|Appears in Collections:||Economics Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?|
Atkins, Jonathan P
Austen, Melanie C
|Citation:||Hattam C, Böhnke-Henrichs A, Börger T, Burdon D, Hadjimichael M, Delaney A, Atkins JP, Garrard S & Austen MC (2015) Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?. Ecological Economics, 120, pp. 126-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.10.011|
|Abstract:||A mixed-method approach was used to assess and value the ecosystem services derived from the Dogger Bank, an extensive shallow sandbank in the southern North Sea. Three parallel studies were undertaken that 1) identified and quantified, where possible, how indicators for ecosystem service provision may change according to two future scenarios, 2) assessed members of the public's willingness-to-pay for improvements to a small number of ecosystem services as a consequence of a hypothetical management plan, and 3) facilitated a process of deliberation that allowed members of the public to explore the uses of the Dogger Bank and the conflicts and dilemmas involved in its management. Each of these studies was designed to answer different and specific research questions and therefore contributes different insights about the ecosystem services delivered by the Dogger Bank. This paper explores what can be gained by bringing these findings together post hoc and the extent to which the different methods are complementary. Findings suggest that mixed-method research brings more understanding than can be gained from the individual approaches alone. Nevertheless, the choice of methods used and how these methods are implemented strongly affects the results obtained.|
|Rights:||Accepted refereed manuscript of: Hattam C, Böhnke-Henrichs A, Börger T, Burdon D, Hadjimichael M, Delaney A, Atkins JP, Garrard S & Austen MC (2015) Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?. Ecological Economics, 120, pp. 126-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.10.011 © 2015, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/|
|Hattam-etal-EE-2015.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||613.51 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
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 firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.