Formulating the Criteria and Indexes for Valuation of Cultural Services of Natural Ecosystems on the Basis of Endemic Characteristics of Iran

Document Type : Qualitative Research

Authors
M. Moshari 1
A. Sepehri 2
H. Barani 2
A. Danehkar 3
1 Environment Faculty, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran
2 Faculty of Natural Resources, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran
3 College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
Abstract
The natural environment is one of the most valuable properties of the human being, but its real cost has not been recognized yet. Therefore, the valuation of natural ecosystems that provide various social, cultural and environmental services to urban fabric collections has received special attention in recent years. In this study, after a review of valuation systems of cultural services in several countries, as well as exploratory interviews with relevant experts and researchers in Iran, some criteria, sub-criteria, and indicators for valuing cultural services have been suggested by applying Delphi method. After studying the available resources and reviewing the interviews 5 main indexes with 17 sub-indexes and 56 indicators were extracted and introduced for evaluation of cultural services of natural ecosystems. Five main indexes include aesthetic, outgoing, cultural, spiritual, and education. These indexes have sub-indexes named diversity of perspectives, natural life, specific species and protection significance for the aesthetic index. An outgoing index has two sub-indexes namely natural parks and entertainment facilities. Cultural indexes have five sub-indexes namely historical sites, cultural heritage, nature as an intuition source for an artistic activities, religious locations, and cultural occurrences. A spiritual index has only one sub-indexes named religious beliefs. Eventually, education index has five sub-indexes namely knowledge about an ecosystem, traditional knowledge, knowledge management, knowledge of stakeholders and experiencing nature. It is possible to identify criteria and indicators and match them with cultural values in planning.

Keywords

Subjects

1. Grunwald A. Diverging pathways to overcoming the environmental crisis: A critique of eco-modernism from a technology assessment perspective. J Clean Prod. 2018;197:1854-1862.
2. Meyer C, Schomers S, Matzdorf B, Biedermann C, Sattler, C. Civil society actors at the nexus of the ecosystem services concept and agri-environmental policies. Land Use Policy. 2016;55:352-356.
3. Borland H, Ambrosini V, Lindgreen A, Vanhamme, J. Building theory at the intersection of ecological sustainability and strategic management. J Bus Ethics. 2016;135(2):293-307.
4. Peng J, Du Y, Liu Y, Hu X. How to assess urban development potential in mountain areas? An approach of ecological carrying capacity in the view of coupled human and natural systems. Ecol Indic. 2016; 60:1017-1030.
5. Abdi E, Saleh HR, Majnonian B, Deljouei A. Soil fixation and erosion control by Haloxylon persicum roots in arid lands, Iran. J Ardi Land. 2019;11(1):86-96.
6. Scheiter S, Schulte J, Pfeiffer M, Martens C, Erasmus BF, Twine WC. How does climate change influence the economic value of ecosystem services in Savanna rangelands?. Ecol Econ. 2019;157:342-356.
7. Favretto N, Luedeling E, Stringer LC, Dougill AJ. Valuing ecosystem services in semi‐arid rangelands through stochastic simulation. Land Deg Dev. 2017;28(1):65-73.
8. Chelan MM, Alijanpour A, Barani H, Motamedi J, Azadi H, Van Passel S. Economic sustainability assessment in semi-steppe rangelands. Sci Tot Env, 2018;637:112-119.
9. Wolf KM., Baldwin RA, Barry S. Compatibility of livestock grazing and recreational use on coastal California public lands: importance, interactions, and management solutions. Rangeland Ecol Manag. 2017;70(2):192-201.
10. Merry K, Bettinger P, Siry J, Bowker JM, Weaver S, Ucar Z. Mapping potential motorised sightseeing recreation supply across broad privately-owned landscapes of the Southern United States. Landscape Res. 2018;43(5):721-734.
11. Reid WV, Mooney HA. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: testing the limits of interdisciplinary and multi-scale science. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2016;19:40-46.
12. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC.
13. Farahnak M, Mitsuyasu K, Jeong S, Otsuki K, Chiwa M, Sadeghi SMM, Kume A. Soil hydraulic conductivity differences between upslope and downslope of two coniferous trees on a hillslope. J For Res. 2019;24(3):1-10.
14. Sadeghi SMM, Van Stan JT, Pypker TG, Tamjidi J, Friesen J, Farahnaklangroudi M. Importance of transitional leaf states in canopy rainfall partitioning dynamics. Eur J For Res. 2018;137(1):121-130.
15. Fisher, Brendan, Turner, R. Kerry, Morling, Paul (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making, Ecological Economics, Vol 68, Issue 3, 15 January 2009.
16. Fish R, Church A, Winter M. Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: a novel framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosystem Serv. 2016; 21:208-217.
17. La Rosa D, Spyra M, Inostroza L. Indicators of cultural ecosystem services for urban planning: a review. Ecologic Indic. 2016;61:74-89.
18. Sherrouse, B.C., Clement, J.M., Semmens, D.J. (2010) A GIS Application for Assessing, Mapping, and Quantifying the Social Values of Ecosystem Services. USGS.
19. Chan, K.M.A, Satterfield, T., Goldstein, J. (2011) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics. 74. 8-18.
20. Biedenweg, K., Hanein, A. (2013) Developing Human Wellbeing Indicators for the Hood Canal Watershed. Puget Sound Institute. October.
21. Department of Ecology, State of Washington (2012) Green-Duwamish Watershed – WRIA 9. Publication Number: 11-11-014. Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/ publications/1111014.pdf.
22. Plieninger, Tobias, Bieling, Claudia (2013) Resilience-Based Perspectives to Guiding High-Nature-Value Farmland through Socioeconomic Change, Ecology and Society, Vol 18, Issue 4.
23. Brandt, Jesper, Christensen, Andreas Aagaard, Svenningsen, Stig Roar, Holmes, Esbern (2013) Landscape practise and key concepts for landscape sustainability, Landscape Ecology, Vol 28, Issue 6, July 2013.
24. Brown, Greg, Montag, Jessica M, Lyon, Katie (2012) Public Participation GIS: A Method for Identifying Ecosystem Services, Society and Natural Resources, Vol 25, Issue 7.
25. Sander, H.A. and R.G. Haight. (2012) Estimating the economic value of cultural ecosystem services in an urban area using hedonic pricing. Journal of Environmental Management.
26. Van Berkel, Derek B, Verburg, Peter H (2014) Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape, Ecological Indicators, Vol 37, Part A, February 2014.
Naqshejahan- Basic studies and New Technologies of Architecture and Planning
Volume 9, Issue 4 - Serial Number 28
Winter 2020
Pages 305-312