Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists.
The economic valuation of ecosystem services in part reflects the desire to use conventional economic tools (markets and economic instruments) to conserve ecosystem services. However, for regulating and supporting ecosystem services that depend on ecosystem structure and function, estimation of econ...
Published in: | PLOS ONE |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/article/99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e |
id |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e 2023-05-15T15:13:38+02:00 Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. Andrew N Kadykalo Lisa A Kelly Albana Berberi Jessica L Reid C Scott Findlay 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/article/99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e EN eng Public Library of Science (PLoS) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203 1932-6203 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/article/99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e PLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 5, p e0252463 (2021) Medicine R Science Q article 2021 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 2022-12-31T11:18:05Z The economic valuation of ecosystem services in part reflects the desire to use conventional economic tools (markets and economic instruments) to conserve ecosystem services. However, for regulating and supporting ecosystem services that depend on ecosystem structure and function, estimation of economic value requires estimates of the current level of underlying ecological functions first. This primary step is in principle, the job of environmental scientists, not economists. Here, we provide a coarse-level quantitative assessment of the relationship between the research effort expended by environmental scientists (on the biophysical values) and economists (on the monetary values) on 15 different regulating and supporting services in 32 ecosystem types using peer-reviewed article hits retrieved from bibliographic databases as a measure of research effort. We find a positive, moderately strong (r = 0.69) correlation between research efforts in the two domains, a result that, while encouraging, is likely to reflect serendipity rather than the deliberate design of integrated environmental science-economics research programs. Our results suggest that compared to environmental science research effort economic valuation is devoted to a smaller, less diverse set of ecosystem services but a broader, more diverse, set of ecosystem types. The two domains differed more with respect to the ecosystem services that are the major focus of research effort than they did with respect to the ecosystem types of principal research interest. For example, carbon sequestration, erosion regulation, and nutrient cycling receive more relative research effort in the environmental sciences; air quality regulation in economic valuations. For both domains, cultivated areas, wetlands, and urban/semi-urban ecosystem types received relatively large research effort, while arctic and mountain tundra, cave and subterranean, cryosphere, intertidal/littoral zone, and kelp forest ecosystem types received negligible research effort. We suggest ways and ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Tundra Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Arctic PLOS ONE 16 5 e0252463 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles |
op_collection_id |
ftdoajarticles |
language |
English |
topic |
Medicine R Science Q |
spellingShingle |
Medicine R Science Q Andrew N Kadykalo Lisa A Kelly Albana Berberi Jessica L Reid C Scott Findlay Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
topic_facet |
Medicine R Science Q |
description |
The economic valuation of ecosystem services in part reflects the desire to use conventional economic tools (markets and economic instruments) to conserve ecosystem services. However, for regulating and supporting ecosystem services that depend on ecosystem structure and function, estimation of economic value requires estimates of the current level of underlying ecological functions first. This primary step is in principle, the job of environmental scientists, not economists. Here, we provide a coarse-level quantitative assessment of the relationship between the research effort expended by environmental scientists (on the biophysical values) and economists (on the monetary values) on 15 different regulating and supporting services in 32 ecosystem types using peer-reviewed article hits retrieved from bibliographic databases as a measure of research effort. We find a positive, moderately strong (r = 0.69) correlation between research efforts in the two domains, a result that, while encouraging, is likely to reflect serendipity rather than the deliberate design of integrated environmental science-economics research programs. Our results suggest that compared to environmental science research effort economic valuation is devoted to a smaller, less diverse set of ecosystem services but a broader, more diverse, set of ecosystem types. The two domains differed more with respect to the ecosystem services that are the major focus of research effort than they did with respect to the ecosystem types of principal research interest. For example, carbon sequestration, erosion regulation, and nutrient cycling receive more relative research effort in the environmental sciences; air quality regulation in economic valuations. For both domains, cultivated areas, wetlands, and urban/semi-urban ecosystem types received relatively large research effort, while arctic and mountain tundra, cave and subterranean, cryosphere, intertidal/littoral zone, and kelp forest ecosystem types received negligible research effort. We suggest ways and ... |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Andrew N Kadykalo Lisa A Kelly Albana Berberi Jessica L Reid C Scott Findlay |
author_facet |
Andrew N Kadykalo Lisa A Kelly Albana Berberi Jessica L Reid C Scott Findlay |
author_sort |
Andrew N Kadykalo |
title |
Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
title_short |
Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
title_full |
Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
title_fullStr |
Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
title_sort |
research effort devoted to regulating and supporting ecosystem services by environmental scientists and economists. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
publishDate |
2021 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/article/99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e |
geographic |
Arctic |
geographic_facet |
Arctic |
genre |
Arctic Tundra |
genre_facet |
Arctic Tundra |
op_source |
PLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 5, p e0252463 (2021) |
op_relation |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203 1932-6203 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 https://doaj.org/article/99ffb861e24d4738b17595a69f16627e |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252463 |
container_title |
PLOS ONE |
container_volume |
16 |
container_issue |
5 |
container_start_page |
e0252463 |
_version_ |
1766344173015793664 |