Governing trade-offs in ecosystem services and disservices to achieve human–wildlife coexistence |
| |
Authors: | Silvia Ceau?u Rose A Graves Alexander K Killion Jens-Christian Svenning Neil H Carter |
| |
Institution: | 1. Center for Biodiversity Dynamics in a Changing World (BIOCHANGE), Aarhus University, Ny Munkegade 116, DK-8000, Aarhus C, Denmark;2. Human-Environment Systems Center, Boise State University, Boise, ID, U.S.A.;3. Center for Biodiversity Dynamics in a Changing World (BIOCHANGE), Aarhus University, Ny Munkegade 116, DK-8000, Aarhus C, Denmark
Section for Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Ny Munkegade 116, DK-8000, Aarhus C, Denmark |
| |
Abstract: | Sustaining wildlife populations, which provide both ecosystem services and disservices, represents a worldwide conservation challenge. The ecosystem services and Ostrom's social–ecological systems frameworks have been adopted across natural and social sciences to characterize benefits from nature. Despite their generalizability, individually they do not include explicit tools for addressing the sustainable management of many wildlife populations. For instance, Ostrom's framework does not specifically address competing perspectives on wildlife, whereas the ecosystem services framework provides a limited representation of the social and governance context wherein such competing perspectives are embedded. We developed a unified social–ecological framework of ecosystem disservices and services (SEEDS) that advances both frameworks by explicitly acknowledging the importance of competing wildlife perspectives embedded in the social and governance contexts. The SEEDS framework emulates the hierarchical structure of Ostrom's social–ecological systems, but adds subsystems reflecting heterogeneous stakeholder views and experiences of wildlife-based services and disservices. To facilitate operationalizing SEEDS and further broader analyses across human–wildlife systems, we devised a list of variables to describe SEEDS subsystems, such as types and level of services and disservices, cost and benefit sharing, and social participation of stakeholders. Steps to implement SEEDS involve engaging local communities and stakeholders to define the subsystems, analyze interactions and outcomes, and identify leverage points and actions to remedy unwanted outcomes. These steps connect SEEDS with other existing approaches in social–ecological research and can guide analyses across systems or within individual systems to provide new insights and management options for sustainable human–wildlife coexistence. |
| |
Keywords: | human–wildlife conflict resource management social–ecological systems wildlife conservation wildlife management conflicto humano – fauna conservación de fauna manejo de fauna manejo de recursos sistemas socio-ecológicos 人类-野生生物冲突 资源管理 社会-生态系统 野生生物保护 野生生物管理 |
|
|