Cited by 335Land Use and Ecosystem ServicesEnvironmental Philosophy and EthicsConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

Ecosystem Services and Beyond: Using Multiple Metaphors to Understand Human–Environment Relationships

Open access
Raymond, Christopher M., Singh, Gerald G., Benessaiah, Karina, Bernhardt, Joanna R., Levine, Jordan, Nelson, Harry, Turner, Nancy J., Norton, Bryan +2 more·2013·BioScience

Abstract

Ecosystem services research has been focused on the ways that humans directly benefit from goods and services, and economic valuation techniques have been used to measure those benefits. We argue that, although it is appropriate in some cases, this focus on direct use and economic quantification is often limiting and can detract from environmental research and effective management, in part by crowding out other understandings of human–environment relationships. Instead, we make the case that the systematic consideration of multiple metaphors of such relationships in assessing social–ecological systems will foster better understanding of the many ways in which humans relate to, care for, and value ecosystems. Where it is possible, we encourage a deliberative approach to ecosystem management whereby ecosystem researchers actively engage conservationists and local resource users to make explicit, through open deliberation, the types of metaphors salient to their conservation problem.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 67 · Cited by 335

Authors
Raymond, C. M., Singh, G. G., Benessaiah, K., Bernhardt, J. R., Levine, J., Nelson, H., Turner, N. J., Norton, B., Tam, J., & Chan, K. M. A.
Affiliations
  • Charles Sturt University (AU)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • University of Victoria (CA)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
BioScience
Published
2013-07
Volume
63
Issue
7
Pages
536-546
ISSN
  • 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-3244
OpenAlex
W2104024295
Cited by
335
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4
FWCI
18.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BioScience (publishedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Environmental Philosophy and Ethics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
ecosystem services, metaphor, human-environment relationship, social-ecological systems, ecosystem management, deliberative approach, economic valuation, conservation, local resource users

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