Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/28005
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorStosch, Kathleen Cen_UK
dc.contributor.authorQuilliam, Richard Sen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBunnefeld, Nilsen_UK
dc.contributor.authorOliver, David Men_UK
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-20T00:00:12Z-
dc.date.available2018-10-20T00:00:12Z-
dc.date.issued2019-02-15en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/28005-
dc.description.abstractSustainable management of global natural resources is challenged by social and environmental drivers, adding pressure to ecosystem service provision in many regions of the world where there are competing demands on environmental resources. Understanding trade-offs between ecosystem services and how they are valued by different stakeholder groups is therefore critical to maximise benefits and avoid conflict between competing uses. In this study we developed a novel participatory trade-off experiment to elicit the perception of 43 participants, from across four key stakeholder groups, working in land and water management (Environmental Regulators, Farming Advisors, Water Industry Staff and Catchment Scientists). Using the Production Possibility Frontier (PPF) concept, we quantified stakeholder assessment of both the shape and the uncertainty around the PPF in a trade-off between agricultural intensity and the ecological health of freshwater systems. The majority of stakeholder groups selected threshold and logistic decay trade-off curves to describe the relationship of the trade-off, and estimated the uncertainty around the curves to be intermediate or large. The views of the four stakeholder groups differed significantly regarding how they estimated stakeholder trade-off prioritisation; the largest difference in perspectives was identified between Environmental Regulators and Farm Advisors. The methodology considered the cultural, socio-economic and institutional specificities of an ecosystem service interaction and identified potential sources of conflict but also possible solutions for win-win opportunities to explore and share understanding between stakeholders. Valuing stakeholder knowledge as a form of expert data and integrating this into participatory decision-making processes for land and water management thus contributes considerable value beyond traditional approaches to ecosystem service assessments.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherElsevier BVen_UK
dc.relationStosch KC, Quilliam RS, Bunnefeld N & Oliver DM (2019) Quantifying stakeholder understanding of an ecosystem service trade-off. Science of The Total Environment, 651 (Part 2), pp. 2524-2534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.090en_UK
dc.rightsThis item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. Accepted refereed manuscript of: Stosch KC, Quilliam RS, Bunnefeld N & Oliver DM (2019) Quantifying stakeholder understanding of an ecosystem service trade-off. Science of The Total Environment, 651 (Part 2), pp. 2524-2534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.090 © 2018, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectIntegrated catchment managementen_UK
dc.subjectLand and water managementen_UK
dc.subjectLand-use conflicten_UK
dc.subjectParticipatory techniquesen_UK
dc.subjectProduction possibility frontieren_UK
dc.subjectTrade-off analysisen_UK
dc.titleQuantifying stakeholder understanding of an ecosystem service trade-offen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.rights.embargodate2019-10-10en_UK
dc.rights.embargoreason[Stosch et al 2018 STOTEN RESUBMISSION.pdf] Publisher requires embargo of 12 months after formal publication.en_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.090en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid30340188en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleScience of the Total Environmenten_UK
dc.citation.issn0048-9697en_UK
dc.citation.volume651en_UK
dc.citation.issuePart 2en_UK
dc.citation.spage2524en_UK
dc.citation.epage2534en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.contributor.funderScottish Governmenten_UK
dc.author.emailkathleen.stosch@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date09/10/2018en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationBiological and Environmental Sciencesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationBiological and Environmental Sciencesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationBiological and Environmental Sciencesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationBiological and Environmental Sciencesen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000450551600084en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85054847587en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1036905en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0001-5724-1233en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0001-7020-4410en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-1349-4463en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-6200-562Xen_UK
dc.date.accepted2018-10-07en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-10-07en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2018-10-19en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionAMen_UK
local.rioxx.authorStosch, Kathleen C|0000-0001-5724-1233en_UK
local.rioxx.authorQuilliam, Richard S|0000-0001-7020-4410en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBunnefeld, Nils|0000-0002-1349-4463en_UK
local.rioxx.authorOliver, David M|0000-0002-6200-562Xen_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Scottish Government|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012095en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-10-10en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/under-embargo-all-rights-reserved||2019-10-09en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/|2019-10-10|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameStosch et al 2018 STOTEN RESUBMISSION.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source0048-9697en_UK
Appears in Collections:Biological and Environmental Sciences Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Stosch et al 2018 STOTEN RESUBMISSION.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version821.76 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.