Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Conservation for a New Governance of Alpine Areas
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Alpine Region: A Rapidly Changing Environment
3. A Problem of Governance
- The geographical position of the Alpine Range makes it vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, as is already well-known, and there is great uncertainty as to alpine ecosystems’ capacity for resilience. A thorough knowledge of the ecological processes activated by climate change is not yet available, but much research on this topic is currently being carried out. Suggestions have been made that the effects of climate change on the provision of goods and services may be multi-faceted [17,28,29], with their impacts depending on location and services [30,31,32,33]. It is also thought that demand for certain services might increase [34], causing discrepancies between supply and demand. As far as governance mechanisms are concerned, the coordination of policies—climate, water management, agriculture and forestry, energy, housing, tourism and transport—is generally still lacking and there is a great need for research in order to investigate the new opportunities of development that might be created by climate change, such as those within the ambit of agriculture and forestry, green economy and renewable energy production [35].
- The effects of land-use changes are now even more impressive than those connected to climate change, due to the fact that they stimulate quite rapid responses in ecological processes. Two contrasting trends are manifest when dealing with land-use changes: intensification in some areas and abandonment in others [36]. Both may have grave consequences on landscape and biodiversity, in terms of alteration of traditional assets and fragmentation or loss of natural habitats and ecological corridors. However, nowadays, the Alpine environment is affected in particular by the phenomenon of abandonment of traditional activities over large areas, often accompanied by severe depopulation. The ensuing transformation of the landscape, tied up in particular to the rapid and often irreversible loss of open spaces, is already showing negative effects for the conservation of biodiversity [37,38,39,40,41,42]. In fact cultural landscapes in the Alps have long provided diversified habitats for numerous species, some of which are now endangered. In recent years, the biodiversity emergency has become one of the priorities on the European Union’s agenda [43,44]. In many valleys, moreover, the rapid advance of forest is leading to an extensive homogenization of landscape and a loss of scenic view. This has a negative impact on summer tourism [37,38,39,40,41,42]. Other possible negative implications of abandonment are those connected to the protective functions of the forests: forests that over the centuries have been altered by Man, nowadays need forms of management tailor-made to guarantee their stability, functionality, and a capacity for natural regeneration. Regarding intensification, on the other hand, sensitive issues are, among others, those connected to the intensive utilization of meadows [45] or the use of wood biomass for energy supplies [46,47,48]. These days, in fact, there is increasing interest in the use of wood as a source of energy in order to reach the European objective regarding renewable energy sources [49,50].
- The recent economic-financial crisis is raising serious doubts regarding the model of development, mostly based on mass tourism, which has characterised many valleys of the Alps in the last few decades. The related activities have indeed upset not only the balance in the ecosystems, but also that of human communities, disrupting the traditional modalities of interaction peculiar to a mountain society and causing the collapse of that principle of solidarity which once bound the members of Alpine communities together [1,51]. At the same time, the traditional activities of the primary sector (forestry, agriculture and animal husbandry), which in the past had played a very important role in the lives of local communities, have been gradually abandoned, because they have been confronted with different kinds of problems. Among these, there is an increase in the cost of labour, but without a corresponding increase in the price of the product [7,42]. There is also an intrinsic weakness in the sector due to inadequate and ineffective organisation of what the sector has to offer and a lack of marketing strategies to promote the Alpine region’s finest local products. Quite often this has also meant a loss of competence and professionalism throughout the entire chain of production. Specific handicaps that the alpine regions share with the other mountainous areas of Europe are a very fragmented ownership structure and practical difficulties in realizing infrastructures, in particular transport networks, and also in guaranteeing services [37]. This really does make these areas less favoured [52]. The current crisis, however, could offer new opportunities for the primary sector, and more generally for a transition towards more sustainable and resource-efficient economic structures, provided that appropriate actions are taken and synergies are sought (such as the sustainable use of wood biomass for energy supply or the provision of high quality dairy products, within initiatives connected to ecotourism) [1].
4. The Concept of Ecosystem Services
- A comprehensive vision of the different ESs is still lacking. Until now, research has often addressed only a single service or a specific group (i.e., provisioning), and the estimation of its value was mostly carried out from only one perspective (i.e., in monetary terms). For example, after a review of ESs valuation studies conducted in the Alps, Grêt-Regamey and colleagues [63] show that, with few rare exceptions, only one service is taken into consideration. This is often true also in more recent research. In most cases it has to do with biodiversity, scenic beauty, tourism and recreation [66,67], direct protection against natural hazards or hydrogeological regulation [68,69,70]. Considering the increasing importance attributed nowadays to the multi-functional use of natural and semi-natural ecosystems, research should carefully consider the entire range of ESs and the relative importance of each of them in a specific territory.
