Opinion
Conceptualizing ecosystem services using social–ecological networks

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2021.11.012Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Social–ecological networks (SENs) provide a promising approach to represent the complex ecological, social, and social–ecological relationships that influence ecosystems service supply.

  • Ecosystem services can be represented in SENs as nodes, links, attributes, or as emergent properties of the network, each bringing distinct aspects of ecosystem services into focus to address different questions.

  • Applications of SENs in ecosystem service research can foster: (i) understanding of the social and ecological drivers of ecosystem services; (ii) forecasting of the impacts of stressors; (iii) investigation of trade-offs between ecosystem services; and (iv) assessment of the effects of alternative management options.

  • Ecosystem service research would benefit from a typology to conceptualize particular ecosystem services in SEN analyses and from greater clarity of when ecosystem service research can benefit from a SEN approach.

Social–ecological networks (SENs) represent the complex relationships between ecological and social systems and are a useful tool for analyzing and managing ecosystem services. However, mainstreaming the application of SENs in ecosystem service research has been hindered by a lack of clarity about how to match research questions to ecosystem service conceptualizations in SEN (i.e., as nodes, links, attributes, or emergent properties). Building from different disciplines, we propose a typology to represent ecosystem service in SENs and identify opportunities and challenges of using SENs in ecosystem service research. Our typology provides guidance for this growing field to improve research design and increase the breadth of questions that can be addressed with SEN to understand human–nature interdependencies in a changing world.

Section snippets

Ecosystem services as SENs

Ecosystem services (see Glossary) represent an interface between ecological and social systems, as the benefits people receive from nature [1]. Given the inherent dependencies between social and ecological systems, SENs have recently been proposed as a promising approach to conceptualize and manage ecosystem services [2., 3., 4., 5., 6.]. SENs complement and enhance current approaches to ecosystem service research (Box 1), such as those focused on the spatial mapping or valuing of ecosystem

Representing ecosystem services in SENs

Building on examples from the literature (Table 1), we identified four main approaches to the representation and analysis of ecosystem services as part of SENs: ecosystem services as links, nodes, node attributes, or emergent properties of the network (Figure 1; see Figure S1 in the supplemental information online for a terrestrial example). We propose that the choice of representation ought to be guided by the research question and context, rather than suggesting a single ‘best’

Remaining challenges and opportunities in the use of SENs for ecosystem service research

In this section, we identify key challenges and opportunities in the application of SENs that can help ecosystem service research to advance knowledge and fully leverage SEN approaches. In addition, we highlight the need for coordinated approaches to data collection in interdisciplinary research to generalize insights in Box 2.

Concluding remarks

SENs bridge social and ecological systems to represent the complex relationships that exist within and between them, enabling combined analyses of both synergistic and antagonistic relationships such as collaboration and conflict. While previous studies have investigated how SENs can be used in environmental management, here we specifically focus on ecosystem services (also applicable to Nature Contributions to People [1]) in SENs. We show four ways in which ecosystem services can be integrated

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Editor A.E.A. Stephens and two anonymous reviewers for insightful comments on an earlier version of this Opinion. We acknowledge funding from the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) to L.E.D., A.M.G., R.S.F. for funding a workshop that developed this research, under funding received from the National Science Foundation (NSF) DBI-1639145. We thank other participants of the workshop for fruitful discussions, as well as G. Rada and S. Bernhardt from iDiv Media

Declaration of interests

No interests are declared.

Glossary

Ecological network
network depicting ecological entities, such as species, functional groups, or patches, and the processes that connect them (e.g., species interactions, connectivity through dispersal).
Ecosystem service
material or immaterial benefits people receive from nature. They are often classified as provisioning (e.g., food, water), cultural (e.g., learning, inspiration, aesthetic value), and regulating (e.g., carbon sequestration, water purification). The Nature Contributions to People [

References (101)

  • J. Hines

    Towards an integration of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning and food web theory to evaluate relationships between multiple ecosystem services

    Adv. Ecol. Res.

    (2015)
  • P.F. Carcamo

    Using stakeholders’ perspective of ecosystem services and biodiversity features to plan a marine protected area

    Environ. Sci. Policy

    (2014)
  • M. Berbes-Blazquez

    Towards an ecosystem services approach that addresses social power relations

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2016)
  • B. Martín-López

    A novel telecoupling framework to assess social relations across spatial scales for ecosystem services research

    J. Environ. Manag.

    (2019)
  • R.D. Field et al.

    Multi-ecosystem services networks: a new perspective for assessing landscape connectivity and resilience

    Ecol. Complex.

    (2017)
  • H. Ernstson

    The social production of ecosystem services: a framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes

    Landsc. Urban Plan.

