Plural valuation in space: mapping values of grasslands and their ecosystem services

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location and characteristics of the RWMain study area (left) and the Ammer study area (right) in Bavaria (BY), Germany (GER).

Table 1. Value types, sub-types of values, description (modified from Arias-Arévalo et al. (2018)), times the value was stated (n) and a translated example from the coded dataset. Respondent IDs are reported in brackets. ES: Ecosystem services

Value types	Value sub-type	Value description	n	Illustrative examples
Instrumental		Direct or indirect monetary benefit; utility	20	‘Easily economically usable (location, field size) (2,020,302)’ ‘Size of the area and proximity to consumers (2,020,286)’
‘Subjective’ intrinsic		Nature’s right to exist	121	‘In my experience these are important places where wild plants or wild animals exist that should simply be further protected (2,020,438)’ ‘Especially along lakes and rivers we need large amounts of grasslands as many animals live close to waters, give birth and raise their offspring (2,018,327)’
Relational	Security	ES critical for achieving security including meaningful livelihood, energy and health goals	14	‘I am convinced that untouched grasslands are important for clean drinking water […] (2,020,376)’
	Ecological resilience	Capacity of ecosystems to maintain their integrity in the face of disturbances (e.g. prevention of hazards such as flooding)	23	‘Notable landscapes with an intact ecosystem and rare plants and animals. The conservation of these is important for a stable system in the pre-Alpine region (2,018,281)’
	Mental and physical health	Physical benefits perceived from ecosystems’ regulation of water, air and diseases, and mental benefits due to exposure to nature	7	‘It has stress-reducing effects (2,018,526)’
	Sense of place	Emotional attachment to a place/feelings of belonging, commitment, identity or community (e.g. notions of ‘home’ or attributes to locations signaling feelings of belong such as ‘my surroundings’)	39	‘It is just typical Bavaria, I got to know it like this as a child and kept it in my memories. This is why I moved back here after my studies in Baden-Württemberg (2,018,277)’
	Cultural heritage	Tangible and intangible features of landscapes which are historically significant (e.g. buildings, monuments, traditions, stories, traditional ecological knowledge, other knowledge systems)	6	‘I am a farmer and an “Alpler” (herdsman) in the Ammer mountains and would like to continue to manage it as I always have. The Ammer mountains are so beautiful due to the management, so we do not need a change (2,020,335)’
	Aesthetic	Appreciation of the beauty of nature, grounded on sensations and emotions	39	‘Personal connection to beautiful landscape (2,020,327)’
	Recreational	Appreciation of tourism, recreational and leisure activities in natural areas	60	‘The grasslands towards Unternogg/Halbammer are a beautiful place for recreation for my family and me (2,020,159)’
	Cognitive Development	Appreciation of ecosystems’ features within special educational and scientific interest	3	‘The River Lech runs through our town and there is still quite some valuable nature that is taught to us by Lech Rangers (2,025,252)’
	Care	Core values about nature as related to universal moral values such as care, responsibility and stewardship towards nature, landscape and land (e.g. motions of “we should protect	92	‘[…] Here we should protect and use nature, not interfere with it (2,020,230)’
	Social relations/ cohesion	Nature as a platform where social relationships are fostered	1	‘[…] I explored these areas already 60 years ago with my father […] (2,020,361)’
	Altruism	Concern for biodiversity, ecosystems or ES in favor of a present larger community of (future) generations	14	‘As close to towns as possible so that people who are not mobile are close to grasslands (2,020,436)’
	Meaningful occupation	Occupations related to biodiversity and ecosystems that allow people to fulfill a good human life	1	‘[…] I think that the farmers are doing very responsible great work for uncountable years!! […] (2,020,577)’

Table 2. Differences in relational articulated values between regions and years; ** indicates statistically significant results at p < 0.05; * indicates significance at p < 0.10

Relational value subtype	Total	Study area			Year
		Ammer	RWMain		2018	2020
Aesthetic	39	24	15		24	15
Care	92	56	36	*	45	47
Recreation	60	24	36	**	26	34
Sense of place	39	18	21		18	21
Altruism, security, ecological resilience	47	20	27		21	26

Figure 2. Frequency (in %) of respondents (n = 304) that expressed instrumental, intrinsic, or relational values. Per respondent, only one count per value type is included in this figure, even if a value type was indicated multiple times by the same respondent.

Figure 3. Getis-Ord GI* hot- and coldspots (dots) of (a) value domains (Instrumental, ‘subjective’ intrinsic, relational) and (b) articulated sub-types of relational values associated with grasslands in the Ammer (top) and RWMain (bottom) study areas.

Figure 4. Constrained correspondence analysis indicating the connections between intrinsic (red triangle), instrumental (red square), and relational (red circles) values associated with grasslands, the perceptions of ecosystem services (blue), and further personal characteristics (green). (S,A,E = Security, Altruism, Ecological Resilience; Biol. pest control = Biological pest control; GW regulation = Groundwater regulation).

Table 3. Results of the first two axes of the CCA

	Axis 1	Axis 2
Eigenvalue	0.137	0.084
Proportion explained (%)	33.5	20.7
Cumulative proportion explained (%)	33.5	54.2

Arias-Arévalo P, Gómez-Baggethun E, Martín-López B, Pérez-Rincón M. 2018. Widening the Evaluative Space for Ecosystem Services: a Taxonomy of Plural Values and Valuation Methods. Environmental Values. 27(1):29–53. doi:10.3197/096327118X15144698637513.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar