Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLindo, Zoe
dc.contributor.advisorDodd, Matt
dc.contributor.advisorLing, Chris
dc.contributor.authorDarvill, Rachel
dc.date.accessioned2014-02-05T02:25:49Z
dc.date.available2014-02-05T02:25:49Z
dc.date.issued2014-02-04
dc.date.submitted2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10170/672
dc.description.abstractThe ecosystem service (ES) approach to conservation normally uses economic or biophysical assessments for valuating nature's services. In contrast, even though ES are required for human well-being, the actual uses of services by differing interest groups are rarely considered, nor are intangible cultural ES. The aim of this research was to quantify different uses for 15 cultural and provisioning ES indicators across seven groups on a regional scale, as well assess spatial differences in ES across eight groups using participatory GIS. Results demonstrate that different interest groups use ES differently; in terms of ES type, frequency of use, as well as spatial location of ES use. In particular, this work highlights the importance of considering cultural ES (e.g. aesthetic/scenic, sense-of-place) during decision making processes. Spatial locations of ES hotspots were also shown to correspond with established areas of high biodiversity, both required for effective and legitimate decisions regarding land use.en_US
dc.subjectbiodiversityen_US
dc.subjectcultural ecosystem servicesen_US
dc.subjectecosystem servicesen_US
dc.subjecthotspotsen_US
dc.subjectinterest groupsen_US
dc.subjectparticipatory GISen_US
dc.titleComparing and mapping ecosystem service use across interest groups in the Upper Peace River Watersheden_US
dc.degree.nameM.Sc. in Environment and Managementen_US
dc.degree.levelMastersen_US
dc.degree.disciplineSchool of Environment and Sustainabilityen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record