- Generally, in the past, the studies focussed on a static situation, whereas today the need for a dynamic approach is acknowledged, in order to highlight the consequences of changes. This is particularly necessary when the concurrent demand for environmental conservation and economic development of a territory have to be conciliated, from the perspective of sustainability. With regard to the above, empirical information is needed as to the quantity, quality and value of the whole of ESs under alternative management regimes, both at local and regional level [62].
- A spatially explicit approach in ESs assessment and valuation is a must when dealing with management and planning at the landscape level, in order to provide credible information for the decision makers and to make communication with the general public easier. Notwithstanding the interest that this topic has recently aroused among scholars [63,64,71,72], increased research effort is needed, in particular when issues of scales are involved, either in space or time [62,73].
- Quite often the results of research are not easily converted into concrete site-specific actions (or rather, in mechanisms of governance), nor are they transferable and applicable to similar situations. What frequently happens is that the institutional context and the governance structures and practices that exist in the investigated area are not taken into due consideration. This causes a discrepancy between theoretical analysis on the one side and practical governance on the other and makes it difficult to “operationalize” ESs for governance [74]. Moreover, in our present time of cost-cutting, decisions concerning forms of management to be supported by public financing (national or European subsidies) are of crucial importance [62]. With this in mind, a greater effort is needed in order to integrate the ESs valuation into the design of models of governance. In this regard, the possible applications of Decision Support Systems (DSS) could be improved in order to ameliorate the structuring of complex environmental problems and supply data for decisions [36,75]. In fact, a DSS, a computer-based information system, may greatly help people to deal with unstructured or semi-structured decision problems and may prove particularly useful in rapidly changing situations.
- The role of some specific ESs should be better analysed and clarified. We do not want, in this paper, to go into the recent discussion about the need for a new ES classification, which excludes supporting services in order to prevent double counting [61,76]. Rather, we intend to focus attention on some particular services especially significant in the Alpine environment. This is the case in tourism. In recent decades the importance of tourism has greatly increased in terms of employment rate and income. It has become the primary source of economic development, even more so in some Alpine valleys, at times triggering off several environmental problems, especially in the case of winter tourism or urbanisation at high altitudes. The Millennium Assessment [12] classifies recreational benefits within cultural services. Actually, most of the activities linked to tourism and the ensuing spin-off, in terms of their effects, are not far from those connected to the production of provisioning services and involve the economic more than the cultural aspect. For this reason, when dealing with recreational benefits, a distinction should be made between residents’ recreation and tourism from outside.
5. Lessons Already Learnt and Yet to Be Learnt
5.1. Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation
- (a)
- All available data must be analysed which relate to land cover, vegetation types, biodiversity, topography, geology and soils, in order to find out the entire range of ESs and the best indicator setting. There are sectors of the Alpine range where it is possible to take advantage of the data sets widely covering the areas of interest and of documents which are often present in great numbers in some Alpine valleys, such as forest- or pasture-management plans, management plans of protected areas and specific scientific studies. If needed, also remote sensing information could be used to obtain certain data, such as those regarding forest stands or morphodynamics. Of course, particular attention is necessary in order to merge and harmonize data derived from different sources.
- (b)
- In addition to the analysis of existing information, expert knowledge may be usefully integrated, in order to bridge possible information gaps. Experts may be involved by means of in-depth interviews or focus groups. They should also be called on to give their advice concerning the impact of changes on the provisioning capacity of the ecosystems. Thanks to such interventions, it should be easier to highlight the main ESs (key ESs) and carry out the selection of the most suitable qualitative and quantitative indicators of the provision capacity of the ecosystems.
- (c)
- Both stakeholders and the general public should be involved in order to assess the key ESs, in a bottom-up approach, and to elicit people’s priorities in these services, focusing also on possible future effects of land-use change on ESs. From this point of view, the stakeholders may be considered as “knowledge-holders”, too. When examining the non-economic techniques available for the assessment of ESs, we can distinguish between consultative methods (such as questionnaires, in-depth interviews) and deliberative and participatory approaches (i.e., focus groups, Delphi surveys) [62]. Both approaches are effective, in relation to the specific context, and in both cases the stakeholders’ analysis is an important prerequisite. It can be profitably carried out by means of the referral sampling method [109,110], which proved to be effective in rural areas [111]. A special team (whose role and composition are highlighted in Section 5.3) could be in charge of this task. The stakeholders’ involvement can be carried out either by means of in-depth interviews or with workshops, after assessing the specific situation. The involvement of the general public should be conducted with participatory techniques, trying to enable as much interaction as possible among participants. Particular attention should be paid to the participation of young people and the elderly, in order to share knowledge and compare different current interests and demands and also to elicit their ideas on possible related future trends.
