Sustainable Ecosystem Services in Cultural Landscapes: Recent Trends and Future Challenges

A special issue of Land (ISSN 2073-445X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2024) | Viewed by 3642

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Geography, Urban and Regional Planning, Universidad de Cantabria | UNICAN, Santander, Spain
Interests: rural area dynamics; cultural landscapes of rural and urban areas; rural depopulation; rural development
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Geography Faculty of Philosophy and Letters, Campus of Teatinos, University of Málaga, 29071 Malaga, Spain
Interests: Mediterranean mountain areas; local development; regional policies impact on territories
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of History, Geography, and Communication, Faculty of Humanities and Communication, University of Burgos, Burgos, Spain
Interests: rural spaces; sustainable and multifunctional agri-food systems; rural landscapes and territorial heritage

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Geography, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain
Interests: agrarian landscapes; heritage; sustainable food system; agrarian policy

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Geography, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Interests: social and identity dimension of landscape; functional articulation and sustainable urban development; territorial governance

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue focuses on how ecosystem services produce important socioeconomic and ecological effects on cultural landscapes and their sustainability, emphasizing both current actions and future initiatives and proposals. We kindly invite you to participate in this interesting topic to achieve the objectives of sustainable territorial development in cultural landscapes.

We can find the origin of the cultural landscape notion in the works of Carl O. Sauer and the Berkeley School (in the first third of the 20th century).  Since then, cultural landscape has been understood as the territorial synthesis of the interaction across time between a specific social group (identified by its techniques, beliefs, and values) with its natural environment (“Culture is the agent, the natural area is the medium, the cultural landscape is the result”, The Morphology of Landscape 1925). More recently, cultural landscape has been defined, in a similar vein, as the current state of an unfinished evolution of the relationship between society and natural environment (Bertrand and Bertrand, 2002). This evolution is performed by:

  1. The dynamic combination established between abiotic, biotic and anthropic factors;
  2. The social perception of this combination.

Regarding ecosystem services, this concept is disseminated in the framework of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, 2005) as well as by different authors (Haines-Young, R. & Potschin, M., 2010).

Ecosystem services can be defined as the benefits that people eventually derive from the ecological structures and processes created by living organisms. Among the different ecosystem services, we can highlight cultural services provided due to the recognition of intangible assets linked to places, ecosystems and agro-systems. In this way, cultural ecosystem services match with, among other activities: scientific knowledge; environmental and patrimonial education; outdoor recreation (agro-tourism and eco-tourism); and social and personal fulfilment. Besides that, appreciation by urban populations can strengthen rural identity and belonging.

The links between ecosystem services, biodiversity, sustainability and human well-being are also explicitly manifested in the official texts themselves in which the definition of the category of cultural landscape is qualified: “Protection of cultural landscapes can contribute to modern techniques of sustainable land-use and can maintain or enhance natural values in the landscape.” (The Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, Annex 3, UNESCO, 1992). This approach has been developed, among others, by D. Raffaelli and C. Frieds (Ecosystem Ecology: A New Synthesis, 2010).

Hence, it seems adequate to assume, as a novel approach, that ecosystem services can reconcile the preservation of cultural landscapes with sustainable land use. As long as many cultural landscapes concern agro-systems preceding industrial economy, their continuing functioning should align with the preservation of both ecological processes and heritage values linked to pre-industrial habitats and engineering (traditional irrigation systems, terraces, saltworks, grazing areas, traditional rural and urban architecture, etc.).

This alignment relies on the economic rationale of farm activities that is threatened by different factors such as its location in peri-urban areas, the lack of labour force in depopulated deep rural areas and its low income. Moreover, heritage preservation under museum management has not proved particularly successful, as it lacks continuity arising from its dependence of public funds.

Thus, this theoretic standpoint faces multiple challenges in order to be implemented by land management:  How is it being encompassed by planning? What kind of planning is it: integrated, urban, sectorial or environmental? Has its implementation as a financial reward acted as a farm income supplement? Are there good practices in the alignment of production, heritage and environmental preservation (the Land Stewardship Network)?

This Special Issue is expected to feature how cultural landscapes and sustainable ecosystem services are linked and how they can be treated both from scholar and planning scopes. We would also like to gather study cases that can help to identify what are the mainstream challenges and responses about the acknowledgement of sustainable ecosystem services provided by the cultural landscape.

We look forward to receiving your original research articles and reviews.

