Skip to main content

Concept and valuation of landscape functions at different scales

  • Chapter
Multifunctional Land Use

Abstract

Natural, semi-natural and cultivated ecosystems and landscapes provide many goods and services to human society that are of great ecological, socio-cultural and economic value (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). In environmental planning and decision-making, however, these benefits are often not fully taken into account and productive, multifunctional landscapes continue to be converted into more simple, often single-function land use types (e.g. croplands) or turned into wastelands (e.g. eroded land after clear-cut logging or polluted and over-fished shelf-seas). Yet, increasingly studies are showing that the total value of multifunctional use of natural and semi-natural landscapes is often economically more beneficial than the value of the converted systems (Balmford et al. 2002). The question therefore is how to identify and quantify the many benefits of multi-functional landscapes in order to take more balanced decisions regarding trade-offs involved in land use planning in view of the increasing demands for space and resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aldred J (1994) Existence value, welfare and altruism. Environmental Values 3: 381–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow K, Solow R, Portney PR, Learner EE, Radner R, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Federal Reg. 58, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper P, Costanza R, Farber S, Green R, Jenkins M, Jefferiss P, Jessamay V, Madden J, Munro K, Myers N, Naeem S, Paavola J, Rayment M, Rosendo S, Roughgarden J, Trumper K, Turner RK (2002) Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297: 950–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker CD, Ostrom E (1995) Human ecology and resource sustainability: the importance of institutional diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 26: 113–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F, Folke C (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum E (1993) Making biodiversity profitable: A case study of the Merck/INBio agreement. Environment 35: 17–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch JM, Hewitt JD (1982) A review of catchment experiments to determine the effect of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. Journal of Hydrology 55: 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer R, Langford IH, Bateman IJ, Turner RK (1997) A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. CSERGE Working Paper, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson RT (1998) Valuation of tropical rainforests: philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation. Ecological Economics 24: 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Moser SC (1998) Cross-scale interactions in assessments, information systems, and decision-making. In: Critical Evaluation of Global Environmental Assessments, Global Environmental Assessment Project, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark CW, Jones DD, Holling CS (1979) Lessons for ecological policy design. A case study of ecosystem management. Ecological Modelling 7: 22–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Folke C (1997) A Valuing ecosystem services with efficiency, fairness, and sustainability as goals. In: Daly G (ed) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems, Island Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot RS, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings RG, Harrison GW (1995) The measurement and decomposition of non use values: a critical review. Environmental and Resource Economics 5: 225–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Soderquist T, Aniyar S, Arrow K, Dasgupta P, Ehrlich PR, Folke C, Jannson A, Jansson BO, Kautsky N, Levin S, Lubchenco J, Maler K-G, David S, Starrett D, Tilman D, Walker B, 2000. The value of nature and the nature of value. Science 289: 395–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot RS (1992) Functions of Nature: evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision-making. Wolters Noordhoff BV, Groningen, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot RS, Wilson M, Boumans R (2002) A typology for the description, classification and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Economics 41: 393–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot RS, Ramakrishnan PS (eds) (in print). Cultural and Amenity Services in: Ecosystems and Human wellbeing: Conditions and Trends (307–328). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994) Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives 8: 45–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA (2002) Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 41: 375–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman AM (1993) The measurement of environmental values and resources: theory and methods. Resources for the Future, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimble R, Wellard K (1997) Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55: 173–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann WM (1995) Contingent valuation and economics. In: Willis K, Corkindale J (eds) Environmental valuation: new perspectives. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. pp. 79–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley N, Spash CL (1993) Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment. Edward Elgar, Vermont. 278 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hein (2005) Optimising the management of complex dynamic ecosystems; an ecological economic modelling approach. PhD thesis Wageningen, 2005, 216 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 57: 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1992) Cross-scale morphology, geometry and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecological Monographs 62: 447–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Gunderson LH, Peterson GD (2002) Sustainability and Panarchies. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy, Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press, Washington, London, pp. 63–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hueting R (1980) New scarcity and economic growth. Agon-Elsevier, Amsterdam/New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hueting R (1991) The use of the discount rate in a cost-benefit analysis for different uses of a humid tropical forest area. Ecological Economics 3: 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hueting R, Reijnders L, de Boer B, Lambooy J, Jansen H (1998) The concept of environmental function and its valuation. Ecological Economics 25: 31–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hufschmidt MM, James DE, Meister AD, Bower BT, Dixon JA (1983) Environment, natural systems and development, An economic valuation guide. The John Hopkins University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Infield M (2001) Cultural values: a forgotten strategy for building community support for protected areas in Africa. Conservation Biology 15: 800–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson P (1999) Theory of economic valuation of environmental goods and services. In: van de Bergh JCJM (ed) Handbook of Environmental Resource Economics, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 747–754.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolstad CD (2000) Environmental economics. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leemans R (2000) Modelling of global land use: connections, causal chains and integration. Inaugural lecture, Department of Plant Production Systems, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943–1967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Limburg KE, O’Neill RV, Costanza R, Farber S (2002) Complex systems and valuation. Ecological Economics 41: 409–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules C, Usher MB (1981) Criteria used in assessing wildlife conservation potential: a review. Biological Conservation 21: 79–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment — Synthesis Report (2005) Strengthening capacity to manage ecosystems sustainably for human wellbeing. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment offices (219 pp)