5.2. Realisation and Implementation of a Decision Support System
5.3. Design of a Model of Governance
6. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Cantiani, M.G.; de Meo, I.; Paletto, A. What do human values and emotions suggest about forest planning? An international review focusing on the Alpine Region. Int. Rev. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2013, 1, 228–243. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, A.S.; Kruger, L.E.; Daniels, S.E. “Place” as an Integrating Concept in Natural Resource Politics: Propositions for a Social Science Research Agenda. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2003, 16, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davenport, M.; Anderson, D. Getting from sense of place to place based management: An interpretive investigation of place, meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2005, 18, 625–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Brien, E.A. Publics and woodlands in England: Well-being, local identity, social learning, conflicts and management. Forestry 2005, 78, 321–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Brien, E.A. Human values and their importance to the development of forestry policy in Britain: A literature review. Forestry 2003, 76, 3–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vining, J.; Tyler, E. Values, emotions and desired outcomes reflected in public responses to forest management plans. Res. Hum. Ecol. 1999, 6, 21–34. [Google Scholar]
- Ianni, E.; Geneletti, D.; Ciolli, M. Revitalizing Traditional Ecological Knowledge: A Study in an Alpine Rural Community. Environ. Manag. 2015, 56, 144–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bettelini, D.; Cantiani, M.G.; Mariotta, S. Experiences in participatory planning of designated areas: The Bavona Valley in Switzerland. Forestry 2000, 73, 187–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmithüsen, F.; Wild-Eck, S. Uses and perceptions of forests by people living in urban areas—Findings from selected empirical studies. Forstwiss. Cent. 2000, 119, 395–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cantiani, M.G. Forest planning and public participation: A possible methodological approach. iForest 2012, 5, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svadlenak-Gomez, K.; Badura, M.; Kraxner, F.; Fuss, S.; Vettorato, D.; Walzer, C. Valuing Alpine ecosystems: The Recharge.Green project will help decision-makers to reconcile renewable energy production and biodiversity conservation in the Alps. Eco. Mont. J. Prot. Mt. Areas Res. 2013, 5, 59–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Current States and Trends; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Farcy, C.; Devillez, F. New orientations of forest management planning from an historical perspective of the relations between man and nature. For. Policy Econ. 2005, 7, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owen, R.J.; Duinker, P.N.; Beckley, T.M. Capturing Old-Growth Values for Use in Forest Decision-Making. Environ. Manag. 2009, 43, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rotherham, I.D. The implications of perceptions and cultural knowledge loss for the management of cultural landscapes: A UK case-study. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 249, 100–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agnoletti, M. The Conservation of Cultural Landscapes; CAB International Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Bender, O.; Borsdorf, A.; Fischer, A.; Stötter, H. Mountains under Climate and Global Change Conditions. Research Results in the Alps. In Climate Change—Geophysical Foundations and Ecological Effects; Blanco, J.A., Kheradmand, H., Eds.; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2011; pp. 403–422. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, J.L. Perceptions of landscape change in a rural British Columbia community. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2008, 85, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sitzia, T.; Semenzato, P.; Trentanovi, G. Natural reforestation in changing spatial patterns of rural mountain and hill landscapes: A global overview. For. Ecol. Manag. 2010, 259, 1354–1362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindhagen, A.; Hörnsten, L. Forest recreation in 1977 and 1997 in Sweden: Changes in public preferences and behaviour. Forestry 2000, 73, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Messerli, P. Mensch und Natur im Alpinen Lebensraum. Risiken, Chancen, Perspektiven; Verlag Paul Haupt: Bern, Switzerland, 1989. (In German) [Google Scholar]
