TY - JOUR
T1 - Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia
AU - Matzek, Virginia
AU - Wilson, Kerrie A.
AU - Kragt, Marit
PY - 2019/2/1
Y1 - 2019/2/1
N2 - Conservation biology and restoration ecology have historically focused on promoting biodiversity and safeguarding endangered species. However, the ecosystem services (ES) concept has given these fields a new, anthropocentric rationale: promoting human wellbeing. Here we investigate how the ES concept has penetrated decision making and public support for ecological restoration in Australia, by examining the national government's funding priorities, land managers’ project goals, and the public's willingness to pay for restoration. We find that national funding priorities and local project implementation have thoroughly mainstreamed the ES concept, and that the public is generally supportive of ES goals. More than half of projects awarded funding, and two-thirds of land managers’ implemented projects, had explicit ES goals. Among managers who participated in semi-structured interviews, 45% rated ES aims as at least as important as biodiversity aims in their projects. The public was more willing to donate to a restoration scenario that included ES than one that did not, and 41% of the public chose an ES as the preferred outcome of restoration. Across all groups, provisioning services were the least preferred ES outcome, compared to regulating or cultural services. Our results indicate that ES are now important rationales for restoration funding and implementation.
AB - Conservation biology and restoration ecology have historically focused on promoting biodiversity and safeguarding endangered species. However, the ecosystem services (ES) concept has given these fields a new, anthropocentric rationale: promoting human wellbeing. Here we investigate how the ES concept has penetrated decision making and public support for ecological restoration in Australia, by examining the national government's funding priorities, land managers’ project goals, and the public's willingness to pay for restoration. We find that national funding priorities and local project implementation have thoroughly mainstreamed the ES concept, and that the public is generally supportive of ES goals. More than half of projects awarded funding, and two-thirds of land managers’ implemented projects, had explicit ES goals. Among managers who participated in semi-structured interviews, 45% rated ES aims as at least as important as biodiversity aims in their projects. The public was more willing to donate to a restoration scenario that included ES than one that did not, and 41% of the public chose an ES as the preferred outcome of restoration. Across all groups, provisioning services were the least preferred ES outcome, compared to regulating or cultural services. Our results indicate that ES are now important rationales for restoration funding and implementation.
KW - Conservation planning
KW - Natural resource management
KW - Prioritization
KW - Stakeholders
KW - Survey
KW - Willingness to pay
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057238006&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.005
DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.005
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85057238006
SN - 2212-0416
VL - 35
SP - 79
EP - 86
JO - Ecosystem Services
JF - Ecosystem Services
ER -