Journal of Natural Environment

Evaluating, mapping and quantifying the social value of ecosystem services, study of Qeshm Geopark

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of Environment, Faculty of Natural Resources. University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran

10.22059/jne.2023.353857.2517

Abstract

Based on complexity in the socio-ecologic dynamic systems, and due to increasing human pressure on ecosystems, integrated approaches using social indicators of ecosystem services are valuable to evaluate ecosystem services. This issue becomes more important in Qeshm Island as one of the important tourist destinations of the country, the nominated Glopbal Geoparks by UNESCO and existing of some vulnerable natural ecosystems such as mangrove forest. In this study, using the social value of ecosystem services (SolVES) model, twelve social values ​​of Qeshm Island were mapped. The use of questionnaire and participatory evaluation methods combined with mapping of ecosystem services led to the integrated approach based on social values assessment of ecosystem services. In this regard, objective and subjective indicators have been used quantitatively and qualitatively. The indicators of social value of ecosystem services were first evaluated qualitatively in the form of a questionnaire and then quantitatively in the form of zoning performed in SolVES software. The results showed that the integration of spatial and social ecosystem services data and zoning of different intensities of value based on people's understanding of the social values of Qeshm Geopark's ecosystem services can effectively improve the process of spatial planning. Combining social values of ecosystem services with territorial data can lead to the integration of public understanding of social values among different stakeholders. It can prioritize places with attractions and social values of ecosystem services.

Keywords

Bendor, T.K., Spurlock, D., Woodruff, S.C., Olander, L., 2017. A research agenda for ecosystem services in American environmental and land use planning. Citise 60, 260-271.  
Bogdan, S.M., Stupariu, I., Ander-Toparceanu, A., Nastase, I.I., 2019. Mapping social values for cultural ecosystem services in a mountain landscape in the Romanian Carpathians. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 14(1): 199-208. ‏
Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., Müller, F., 2014. Ecosystem Service Potentials, Flows and Demands-Concepts for Spatial Localisation, Indication and Quantification. Landscape Online 34.
Chen, J., Jiang, B., Bai, Y., Xu, X., Alatalo, J.M., 2019. Quantifying ecosystem services supply and demand shortfalls and mismatches for management optimisation. Science of the Total Environment 650, 1426-1439.
Dang, K.B., Burkhard, B., Muller, F., 2018. Modelling and mapping natural hazard regulating ecosystem services in Sapa, Lao Cai province, Vietnam. Paddy and Water Environment 16, 767-781.
Global Geoparks. 2023. https://gogeoparks.com/geoparks/qeshm-island-unesco-global-geopark. (Access on 20.2.2023).
Ma, S., Smailes, M., Zheng, H., Robinson, B.E., 2019. Who is vulnerable to ecosystem service change? Reconciling locally disaggregated ecosystem service supply and demand. Ecological Economics 157, 312-320. ‏
Moody, N. L. 2016. River Corridor Social Value Mapping: Using the GIS Application SolVES for Idaho's Middle Fork of the Salmon River. Doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
Petrakis, R. E., Norman, L. M., Lysaght, O., Sherrouse, B. C., Semmens, D., Bagstad, K.J., Pritzlaff, R., 2020. Mapping Perceived Social Values to Support a Respondent-Defined Restoration Economy: Case Study in Southeastern Arizona, USA. Air, Soil and Water Research 13, 1178622120913318.
Schirpke, U., Candiago, S., Vigl, L.E., Jager, H., Labadini, A., Marsoner, T., Meisch, C., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2019. Integrating supply, flow and demand to enhance the understanding of interactions among multiple ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment 651, 928-941.
Sherrouse, B.C., Semmens, D.J., 2014. Validating a method for transferring social values of ecosystem services between public lands in the Rocky Mountain region. Ecosystem Services 8, 166-177. ‏
Sherrouse, B. C., Clement, J. M., & Semmens, D.J., 2011. A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Applied Geography, 31, 748-760. ‏
Sherrouse, B.C., Semmens, D.J., 2015. Social Values for Ecosystem Services, version 3.0 (SolVES 3.0): documentation and user manual (No. 2015-1008, p. 65). US Geological Survey.
Sherrouse B.C., Semmens, D.J., Ancona, Z.H., 2022. Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES): Open-source spatial modeling of cultural services. Software 148, 145-183.
Van Riper, C.J., Kyle, G.T., Sutton, S.G., Barnes, M., Sherrouse, B.C., 2012. Mapping outdoor recreationists' perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Applied Geography 35, 164-173.
Zhang, Z., Zhang, H., Feng, J., Wang Y., Liu, K., 2021. Evaluation of social values for ecosystem services in urban riverfront space based on the solves model: A case study of the fenghe river, Xi'an, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(5), 2765.
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Cuan, Y., Zhou, Z., 2020. The Evolution Response of Ecosystem Cultural Services under Different Scenarios Based on System Dynamics. Remote Sensing 12(3), 418. ‏
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Liu, J., Cuan, Y., Zhang, C. 2019. Integrating supply and demand in cultural ecosystem services assessment: a case study of Cuihua Mountain (China). Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26, 6065-6076.
Zhu, Y., 2022.  Social value evaluation of ecosystem services in global geoparks based on SolVES model, Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3, 286-295.
Zoderer, B.M., Tasser, E., Erb, K.H., Stanghellini, P.S.L., Tappeiner, U., 2016. Identifying and mapping the tourist perception of cultural ecosystem services: A case study from an Alpine region. Land Use Policy 56, 251-261.
Journal of Natural Environment
Volume 75, Special Issue Coastal and Marine Environment
February 2023
Pages 198-213