- Netting, R. Balancing on an Alp: Ecological Change and Continuity in a Swiss Mountain; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Viazzo, P.P. Upland Communities: Environment, Population and Social Structure in the Alps since the Sixteenth Century; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Cole, J.W.; Wolf, E.R. The Hidden Frontier: Ecology and Ethnicity in an Alpine Valley; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Sibilla, P. Approdi e Percorsi—Saggi di Antropologia Alpina; Leo Olschki Editore: Firenze, Italy, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Wolf, E.R. Cultural Dissonances in the Italian Alps. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist. 1962, 5, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cantiani, M.G.; Bettelini, D.; Mariotta, S. Participatory Forest Planning: A chance of communication between forest service and local community. In Proceedings of the International Conference “Forestry Meets the Public”, Rüttihubelbad, Switzerland, 8–11 October 2001; FAO/ECE/ILO: Bern, Switzerland, 2002; pp. 249–263. [Google Scholar]
- Howe, C.; Suich, H.; van Gardingen, P.; Rahman, A.; Mace, G.M. Elucidating the pathways between climate change, ecosystem services and poverty alleviation. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 102–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massarutto, A. Water in climate change: A Background Report of CIPRA; Compact No 03/2011; CIPRA International: Schaan, Liechtenstein, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Elkin, C.; Gutiérrez, A.G.; Leuzinger, S.; Manusch, C.; Temperli, C.; Rasche, L.; Bugmann, H. A 2 °C warmer world is not safe for ecosystem services in the European Alps. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2013, 19, 1827–1840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lorencova, E.; Frelichova, J.; Nelson, E.; Vackar, D. Past and future impacts of land use and climate change on agricultural ecosystem services in the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy 2013, 33, 183–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Munang, R.; Thiaw, I.; Alverson, K.; Liu, J.; Han, Z. The role of ecosystem services in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 47–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vihervaara, P.; D’Amato, D.; Forsius, M.; Angelstam, P.; Baessler, C.; Balvanera, P.; Boldgiv, B.; Bourgeron, P.; Dick, J.; Kanka, R.; et al. Using long-term ecosystem service and biodiversity data to study the impacts and adaptation options in response to climate change: Insights from the global ILTER sites network. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 53–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Courbaud, B.; Kunstler, G.; Morin, X.; Cordonnier, T. What is the future of the ecosystem services of the Alpine forest against a backdrop of climate change? Rev. Geogr. Alp. 2010, 98, 412–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agenda, T. Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020: Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions. In Agreed at the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development, Gödöllő, Hungary, 19 May 2011; Available online: http://www.eu2011.hu/files/bveu/documents/TA2020.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- Fontana, V.; Radtke, A.; Bossi Fedrigotti, V.; Tappeiner, U.; Tasser, E.; Zerbe, S.; Buchholz, T. Comparing land-use alternatives: Using the ecosystem services concept to define a multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 93, 128–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mac Donald, D.; Crabtree, J.R.; Wiesinger, G.; Dax, T.; Stamou, N.; Fleury, P.; Gutierrez Lazpita, J.; Gibon, A. Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: Environmental consequences and policy response. J. Environ. Manag. 2000, 59, 47–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orlandi, S.; Probo, M.; Sitzia, T.; Trentanovi, G.; Garbarino, M.; Lombardi, G.; Lonati, M. Environmental and land use determinants of grassland patch diversity in the western and eastern Alps under agro-pastoral abandonment. Biodivers. Conserv. 2016, 25, 275–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sitzia, T.; Trentanovi, G. Maggengo meadow patches enclosed by forests in the Italian Alps: Evidence of landscape legacy on plant diversity. Biodivers. Conserv. 2011, 20, 945–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soliva, R. Agricultural Decline, Landscape Change, and Outmigration: Debating the Sustainability of Three Scenarios for a Swiss Mountain Region. Mt. Res. Dev. 2007, 27, 124–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steinmetz, A.K.; Haida, C.; Geitner, C. Trade-offs of ecosystem services provided by mountain hay meadows under land use change scenarios. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium for Research in Protected Areas, Mittersill, Austria, 10–12 June 2013.
