage basin in Sweden. We test four models of human impact on ecosystems, land use, ecological modernization, ecological footprint, and location theory, and test their ability to predict both individual ES and bundles of ES. We find that different models do best to predict different types of individual ES. Land use is the best model for predicting provisioning services, standing water quality, biodiversity appreciation, and cross-country skiing, while other models work better for the remaining services. However, this range of models is not able to predict some of the cultural ES. ES bundles are predicted worse than individual ES by these models, but provide a clear picture of variation in multiple ecosystem services based on limited information. Based on our results, we offer suggestions on how social-ecological modeling and assessments of ecosystems can be further developed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 21, no 1, 14
Keyword [en]
ecological footprint, ecological modernization, ecosystem service bundles, land use change, location theory, Stockholm, Sweden
National Category
Biological Sciences Social and Economic Geography
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-130012DOI: 10.5751/ES-08077-210114ISI: 000373935100012OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-130012DiVA: diva2:927221
Available from: 2016-05-11 Created: 2016-05-09 Last updated: 2017-09-21Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1.
The record could not be found. The reason may be that the record is no longer available or you may have typed in a wrong id in the address field.

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Meacham, MeganQueiroz, CibeleNorström, Albert V.Peterson, Garry D.
By organisation
Stockholm Resilience Centre
In the same journal
Ecology & society
Biological SciencesSocial and Economic Geography

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 26 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf