8.1 Introduction
The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) originates in the 1970s when a first attempt
to define the beneficial ecosystem processes and functions was made based on a
utilitarian approach, aiming to increase public support for ecosystems’ conservation.
In the mid-1990s, the economists Costanza and Daily (Daily 1997) were among the
first researchers to introduce in the literature the concept of ecosystem services
valuation (Costanza et al. 1997). During the 2000s, the concept of ES has already
received much attention, and after the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment synthesis reports (MEA 2005), it is well-placed in the policy agenda. In
MEA, the Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) are for the first time officially defined
as a framework for understanding the ecosystems’ processes and functions, as well
as the relationship of ecosystems with human well-being. Long before that, attempts
to integrate the economic aspects of ES within policy decision-making have been
made and resulted in the establishment of several markets of ecosystem services or
payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes within that context. However, the CES is
the least developed category of ES, especially as far as the context of “ocean space”
is concerned.
Later, another framework that has also attracted the interest of the research
community, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB 2010), explicitly included CES as a services category linked to commercial or non-commercial
cultural-related values. But more than a decade later, CES are still not fully
operationalized in valuation exercises and the decision-making process, while the
definitions, conceptual models and assessment indicators related to CES are not yet
standardized. The qualitative and interpretative nature of CES as well as their
confusing and overlapping meanings can explain why standard assessment indicators are missing and why their measurement raises methodological challenges.
The boundaries of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) contain ocean/marine space
or settings that can combine several cultural elements such as protected shipwrecks,
marine conservation areas, marine parks, settlements, green spaces for leisure,
diving sites, etc. Thus, MPAs have the potential to bring new levels of integration
and protection to the management of cultural resources within the coastal and marine
environments. This explains how cultural benefits are placed within the context of
MPAs, which can be associated with a range of culturally defined attributes
(e.g. scenic beauty, distinctiveness, etc.). Although management plans based on
the valuation of ecosystem services provided by the habitats within their boundaries
have a track record of application (Börger et al. 2014), CES are rarely part of the
valuation exercises because they take place at different levels and realized by diverse
methods, as will be explained in the next sections.
126
L. Stergiopoulou et al.
The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES) originates in the 1970s when a first attempt
to define the beneficial ecosystem processes and functions was made based on a
utilitarian approach, aiming to increase public support for ecosystems’ conservation.
In the mid-1990s, the economists Costanza and Daily (Daily 1997) were among the
first researchers to introduce in the literature the concept of ecosystem services
valuation (Costanza et al. 1997). During the 2000s, the concept of ES has already
received much attention, and after the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment synthesis reports (MEA 2005), it is well-placed in the policy agenda. In
MEA, the Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) are for the first time officially defined
as a framework for understanding the ecosystems’ processes and functions, as well
as the relationship of ecosystems with human well-being. Long before that, attempts
to integrate the economic aspects of ES within policy decision-making have been
made and resulted in the establishment of several markets of ecosystem services or
payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes within that context. However, the CES is
the least developed category of ES, especially as far as the context of “ocean space”
is concerned.
Later, another framework that has also attracted the interest of the research
community, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB 2010), explicitly included CES as a services category linked to commercial or non-commercial
cultural-related values. But more than a decade later, CES are still not fully
operationalized in valuation exercises and the decision-making process, while the
definitions, conceptual models and assessment indicators related to CES are not yet
standardized. The qualitative and interpretative nature of CES as well as their
confusing and overlapping meanings can explain why standard assessment indicators are missing and why their measurement raises methodological challenges.
The boundaries of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) contain ocean/marine space
or settings that can combine several cultural elements such as protected shipwrecks,
marine conservation areas, marine parks, settlements, green spaces for leisure,
diving sites, etc. Thus, MPAs have the potential to bring new levels of integration
and protection to the management of cultural resources within the coastal and marine
environments. This explains how cultural benefits are placed within the context of
MPAs, which can be associated with a range of culturally defined attributes
(e.g. scenic beauty, distinctiveness, etc.). Although management plans based on
the valuation of ecosystem services provided by the habitats within their boundaries
have a track record of application (Börger et al. 2014), CES are rarely part of the
valuation exercises because they take place at different levels and realized by diverse
methods, as will be explained in the next sections.
126
L. Stergiopoulou et al.