- Tattoni, C.; Ciolli, M.; Ferretti, F.; Cantiani, M.G. Monitoring spatial and temporal pattern of Paneveggio forest (Northern Italy) from 1859 to 2006. iForest 2010, 3, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EC-DGE. Biodiversity Protection—Beyond 2010. Priorities and Options for Future EU Policy. Available online: http://ec.europe.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/conference/index_en.htm (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity of National and International Policy Makers—Summary: Responding to the Value of Nature. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/index_en.htm (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- Graf, R.; Müller, M.; Korner, P.; Jenny, M.; Jenni, L. 20% loss of unimproved farmland in 22 years in the Engadin, Swiss Alps. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 2014, 185, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kraxner, F.; Nordström., E.M.; Havlík, P.; Gusti, M.; Mosnier, A.; Frank, S.; Valin, H.; Fritz, S.; Fuss, S.; Kindermann, G.; et al. Global bioenergy scenarios—Future forest development, land-use implications, and trade-offs. Biomass Bioenerg. 2013, 57, 86–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacchelli, S.; De Meo, I.; Paletto, A. Bioenergy production and forest multifunctionality: A trade-off analysis using multiscale GIS model in a case study in Italy. Appl. Energy 2013, 104, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacchelli, S.; Bernetti, I.; De Meo, I.; Fiori, L.; Paletto, A.; Zambelli, P.; Ciolli, M. Matching socio-economic and environmental efficiency of wood-residues energy chain: A partial equilibrium model for a case study in Alpine area. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 66, 431–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fritsche, U.R.; Iriarte, L.; de Jong, J.; Agostini, A.; Scarlat, N. Extending the EU Renewable Energy Directive sustainability criteria to solid bioenergy from forests. Nat. Resour. Forum 2014, 38, 129–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hastik, R.; Basso, S.; Geitner, C.; Haida, C.; Poljanec, A.; Portaccio, A.; Vrščaj, B.; Walzer, C. Renewable energies and ecosystem service impacts. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 48, 608–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finger-Stich, A. Les populations alpines et leurs forêts communales. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 2006, 157, 453–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bachmann, P.; Bettelini, D.; Cantiani, M.G. Développements récents de la planification forestière en Italie du Nord et en Suisse. Rev. For. Fr. 1999, 51, 259–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amin, A.; Thrift, N.J. Globalisation, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Bevir, M. Governance: A Very Short Introduction; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Commission on Global Governance. Our Global Neighborhood: The Report of The Commission on Global Governance; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Ruhanen, L.; Scott, N.; Ritchie, B.; Tkaczynski, A. Governance: A review and synthesis of the literature. Tour. Rev. 2010, 65, 4–16. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. European Governance—A White Paper. Available online: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_DOC-01–10_en.htm (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- Sarkki, S.; Ficko, A.; Grunewald, K.; Nijnik, M. Benefits from and threats to European treeline ecosystem services: An exploratory study of stakeholders and governance. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westman, W.E. How much are Nature’s services worth? Science 1977, 197, 960–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Costanza, R.; d’Arge, R.; De Groot, R.; Farberk, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, M.; Limburg, K.; Naem, K.; O’Neil, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M. Cices V4.3—Report Prepared Following Consultation on Cices Version 4, August–December 2012, EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003. Available online: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seearev/GCComments/CICES_Report.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- De Groot, R.; Alkemade, R.; Braat, L.; Hein, L.; Willemen, L. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grêt-Regamey, A.; Walz, A.; Bebi, P. Valuing Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Landscape Planning in Alpine regions. Mt. Res. Dev. 2008, 28, 156–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hermann, A.; Schleifer, S.; Wrbka, T. The Concept of Ecosystem Services regarding Landscape Research: A review. Living Rev. Landsc. Res. 2011, 5, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hermann, A.; Kuttner, M.; Hainz-Renetzeder, C.; Konkoly-Gyuró, É.; Tirászi, Á.; Brandenburg, C.; Allex, B.; Ziener, K.; Wrbka, T. Assessment framework for landscape services in European cultural landscapes: An Austrian Hungarian case study. Ecol. Indic. 2013, 37, 229–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gios, G.; Goio, I.; Notaro, S.; Raffaelli, R. The value of natural resources for tourism: A case study of the Italian Alps. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2006, 8, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grilli, G.; Paletto, A.; De Meo, I. Economic Valuation of Forest Recreation in an Alpine Valley. Balt. For. 2014, 20, 167–175. [Google Scholar]
