Felipe-Lucia María R, Comín Francisco A, Escalera-Reyes Javier
Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología-CSIC, Av. Nuestra Señora de la Victoria, s/n, 22700, Jaca, Huesca, Spain,
Ambio. 2015 May;44(4):308-18. doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0555-2. Epub 2014 Oct 21.
Methods to assess ecosystem services using ecological or economic approaches are considerably better defined than methods for the social approach. To identify why the social approach remains unclear, we reviewed current trends in the literature. We found two main reasons: (i) the cultural ecosystem services are usually used to represent the whole social approach, and (ii) the economic valuation based on social preferences is typically included in the social approach. Next, we proposed a framework for the social valuation of ecosystem services that provides alternatives to economics methods, enables comparison across studies, and supports decision-making in land planning and management. The framework includes the agreements emerged from the review, such as considering spatial-temporal flows, including stakeholders from all social ranges, and using two complementary methods to value ecosystem services. Finally, we provided practical recommendations learned from the application of the proposed framework in a case study.
与社会方法相比，使用生态或经济方法评估生态系统服务的方法定义得更为明确。为了确定社会方法为何仍不明确，我们回顾了文献中的当前趋势。我们发现两个主要原因：（i）文化生态系统服务通常被用来代表整个社会方法，以及（ii）基于社会偏好的经济估值通常包含在社会方法中。接下来，我们提出了一个生态系统服务社会估值框架，该框架提供了经济方法的替代方案，能够在各项研究之间进行比较，并支持土地规划和管理中的决策制定。该框架包括从审查中得出的共识，例如考虑时空流动、纳入所有社会阶层的利益相关者，以及使用两种互补方法对生态系统服务进行估值。最后，我们提供了从在一个案例研究中应用所提出的框架中获得的实际建议。