    (2013)
  • I. Palomo

    Disentangling the pathways and effects of ecosystem service co-production

    Adv. Ecol. Res.

    (2016)
  • A. Vallet

    Power asymmetries in social networks of ecosystem services governance

    Environ. Sci. Policy

    (2020)
  • D.N. Barton

    Assessing ecosystem services from multifunctional trees in pastures using Bayesian belief networks

    Ecosyst. Serv.

    (2016)
  • A. Bergsten

    Identifying governance gaps among interlinked sustainability challenges

    Environ. Sci. Policy

    (2019)
  • A. Fischer et al.

    Coproduction of ecosystem services as human–nature interactions – an analytical framework

    Land Use Policy

    (2016)
  • U. Bastolla

    Biodiversity in model ecosystems, I: coexistence conditions for competing species

    J. Theor. Biol.

    (2005)
  • P. Manning

    Transferring biodiversity-ecosystem function research to the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems

    Adv. Ecol. Res.

    (2019)
  • F. Battiston

    Networks beyond pairwise interactions: structure and dynamics

    Phys. Rep.

    (2020)
  • A.J. Golubski

    Ecological networks over the edge: hypergraph trait-mediated indirect interaction (TMII) structure

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2016)
  • J.A. Baggio et al.

    Managing ecological disturbances: learning and the structure of social–ecological networks

    Environ. Model. Softw.

    (2018)
  • M.J.O. Pocock

    The visualisation of ecological networks, and their use as a tool for engagement, advocacy and management

    Adv. Ecol. Res.

    (2016)
  • R. Costanza

    Changes in the global value of ecosystem services

    Glob. Environ. Change

    (2014)
  • E.K. Mbaru et al.

    Key players in conservation diffusion: using social network analysis to identify critical injection points

    Biol. Conserv.

    (2017)
  • E. de Lange

    Improving environmental interventions by understanding information flows

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2019)
  • S.L. Clec’h

    Mapping multiple ecosystem services indicators: toward an objective-oriented approach

    Ecol. Indic.

    (2016)
  • P. Balvanera

    Interconnected place-based social–ecological research can inform global sustainability

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • J.S. Sayles

    Social–ecological network analysis for sustainability sciences: a systematic review and innovative research agenda for the future

    Environ. Res. Lett.

    (2019)
  • The QUINTESSENCE Consortium

    Networking our way to better ecosystem service provision

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2016)
  • R. Seppelt

    A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead

    J. Appl. Ecol.

    (2011)
  • M.J. Martínez-Harms et al.

    Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review

    Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag.

    (2012)
  • L.C. Kluger

    Studying human–nature relationships through a network lens: a systematic review

    People Nat.

    (2020)
  • M.E. Saunders

    Ecosystem services networks: an accessible framework for decision-making

    EcoEvoRxiv.

    (2019)
  • M.R. Felipe-Lucia

    Land-use intensity alters networks between biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (2020)
  • U. Jacob

    Marine conservation: towards a multi-layered network approach

    Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci.

    (2020)
  • A.A. Keyes

    An ecological network approach to predict ecosystem service vulnerability to species losses

    Nat. Commun.

    (2021)
  • J.P. Metzger

    Connecting governance interventions to ecosystem services provision: a social-ecological network approach

    People Nat.

    (2021)
  • J.S. Sayles et al.

    Social–ecological network analysis of scale mismatches in estuary watershed restoration

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (2017)
  • M.L. Barnes

    Social determinants of adaptive and transformative responses to climate change

    Nat. Clim. Chang.

    (2020)
  • Ö. Bodin

    Theorizing benefits and constraints in collaborative environmental governance: a transdisciplinary social–ecological network approach for empirical investigations

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2016)
  • Ö. Bodin

    Improving network approaches to the study of complex social–ecological interdependencies

    Nat. Sustain.

    (2019)
  • A. Guerrero

    Achieving social–ecological fit through bottom-up collaborative governance: an empirical investigation

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2015)
  • J. Rocha

    Marine regime shifts: drivers and impacts on ecosystems services

    Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci.

    (2015)
  • T. Holstein

    Optimization of coupling and global collapse in diffusively coupled socio-ecological resource exploitation networks

    New J. Phys.

    (2021)
  • R. Dolan

    The flows of nature to people, and of people to nature: applying movement concepts to ecosystem services

    Land

    (2021)
  • Cited by (0)

    @

    Twitter: @salexander_11 (S.M. Alexander), @jaimedash (J. Ashander), @YumMusings (R.S. Friedman), @jagephart (J.A. Gephart), @KateHelmstedt (K.J. Helmstedt), @AislynAKeyes (A.A. Keyes), @SaylesJS (J. Sayles), and @LauraEllenDee (L.E. Dee).

    View full text