- Dorren, L.K.A.; Berger, F.; Imeson, A.C.; Maier, B.; Rey, F. Integrity, stability and management of protection forests in the European Alps. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 195, 165–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Notaro, S.; Paletto, A. The economic valuation of natural hazards in mountain forests: An approach based on the replacement cost method. J. For. Econ. 2012, 18, 318–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olschewski, R.; Bebi, P.; Teich, M.; Wissen Hayek, U.; Grêt-Regamey, A. Avalanche protection by forests—A choise experiment in the Swiss Alps. For. Policy Econ. 2012, 15, 108–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maes, J.; Egoh, B.; Willemen, L.; Liquete, C.; Vihervaara, P.; Schägner, J.; Grizzetti, B.; Drakou, E.G.; La Notte, A.; Zulian, G.; et al. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 2012, 1, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schirpke, U.; Tasser, E.; Tappeiner, U. Predicting scenic beauty of mountain regions. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 111, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Willemen, L.; Veldkamp, A.; Verburg, P.; Hein, L.; Leemans, R. A multi-scale modelling approach for analysing landscape service dynamics. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 100, 86–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Primmer, E.; Furman, E. Operationalising ecosystem service approaches for governance: Do measuring, mapping and valuing integrate sector-specific knowledge systems? Ecosyst. Serv. 2012, 1, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacchelli, S.; Zambelli, P.; Zatelli, P.; Ciolli, M. Biomasfor: An open source holistic model for the assessment of sustainable forest bioenergy. iForest 2013, 6, 285–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyd, J.; Banzhaf, S. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 616–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferretti, F.; Di Bari, C.; De Meo, I.; Bianchi, M. ProgettoBosco, a data-driven decision support system for forest planning. Math. Comput. For. Nat. Resour. Sci. 2011, 3, 27–35. [Google Scholar]
- De Meo, I.; Cantiani, M.G.; Paletto, A. Landscape Changes and Shareholders’ Preferences in the Baselga di Pinè Commons (Italy). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Common Goods from a Landscape Perspective, Florence, Italy, 16–17 January 2014; University of Florence: Florence, Italy, 2014; pp. 171–175. [Google Scholar]
- De Meo, I.; Paletto, A.; Cantiani, M.G. The attractiveness of forests: Preferences and perceptions in a mountain community in Italy. Ann. For. Res. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geitner, C.; Haida, C.; Lang, P. Aspekte bodenbezogener ecosystem services in den Alpen und ihrer monetären Bewertung. In Jahresbericht der Innsbrucker Geographische Gesellschaft 2008–2010; Universität Innsbruck: Innsbruck, Austria, 2011; pp. 157–173. (In German) [Google Scholar]
- Haida, C.; Ruedisser, J.; Tappeiner, U. Ecosystem services in mountain regions: Experts’ perception and research intensity. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paletto, A.; De Meo, I.; Maino, F.; Cantiani, M.G. Social Perceptions and Forest Management Strategies in an Italian Alpine Community. Mt. Res. Dev. 2013, 33, 152–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paletto, A.; De Meo, I.; Cantiani, M.G.; Cocciardi, D. Balancing wood market demand and common property rights: A case study on a community in the Italian Alps. J. For. Res. 2014, 19, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grilli, G.; Balest, J.; De Meo, I.; Garegnani, G.; Paletto, A. Experts’ opinions on the effects of renewable energy development on ecosystem services in the Alpine region. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2016, 8, 013115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paletto, A.; Geitner, C.; Grilli, G.; Hastik, R.; Pastorella, F.; Rodríguez García, L. Mapping the value of ecosystem services: A case study from the Austrian Alps. Ann. For. Res. 2015, 58, 157–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacchelli, S.; Garegnani, G.; Geri, F.; Grilli, G.; Paletto, A.; Zambelli, P.; Ciolli, M.; Vettorato, D. Trade-off between photovoltaic systems installation and agricultural practices on arable lands: An environmental and socio-economic impact analysis for Italy. Land Use Policy 2016, 56, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Union 2013. Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. An Analytical Framework for Ecosystem Assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/ecosystem_assessment/pdf/MAESWorkingPaper2013.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- Burkhard, B.; Kroll, F.; Nedkov, S.; Müller, F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budget. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunewald, K.; Bastian, O. (Eds.) Ökosystemdienstleistungen: Konzepte, Methoden und Fallbeispiele; Spektrum Akademischer Verlag: Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. (In German)