Prof. Dr. Carmen Delgado-Viñas
Prof. Dr. María L. Gómez-Moreno
Prof. Dr. Marta Martínez-Arnáiz
Prof. Dr. Eugenio Baraja-Rodríguez
Prof. Dr. Álvaro Daniel Rodríguez Escudero
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Land is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • multifunctionality of cultural landscapes
  • heritage landscapes
  • sustainability of cultural landscapes
  • planning and management of cultural landscapes
  • socioeconomic and cultural ecosystem services
  • cultural ecosystem services
  • ecological ecosystem services
  • territorial identity

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

20 pages, 11695 KiB  
Article
The Precarious Survival of an Ancient Cultural Landscape: The Thousand-Year-Old Olive Trees of the Valencian Maestrat (Spain)
by Joan Carles Membrado-Tena and Jorge Hermosilla-Pla
Land 2023, 12(7), 1331; https://doi.org/10.3390/land12071331 - 02 Jul 2023
Viewed by 1229
Abstract
The object of study of this article is the Valencian Maestrat olive growing system (eastern Spain). Its landscape and heritage values are evaluated through a qualitative assessment method based on a Spanish research project studying MTASs (Multifunctional, Territorialized Agrifood Systems), which can be [...] Read more.
The object of study of this article is the Valencian Maestrat olive growing system (eastern Spain). Its landscape and heritage values are evaluated through a qualitative assessment method based on a Spanish research project studying MTASs (Multifunctional, Territorialized Agrifood Systems), which can be described as an alternative agricultural model to the worldwide agro-industrial model. The results of this analysis show that this olive growing system coincides with the MTAS criteria as regards the landscape, which offers ecosystem services (food, structured soil, and absorption of CO2 emissions) and possesses cultural and heritage values (ancient olive trees, traditional rain-fed lands, unaltered plot structures, and dry stone structures). However, as far as production is concerned, the Maestrat olive growing system does not respond fully to MTAS principles: its particular environmental conditions (soil and climate) restrict the production of quality oil, which is processed and marketed mainly through cooperatives and is economically viable only thanks to CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) aid. Nevertheless, the cooperative system allows for the survival, albeit precarious, of this agricultural system. Only a small number of Maestrat olive growing farmers produce quality oil in accordance with MTAS criteria (such as local single varieties, unique flavour, proximity sales, territory closeness, or good farming practices). Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

19 pages, 2279 KiB  
Review
A Review of Empirical Studies of Cultural Ecosystem Services in National Parks: Current Status and Future Research
by Xin Cheng
Land 2023, 12(10), 1912; https://doi.org/10.3390/land12101912 - 12 Oct 2023
Viewed by 1271
Abstract
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) provided by national parks (NP) have been increasingly recognized and appreciated by the public and researchers. However, they are often under-represented in ecosystem services evaluations due to their intangible nature. As a result, their application in supporting NP conservation [...] Read more.
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) provided by national parks (NP) have been increasingly recognized and appreciated by the public and researchers. However, they are often under-represented in ecosystem services evaluations due to their intangible nature. As a result, their application in supporting NP conservation and management remains limited. To map the knowledge generated by CES within NP and to support NP practices, this study conducted a review of 199 empirical studies to identify the geographic distribution of research, specific NP habitats/ecosystems that supply CES, frequently addressed CES subcategories, CES evaluation methods, and challenges and prospects for future studies. The results revealed the following: a disparity exists in the global distribution of studies, and the majority of research is conducted in Europe and the USA, with limited knowledge about CES in developing countries. Studies on CES derived from specific NP habitats/ecosystems are limited, and not all the services have received equal attention. Multiple evaluation methods have been employed to assess CES, primarily relying on non-monetary approaches. Among these, participatory mapping-related methods and social-media-based methods are widely favored by researchers. Based on those findings, this study makes the following recommendations: (1) further research is needed in order to investigate a wider range of NP habitats/ecosystems worldwide, especially in developing countries; (2) comprehensive evaluation methods should be employed, considering all services, especially those less addressed; (3) more diverse methods for evaluating CES should be developed, with a particular emphasis on combining various methods to enhance evaluation accuracy; (4) the use of diverse techniques, such as machine learning for social-media-based methods, is encouraged to support data collection and processing to improve the efficacy of evaluation; (5) further studies on the relationships between CES and NP features can assist stakeholders in more effectively addressing CES by enabling the management and adjustment of these features; (6) future studies should integrate CES evaluation into an ecosystem services framework to support application in NP conservation and sustainable management. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop