Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept

Autores
Alonso Roldán, Virginia; Galván, David E.; Lopes, Priscila F. M.; López, Jaime; Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina; Gallego, Federico; Cinti, Ana; Rius, Pía; Schröter, Barbara; Aguado, Mateo; Muñoz Barriga, Andrea; Pittman, Jeremy; Ávila Flores, Giovanni; López-Gómez, Connie Paola; Góngora, María Eva
Año de publicación
2019
Idioma
español castellano
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión aceptada
Descripción
The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) highlights that human wellbeing depends on nature and is a ‘whole system aware’ view. Land-sea systems are examples of complex systems including interfaces that can be perceived as boundaries, overlooking connections of the whole system. We explored the occurrence of several features of scientific knowledge building and governance of these systems that can hinder the recognition of connectivity, challenging an ES approach. We analyzed online survey responses from academics representing 22 research institutions and 13 case studies, all from Latin America. Results showed that the generation of scientific knowledge is not integrally approached and there are deficiencies in researchers’ communication with stakeholders across the land-sea interface. These drawbacks in scientific knowledge building could be one of the reasons why an ES approach is rarely applied on governance of land-sea systems. The cases showed segmented governance schemes and that conflict situations enhance the visibility of ecosystem relations. The establishment of long-lasting institutional instruments and the involvement of intermediaries connecting sectors are complementary paths to improve integrated governance. Using ES as a boundary concept could improve integration between sectors and ES trade-off analysis can help to introduce ecosystem relations to stakeholders related to their own interests.
Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico para el Estudio de los Ecosistemas Continentales; Argentina.
Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.
Fil: Galván, David E. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.
Fil: Lopes, Priscila F. M. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. Department of Ecology; Brazil.
Fil: López, Jaime. Comunidad y Biodiversidad; Mexico.
Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. School of Geography; United Kingdom.
Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. Sustainable Places Research Institute; United Kingdom.
Fil: Gallego, Federico. Universidad de la República. Facultad de Ciencias. Instituto de Ecología y Ciencias Ambientales; Uruguay.
Fil: Cinti, Ana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales y Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Argentina.
Fil: Schröter, Barbara. Working Group “Ecosystem Services Governance”. Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research; Germany.
Fil: Aguado, Mateo. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Facultad de Ciencias. Department of Ecology. Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory; Spain.
Fil: Muñoz Barriga, Andrea. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas; Ecuador.
Fil: Pittman, Jeremy. University of Waterloo. School of Planning; Canada.
Fil: Ávila Flores, Giovanni. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur. Departamento de Ciencias Marinas y Costeras; Mexico.
Fil: López-Gómez, Connie Paola. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas. Departamento de Geografía; Colombia.
Fil: Góngora, María Eva. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Ciencias de la Salud. Instituto de Investigación de Hidrobiología; Argentina.
Peer Reviewed
Fuente
Ecosystem Services Volume 38: 100966 (2019)
Materia
Scientific knowledge
Environmental governance
Latin America
Land-sea connectivity
Social-ecological systems
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
2024-10-08T16:57:21Z
Repositorio
Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)
Institución
Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
OAI Identificador
oai:ria.utn.edu.ar:20.500.12272/11609
Acceder
id RIAUTN_7e91fe04ca77150c84df21adec940a1f
oai_identifier_str oai:ria.utn.edu.ar:20.500.12272/11609
network_acronym_str RIAUTN
repository_id_str a
network_name_str Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)
spelling Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES conceptAlonso Roldán, VirginiaGalván, David E.Lopes, Priscila F. M.López, JaimeSanderson Bellamy, AngelinaGallego, FedericoCinti, AnaRius, PíaSchröter, BarbaraAguado, MateoMuñoz Barriga, AndreaPittman, JeremyÁvila Flores, GiovanniLópez-Gómez, Connie PaolaGóngora, María EvaScientific knowledgeEnvironmental governanceLatin AmericaLand-sea connectivitySocial-ecological systemsThe concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) highlights that human wellbeing depends on nature and is a ‘whole system aware’ view. Land-sea systems are examples of complex systems including interfaces that can be perceived as boundaries, overlooking connections of the whole system. We explored the occurrence of several features of scientific knowledge building and governance of these