- Häyhä, T.; Franzese, P.P. Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective. Ecol. Model. 2014, 289, 124–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goulder, L.H.; Kennedy, D. Interpreting and estimating the value of ecosystem services. In Natural Capital: Theory & Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services; Kareiva, P.M., Tallis, H., Ricketts, T.H., Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 15–25. [Google Scholar]
- Goio, I.; Gios, G.; Pollini, C. The development of forest accounting in the province of Trento (Italy). J. For. Econ. 2008, 14, 177–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Häyhä, T.; Franzese, P.P.; Paletto, A.; Fath, B.D. Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 14, 12–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Notaro, S.; Paletto, A.; Raffaelli, R. The economic valuation of non-productive forest functions as an instrument towards integrated forest management. In The Multifunctional Role of Forest-Policies, Methods and Case Studies; Cesaro, L., Gatto, P., Pettenella, D., Eds.; EFI Proceedings No. 55; European Forest Institute: Joensuu, Finland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Rodríguez García, L.; Curetti, G.; Garegnani, G.; Grilli, G.; Pastorella, F.; Paletto, A. La valoración de los servicios ecosistémicos en los ecosistemas forestales: Un caso de estudio en Los Alpes Italianos. Bosque 2016, 37, 41–52. (In Spanish) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, A.; Blowers, A.; Boersema, J. Paying for environmental services: Can we afford to lose a cultural basis for conservation? Environ. Sci. 2008, 5, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, B.; Turner, R.K.; Morling, P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 643–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, B.J.; Su, C.H.; Wei, Y.P.; Willet, I.R.; Lü, Y.H.; Liu, G.H. Double counting in ecosystem services valuation: Causes and countermeasures. Ecol. Res. 2011, 26, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spangenberg, J.; Settele, J. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 327–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riera, P.; Signorello, G.; Thiene, M.; Mahieu, P.A.; Navrud, S.; Kaval, P.; Rulleau, B.; Mavsar, R.; Madureira, L.; Meyerhoff, J.; et al. Non-market valuation of forest goods and services: Good practice guidelines. J. For. Econ. 2012, 18, 259–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spangenberg, J.; Settele, J. Value pluralism and economic valuation—Defendable if well done. Ecosyst. Serv. 2016, 18, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Egoh, B.; Reyers, B.; Rouget, M.; Richardson, D.M.; Le Maitre, D.C.; van Jaarsveld, A.S. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 127, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kienast, F.; Bolliger, J.; Potschin, M.; Groot, R.S.; Verburg, P.H.; Heller, I.; Wascher, D.; Haines-Young, R. Assessing Landscape Functions with Broad-Scale Environmental Data: Insights Gained from a Prototype Development for Europe. Environ. Manag. 2009, 44, 1099–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tasser, E.; Schermer, M.; Siegl, G.; Tappeiner, U. (Eds.) Wir Landschaftmacher: Vom Sein und Werden der Kulturlandschaft in Nord-, Ost- und Südtirol; Athesia: Bozen, Italy, 2012. (In German)
- Grilli, G.; Jonkisz, J.; Ciolli, M.; Lesinski, J. Mixed forests and ecosystem services: Investigating stakeholders’ perceptions in a case study in the Polish Carpathians. For. Policy Econ. 2016, 66, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lamarque, P.; Tappeiner, U.; Turner, C.; Steinbacher, M.; Bardgette, R.; Szukics, U.; Schermer, M.; Lavorel, S. Stakeholder perception of grassland ecosystem services in relation to knowledge on soil fertility and biodiversity. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2011, 11, 791–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palomo, I.; Martín-López, B.; Potschin, M.; Haines-Young, R.; Montes, C. National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 4, 104–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scolozzi, R.; Morri, E.; Santolini, R. Delphi-based change assessment in ecosystem service values to support strategic spatial planning in Italian landscapes. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, S.R.; Qureshi, M.E. Choice of stakeholder groups in multicriteria decision models. Nat. Resour. Forum 2000, 24, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hislop, M. Involving People in Forestry: A Toolbox for Public Involvement in Forest and Woodland Planning; Forestry Commission: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- De Meo, I.; Cantiani, M.G.; Ferretti, F.; Paletto, A. Stakeholders’ Perception as Support for Forest Landscape Planning. Int. J. Ecol. 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sporcic, M.; Landekic, M.; Lovric, M.; Martinic, I. Planning and Decision Making Models in Forestry. Croat. J. For. Eng. 2011, 32, 443–456. [Google Scholar]
- Tattoni, C.; Ciolli, M.; Ferretti, F. The fate of priority areas for conservation in protected areas: A fine-scale Markov chain approach. Environ. Manag. 2011, 47, 263–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wolfslehner, B.; Seidl, R. Harnessing Ecosystem Models and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Support of Forest Management. Environ. Manag. 2010, 46, 850–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ciolli, M.; Tattoni, C.; Ferretti, F. Understanding forest changes to support planning: A fine-scale Markov chain approach. Dev. Environ. Model. 2012, 25, 355–373. [Google Scholar]
