Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Open access
Ernstson, Henrik·2013·Landscape and Urban Planning

Abstract

A framework is constructed for how to relate ecosystem services to environmental justice. The benefits humans and society can derive from biophysical processes cannot be viewed as objectively existing “out there”, but as entangled in social and political processes. This is unpacked through the analytical moments of generation, distribution and articulation of ecosystem services. Social practice moderates the generation of benefits from biophysical processes (through urban development patterns and day-to-day management of urban ecosystems), but also who in society that benefits from them, i.e. the distribution of ecosystem services (viewed here as the temporal and spatial scales at which it is possible for humans to benefit from biophysical processes). Moreover, for biophysical processes to attain value in decision-making, a social practice of value articulation is needed. The framework then moves between two levels of analysis. At the city-wide level, an ecological network translates how urban ‘green’ areas, viewed as nodes, are interconnected by ecological flows (water, species movement, etc.) where nodes have different protective and management capacities. The network captures spatial complexity—what happens in one location, can have effects elsewhere. At the local level, urban struggles over land-use are studied to trace how actors utilize artifacts and social arenas to articulate how certain biophysical processes are of value. Competing networks of value articulation strive to influence land-use, and multiple local studies bring understanding of how power operates locally, informing city-wide analyses. Empirical studies from Stockholm, Cape Town and other cities inform the framework.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.005

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 488

Metadata

Authors
Ernstson, H.
Venue
Landscape and Urban Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
109
Issue
1
Pages
7-17
ISSN
0169-2046 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978048398
Cited by
488
References
3
FWCI
13.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.005
The paper
Ernstson, H. (2013). The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.