systems that can hinder the recognition of connectivity, challenging an ES approach. We analyzed online survey responses from academics representing 22 research institutions and 13 case studies, all from Latin America. Results showed that the generation of scientific knowledge is not integrally approached and there are deficiencies in researchers’ communication with stakeholders across the land-sea interface. These drawbacks in scientific knowledge building could be one of the reasons why an ES approach is rarely applied on governance of land-sea systems. The cases showed segmented governance schemes and that conflict situations enhance the visibility of ecosystem relations. The establishment of long-lasting institutional instruments and the involvement of intermediaries connecting sectors are complementary paths to improve integrated governance. Using ES as a boundary concept could improve integration between sectors and ES trade-off analysis can help to introduce ecosystem relations to stakeholders related to their own interests.Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico para el Estudio de los Ecosistemas Continentales; Argentina.Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.Fil: Galván, David E. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.Fil: Lopes, Priscila F. M. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. Department of Ecology; Brazil.Fil: López, Jaime. Comunidad y Biodiversidad; Mexico.Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. School of Geography; United Kingdom.Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. Sustainable Places Research Institute; United Kingdom.Fil: Gallego, Federico. Universidad de la República. Facultad de Ciencias. Instituto de Ecología y Ciencias Ambientales; Uruguay.Fil: Cinti, Ana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.Fil: Rius, Pía. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas; Argentina.Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales y Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Argentina.Fil: Schröter, Barbara. Working Group “Ecosystem Services Governance”. Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research; Germany.Fil: Aguado, Mateo. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Facultad de Ciencias. Department of Ecology. Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory; Spain.Fil: Muñoz Barriga, Andrea. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas; Ecuador.Fil: Pittman, Jeremy. University of Waterloo. School of Planning; Canada.Fil: Ávila Flores, Giovanni. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur. Departamento de Ciencias Marinas y Costeras; Mexico.Fil: López-Gómez, Connie Paola. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas. Departamento de Geografía; Colombia.Fil: Góngora, María Eva. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Ciencias de la Salud. Instituto de Investigación de Hidrobiología; Argentina.Peer Reviewed2024-10-08T16:57:21Z2024-10-08T16:57:21Z2019info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articulopdfapplication/pdf2212-0416http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12272/11609https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100966Ecosystem Services Volume 38: 100966 (2019)reponame:Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)instname:Universidad Tecnológica Nacionalspainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-10-08T16:57:21Zhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional2026-09-24T12:45:24Zoai:ria.utn.edu.ar:20.500.12272/11609instacron:UTNInstitucionalhttp://ria.utn.edu.ar/Universidad públicaNo correspondehttp://ria.utn.edu.ar/oaigestionria@rec.utn.edu.ar; fsuarez@rec.utn.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:a2026-09-24 12:45:25.878Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN) - Universidad Tecnológica Nacionalfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
title Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
spellingShingle Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
Alonso Roldán, Virginia
Scientific knowledge
Environmental governance
Latin America
Land-sea connectivity
Social-ecological systems
title_short Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
title_full Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
title_fullStr Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
title_full_unstemmed Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
title_sort Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Alonso Roldán, Virginia
Galván, David E.
Lopes, Priscila F. M.
López, Jaime
Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina
Gallego, Federico
Cinti, Ana
Rius, Pía
Schröter, Barbara
Aguado, Mateo
Muñoz Barriga, Andrea
Pittman, Jeremy
Ávila Flores, Giovanni
López-Gómez, Connie Paola
Góngora, María Eva
author Alonso Roldán, Virginia
author_facet Alonso Roldán, Virginia
Galván, David E.
Lopes, Priscila F. M.
López, Jaime
Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina
Gallego, Federico
Cinti, Ana
Rius, Pía
Schröter, Barbara
Aguado, Mateo
Muñoz Barriga, Andrea
Pittman, Jeremy
Ávila Flores, Giovanni
López-Gómez, Connie Paola
Góngora, María Eva
author_role author
author2 Galván, David E.
Lopes, Priscila F. M.