- Zambelli, P.; Lora, C.; Spinelli, R.; Tattoni, C.; Vitti, A.; Zatelli, P.; Ciolli, M. A GIS decision support system for regional forest management to assess biomass availability for renewable energy production. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 38, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G.; Reed, P. Values Compatibility Analysis: Using Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS) for Decision Support in National Forest Management. Appl. Spat. Anal. Policy 2012, 5, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herzig, A.; Ausseil, A.G.E.; Dymond, J.R. Spatial optimisation of ecosystem services. In Ecosystem Services in New Zealand: Conditions and Trends; Dymond, J.R., Ed.; Manaaki Whenua Press: Lincoln, New Zealand, 2013; pp. 511–523. [Google Scholar]
- Verkerk, P.J.; Mavsar, R.; Giergiczny, M.; Lindner, M.; Edwards, D.; Schelhaas, M.J. Assessing impacts of intensified biomass production and biodiversity protection on ecosystem services provided by European forests. Ecosyst. Serv. 2014, 9, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cambero, C.; Sowlati, T. Assessment and optimization of forest biomass supply chains from economic, social and environmental perspectives—A review of literature. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 36, 62–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malek, Ž.; Boerboom, L. Participatory Scenario Development to Address Potential Impacts of Land Use Change: An Example from the Italian Alps. Mt. Res. Dev. 2015, 35, 126–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, M.S.; Kenter, J.; Bonn, A.; Broad, K.; Burt, T.P.; Fazey, I.R.; Fraser, E.D.G.; Hubacek, K.; Nainggolan, D.; Quinn, C.H.; et al. Participatory scenario development for environmental management: A methodological framework illustrated with experience from the UK uplands. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 128, 345–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walz, A.; Lardelli, C.; Behrendt, H.; Grêt-Regamey, A.; Lundstrom, C.; Kytzia, S.; Bebi, P. Participatory scenario analysis for integrated regional modelling. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 81, 114–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garegnani, G.; Geri, F.; Zambelli, P.; Grilli, G.; Sacchelli, S.; Paletto, A.; Curetti, G.; Ciolli, M.; Vettorato, D. A New Open Source DSS for Assessment and Planning of Renewable Energy: r.green. Available online: http://geomatica.como.polimi.it/workbooks/n12/FOSS4G-eu15_submission_94.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2016).
- Steinigera, S.; Hay, G.J. Free and open source geographic information tools for landscape ecology. Ecol. Inform. 2009, 4, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zambelli, P.; Gebbert, S.; Ciolli, M. Pygrass: An object oriented python application programming interface (API) for geographic resources analysis support system (GRASS) geographic information system (GIS). ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf. 2013, 2, 201–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciolli, M.; Garegnani, G.; Geri, F.; Zambelli, P.; Grilli, G.; Sacchelli, S.; Poljanec, A.; Miotello, F.; Paletto, A.; Balest, J.; et al. Applying r.green.biomassfor to Pilot Regions. In Proceedings of the International Conference Energy and Nature in the Alps: A Balancing Act—Recharge Green Final Conference, Sonthofen, Germany, 20–21 May 2015.
- Paletto, A.; Cantiani, M.G.; De Meo, I. Public Participation in Forest Landscape Management Planning (FLMP) in Italy. J. Sustain. For. 2015, 34, 465–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polasky, S.; Nelson, E.; Pennington, D.; Johnson, K.A. The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2011, 48, 219–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polasky, S.; Nelson, E.; Camm, J.; Csuti, B.; Fackler, P.; Lonsdorf, E.; Montgomery, C.; White, D.; Arthur, J.; Garber-Yonts, B.; et al. Where to put things? Spatial land management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 1505–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daily, G.C.; Polasky, S.; Goldstein, J.; Kareiva, P.M.; Mooney, H.A.; Pejchar, L.; Ricketts, T.H.; Salzman, J.; Shallenberger, R.M. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grêt-Regamey, A.; Brunner, S.H.; Kienast, F. Mountain Ecosystem Services: Who Cares? Mt. Res. Dev. 2012, 32, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Cantiani, M.G.; Geitner, C.; Haida, C.; Maino, F.; Tattoni, C.; Vettorato, D.; Ciolli, M. Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Conservation for a New Governance of Alpine Areas. Sustainability 2016, 8, 802. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080802
Cantiani MG, Geitner C, Haida C, Maino F, Tattoni C, Vettorato D, Ciolli M. Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Conservation for a New Governance of Alpine Areas. Sustainability. 2016; 8(8):802. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080802
Chicago/Turabian StyleCantiani, Maria Giulia, Clemens Geitner, Christine Haida, Federica Maino, Clara Tattoni, Daniele Vettorato, and Marco Ciolli. 2016. "Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Conservation for a New Governance of Alpine Areas" Sustainability 8, no. 8: 802. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080802