    Google Scholar 

  • Munasinghe M, Schwab A (1993) Environmental economics and natural resource management in developing countries. World Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes PALD, van den Bergh JCJM (2001) Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense? Ecological Economics 39: 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD 1995. The economic appraisal of environmental projects and policies, a practical guide. OECD, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, King AW (1998) Hommage to St Michael: or why are there so many books on scale? In: Peterson DL, Parker V.T. (eds) Ecological scale: theory and applications. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill J (2001) Representing people, representing nature, representing the world. Environment and Planning — Part C: Government and Policy 19: 483–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan T, Cooper C, Jordan A, Rayner S, Richards K, Runci P, Yoffe S (1998) Institutional frameworks for political action. In: Human choice and climate change, Vol. 1: The societal framework. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, pp. 345–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce DW (1995) Capturing global environmental value. Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce DW, Moran D (1994) The Economic Value of Biodiversity, Earthscan, London, in association with the IUCN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce DW, Howarth A (2000) Technical report on methodology: cost benefit analysis and policy responses. RIVM report 481505020

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce DW, Pearce CGT (2001) The value of forest ecosystems. A report to the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and the environment. BPCC Wheatsons Ltd., Exeter, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posey DA (1999) Cultural and spiritual values of biodiversity. A complementary contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. Intermediate Technology Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strijker D, Sijtsma FJ, Wiersma D (2000) Evaluation of nature conservation; an application to the Dutch Ecological Network. Environmental and Resource Economics 16: 363–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson T (1997) Global action for biodiversity. Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tacconi L (2000) Biodiversity and ecological economics. Participation, values, and resource management. Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tansley AG (1935) The use and abuse of vegetational terms and concepts. Ecology 16: 284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MD (1999) Spatial and temporal scaling of grazing impact on the species composition and productivity of Sahelian annual grasslands. Journal of Arid Environments 41: 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MD, Williams TO (2002) Livestock market dynamics and local vulnerabilities in the Sahel. World Development 30: 683–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner RK, Bateman IJ, Georgiou S, Jones A, Langford IH, Matias NGN, Subramanian L (2004) An ecological economics approach to the management of a multi-purpose coastal wetland. Regional Environmental Change 4: 86–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner RK, van den Bergh CJM, Soderqvist T, Barendregt A, van der Straaten J, Maltby E, van Ierland EC (2000) Ecological-economic analysis of wetlands: scientific integration for management and policy. Ecological Economics 35: 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner RK, Paavola J, Cooper P, Farber S, Jessamy V, Georgiou S (2003) Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions. Ecological Economics 46: 493–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kooten GC, Bulte EH (2000) The economics of nature; managing biological assets. Blackwell Publishers Inc., Malden, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wathern P, Young SN, Brown IW, Roberts DA (1986) Ecological evaluation tecniques. Landscape Planning 12: 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

de Groot, R., Hein, L. (2007). Concept and valuation of landscape functions at different scales. In: Mander, Ü., Wiggering, H., Helming, K. (eds) Multifunctional Land Use. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36763-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics