@misc{SchmidtSachseWalz2016,
  author    = {Schmidt, Katja and Sachse, Ren{\´e} and Walz, Ariane},
  title     = {Current role of social benefits in ecosystem service assessments},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {915},
  issn      = {1866-8372},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-44202},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-442024},
  pages     = {49 -- 64},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Ecosystem services have a significant impact on human wellbeing. While ecosystem services are frequently represented by monetary values, social values and underlying social benefits remain under explored. The purpose of this study is to assess whether and how social benefits have been explicitly addressed within socio-economic and socio-cultural ecosystem services research, ultimately allowing a better understanding between ecosystem services and human well-being. In this paper, we reviewed 115 international primary valuation studies and tested four hypotheses associated to the identification of social benefits of ecosystem services using logistic regressions. Tested hypotheses were that (1) social benefits are mostly derived in studies that assess cultural ecosystem services as opposed to other ecosystem service types, (2) there is a pattern of social benefits and certain cultural ecosystem services assessed simultaneously, (3) monetary valuation techniques go beyond expressing monetary values and convey social benefits, and (4) directly addressing stakeholder's views the consideration of social benefits in ecosystem service assessments. Our analysis revealed that (1) a variety of social benefits are valued in studies that assess either of the four ecosystem service types, (2) certain social benefits are likely to co-occur in combination with certain cultural ecosystem services, (3) of the studies that employed monetary valuation techniques, simulated market approaches overlapped most frequently with the assessment of social benefits and (4) studies that directly incorporate stakeholder's views were more likely to also assess social benefits. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{SchmidtWalzJonesetal.2016,
  author    = {Schmidt, Katja and Walz, Ariane and Jones, Isobel and Metzger, Marc J.},
  title     = {The sociocultural value of upland regions in the vicinity of cities in comparison with urban green spaces},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {920},
  issn      = {1866-8372},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-44201},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-442010},
  pages     = {465 -- 474},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Mountain and upland regions provide a wide range of ecosystem services to residents and visitors. While ecosystem research in mountain regions is on the rise, the linkages between sociocultural benefits and ecological systems remain little explored. Mountainous regions close to urban areas provide numerous benefits to a large number of individuals, suggesting a high social value, particularly for cultural ecosystem services. We explored and compared visitors' valuation of ecosystem services in the Pentland Hills, an upland range close to the city of Edinburgh, Scotland, and urban green spaces within Edinburgh. Based on 715 responses to user surveys in both study areas, we identified intense use and high social value for both areas. Several ecosystem services were perceived as equally important in both areas, including many cultural ecosystem services. Significant differences were revealed in the value of physically using nature, which Pentland Hills users rated more highly than those in the urban green spaces, and of mitigation of pollutants and carbon sequestration, for which the urban green spaces were valued more highly. Major differences were further identified for preferences in future land management, with nature-oriented management preferred by about 57\% of the interviewees in the Pentland Hills, compared to 31\% in the urban parks. The study highlights the substantial value of upland areas in close vicinity to a city for physically using and experiencing nature, with a strong acceptance of nature conservation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchmidtWalzJonesetal.2016,
  author    = {Schmidt, Katja and Walz, Ariane and Jones, Isobel and Metzger, Marc J.},
  title     = {The Sociocultural Value of Upland Regions in the Vicinity of Cities in Comparison With Urban Green Spaces},
  series = {Mountain research and development},
  volume    = {36},
  journal   = {Mountain research and development},
  publisher = {American Geophysical Union},
  address   = {Lawrence},
  issn      = {0276-4741},
  doi       = {10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-16-00044.1},
  pages     = {465 -- 474},
  year      = {2016},
  language  = {en}
}