López, Jaime
Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina
Gallego, Federico
Cinti, Ana
Rius, Pía
Schröter, Barbara
Aguado, Mateo
Muñoz Barriga, Andrea
Pittman, Jeremy
Ávila Flores, Giovanni
López-Gómez, Connie Paola
Góngora, María Eva
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Scientific knowledge
Environmental governance
Latin America
Land-sea connectivity
Social-ecological systems
topic Scientific knowledge
Environmental governance
Latin America
Land-sea connectivity
Social-ecological systems
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) highlights that human wellbeing depends on nature and is a ‘whole system aware’ view. Land-sea systems are examples of complex systems including interfaces that can be perceived as boundaries, overlooking connections of the whole system. We explored the occurrence of several features of scientific knowledge building and governance of these systems that can hinder the recognition of connectivity, challenging an ES approach. We analyzed online survey responses from academics representing 22 research institutions and 13 case studies, all from Latin America. Results showed that the generation of scientific knowledge is not integrally approached and there are deficiencies in researchers’ communication with stakeholders across the land-sea interface. These drawbacks in scientific knowledge building could be one of the reasons why an ES approach is rarely applied on governance of land-sea systems. The cases showed segmented governance schemes and that conflict situations enhance the visibility of ecosystem relations. The establishment of long-lasting institutional instruments and the involvement of intermediaries connecting sectors are complementary paths to improve integrated governance. Using ES as a boundary concept could improve integration between sectors and ES trade-off analysis can help to introduce ecosystem relations to stakeholders related to their own interests.
Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico para el Estudio de los Ecosistemas Continentales; Argentina.
Fil: Alonso Roldán, Virginia. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.
Fil: Galván, David E. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.
Fil: Lopes, Priscila F. M. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. Department of Ecology; Brazil.
Fil: López, Jaime. Comunidad y Biodiversidad; Mexico.
Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. School of Geography; United Kingdom.
Fil: Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina. Cardiff University. Sustainable Places Research Institute; United Kingdom.
Fil: Gallego, Federico. Universidad de la República. Facultad de Ciencias. Instituto de Ecología y Ciencias Ambientales; Uruguay.
Fil: Cinti, Ana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Chubut; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Patagónico de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas; Argentina.
Fil: Rius, Pía. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales y Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Argentina.
Fil: Schröter, Barbara. Working Group “Ecosystem Services Governance”. Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research; Germany.
Fil: Aguado, Mateo. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Facultad de Ciencias. Department of Ecology. Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory; Spain.
Fil: Muñoz Barriga, Andrea. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas; Ecuador.
Fil: Pittman, Jeremy. University of Waterloo. School of Planning; Canada.
Fil: Ávila Flores, Giovanni. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur. Departamento de Ciencias Marinas y Costeras; Mexico.
Fil: López-Gómez, Connie Paola. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Facultad de Ciencias Humanas. Departamento de Geografía; Colombia.
Fil: Góngora, María Eva. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Ciencias de la Salud. Instituto de Investigación de Hidrobiología; Argentina.
Peer Reviewed
description The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) highlights that human wellbeing depends on nature and is a ‘whole system aware’ view. Land-sea systems are examples of complex systems including interfaces that can be perceived as boundaries, overlooking connections of the whole system. We explored the occurrence of several features of scientific knowledge building and governance of these systems that can hinder the recognition of connectivity, challenging an ES approach. We analyzed online survey responses from academics representing 22 research institutions and 13 case studies, all from Latin America. Results showed that the generation of scientific knowledge is not integrally approached and there are deficiencies in researchers’ communication with stakeholders across the land-sea interface. These drawbacks in scientific knowledge building could be one of the reasons why an ES approach is rarely applied on governance of land-sea systems. The cases showed segmented governance schemes and that conflict situations enhance the visibility of ecosystem relations. The establishment of long-lasting institutional instruments and the involvement of intermediaries connecting sectors are complementary paths to improve integrated governance. Using ES as a boundary concept could improve integration between sectors and ES trade-off analysis can help to introduce ecosystem relations to stakeholders related to their own interests.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019
2024-10-08T16:57:21Z
2024-10-08T16:57:21Z
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str acceptedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv 2212-0416
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12272/11609
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100966
identifier_str_mv 2212-0416
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12272/11609
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100966
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
2024-10-08T16:57:21Z
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv 2024-10-08T16:57:21Z
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv pdf
application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Ecosystem Services Volume 38: 100966 (2019)
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)
instname:Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
reponame_str Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)
collection Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN)
instname_str Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio Institucional Abierto (UTN) - Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
repository.mail.fl_str_mv gestionria@rec.utn.edu.ar; fsuarez@rec.utn.edu.ar
_version_ 1877230898160599040
score 13.265058

Publicaciones similares