Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecosystem Services
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoser

Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge

in practice
Heli Saarikoski a,⇑, Eeva Primmer a, Sanna-Riikka Saarela a, Paula Antunes b, Réka Aszalós c, Francesc Baró d,e,
Pam Berry f, Gemma Garcia Blanko g, Erik Goméz-Baggethun h, Laurence Carvalho i, Jan Dick i,
Robert Dunford f,j, Mihail Hanzu k, Paula A. Harrison j, Zita Izakovicova l, Miklós Kertész c,
Leena Kopperoinen a, Berit Köhler m, Johannes Langemeyer d,e, David Lapola n, Camino Liquete o,
Sandra Luque p, Peter Mederly q, Jari Niemelä r, Ignacio Palomo s, Guillermo Martinez Pastur t,
Pablo Luis Peri u, Elena Preda v, Jörg A. Priess w, Rui Santos b, Christian Schleyer x,y, Francis Turkelboom z,
Angheluta Vadineanu v, Wim Verheyden z, Suvi Vikström a, Juliette Young i
a
Finnish Environment Institute, P.O.Box 140, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland
b
CENSE Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal
c
Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Alkotmány u. 2-4, H-2163 Vácrátót, Hungary
d
Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Edifici Z (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193
Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain
e
Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), PRBB, Carrer Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain
f
Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK
g
Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation, Energy and Environment Division, Parque Tecnológico de Bizkaia, C/Geldo, Edificio 700, E-48160 Derio, Bizkaia, Spain
h
Department of International Environment and Development Studies (Noragric), Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway
i
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0QB, UK
j
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre, Library Avenue, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4AP, UK
k
Romanian National Institute for Research and Development in Silviculture, 13, Cloșca, 500040 Brașov, Romania
l
Institute of Landscape Ecology of the Slovak Academy of Science, Štefánikova 3, P.O.Box 254, 814 99 Bratislava, Slovak Republic
m
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway
n
Center for Meteorological and Climatic Studies Applied to Agriculture – CEPAGRI, Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp, Cidade Universitária ‘‘Zeferino Vaz” – 13083-970
Campinas, SP – Brazil
o
European Commission – Joint Research Centre (JRC), Via E. Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra (VA), Italy
p
IRSTEA, National Research Institute of Science and Technology for Environment and Agriculture, UMR TETIS, 500 rue JF BRETON, Montpellier 34000, France
q
Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 1, 94901 Nitra, Slovakia.
r
Department of Environmental Sciences, P.O. Box 65, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland.
s
Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Sede Building 1, 1st floor, Scientific Campus of the University of the Basque Country, 48940 Leioa, Spain
t
Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas (CADIC CONICET), Houssay 200, Ushuaia (9140) Tierra del Fuego, Argentina
u
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA)-Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral (UNPA)-CONICET, CC 332, Río Gallegos (9400) Santa Cruz, Argentina
v
University of Bucharest - Research Center in Systems Ecology and Sustainability, Splaiul Independentei 91-95, 050095 Bucharest, Romania
w
Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
x
Alpen-Adria-University Klagenfurt – Institute of Social Ecology, Schottenfeldgasse 29, 1070 Vienna, Austria
y
University of Kassel – Section of International Agricultural Policy and Environmental Governance, Steinstraße 19, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany
z
Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO), Kliniekstraat 25, 1070 Brussels, Belgium

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The promise that ecosystem service assessments will contribute to better decision-making is not yet pro-
Received 12 January 2017 ven. We analyse how knowledge on ecosystem services is actually used to inform land and water man-
Received in revised form 15 June 2017 agement in 22 case studies covering different social-ecological systems in European and Latin American
Accepted 31 July 2017
countries. None of the case studies reported instrumental use of knowledge in a sense that ecosystem ser-
Available online xxxx
vice knowledge would have served as an impartial arbiter between policy options. Yet, in most cases,
there was some evidence of conceptual learning as a result of close interaction between researchers,
practitioners and stakeholders. We observed several factors that constrained knowledge uptake, includ-
ing competing interests and political agendas, scientific disputes, professional norms and competencies,
and lack of vertical and horizontal integration. Ecosystem knowledge played a small role particularly in

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Saarikoski).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
2212-0416/Ó 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
2 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

those planning and policy-making situations where it challenged established interests and the current
distribution of benefits from ecosystems. The factors that facilitated knowledge use included application
of transparent participatory methods, social capital, policy champions and clear synergies between
ecosystem services and human well-being. The results are aligned with previous studies which have
emphasized the importance of building local capacity, ownership and trust for the long-term success
of ecosystem service research.
Ó 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction agreed evidence base on ecosystem services in concrete case stud-

ies in which knowledge users have been involved in knowledge
The premise in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, generation.
2005), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB, In this paper we examine the ways in which knowledge on
2010) and other significant research interventions on ecosystem ecosystem services, generated in the OpenNESS project (www.
services (e.g. de Groot et al., 2010; Kareiva et al., 2011; Maes openness-project.eu), was used to inform planning, policy-
et al., 2012; Braat and de Groot, 2012) is that knowledge of ecosys- making and management in 22 case studies covering different
tem services and their values can be used to inform, and improve, social-ecological systems in thirteen European and two Latin
decision-making. Yet the ways in which knowledge on ecosystem American countries. The real-world cases were designed to inte-
services is actually used to inform decision-making at different grate the concept of ecosystem services into land and water man-
governance levels is overlooked (Laurans et al., 2013; Jordan and agement. The work was carried out in close collaboration with
Russel, 2014; Primmer et al., 2015; Mann et al., 2015; Russel place-based experts, practitioners, policy-makers and other stake-
et al., 2016). As literature on the role of scientific knowledge in pol- holders throughout the research process, from 2013 till the begin-
icy making suggests, the knowledge-decision making dynamics are ning of 2017, applying participatory action research and
far more complicated than the linear knowledge transfer model unstructured observation methods. Drawing on the case study
assumes (Weiss, 1979; Jasanoff, 1987; Owens, 2012), implying that experiences, we address the following questions:
simply providing more knowledge does not automatically lead to
better and more informed decisions. Therefore, there is a need 1. How did practitioners, decision-makers and other stakeholders
for studies to better understand the patterns of ecosystem service take up and use the research and findings on ecosystem services
knowledge use and associated enablers and barriers in different provided by the case study research teams?
institutional, sectoral and operational contexts. As Russel et al., 2. What were the successes and failures in applying the ecosystem
(2016, p. 588) point out, ‘‘The debate within the ecosystem services services concept and knowledge in planning and decision-
community (both researchers and practitioners) about the condi- making at different governance levels, from national to opera-
tions in which new knowledge is or is not used, by whom and tional site level?
for what purpose, has barely begun”. 3. What were the factors that conditioned the consideration of
In the few studies that have addressed ecosystem service ecosystem services knowledge in different social-ecological sys-
knowledge use, a core message is that direct use of the concept tems and socio-political contexts in the case studies?
or the approach in supporting decision-making is limited. This is
the case, for example, in Australian natural resource management
(Plant and Ryan, 2013), German and Finnish land-use planning 2. Theoretical background
(Albert et al., 2014; Rinne and Primmer, 2016), the UK National
Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) (Waylen and Young, 2014) and other Literatures in the fields of public policy, science and technology
environmental assessments (Cowell and Lennon, 2014; Turnpenny studies, interpretive policy analysis, and new institutionalism have
et al., 2014), as well as in European decision-making more gener- addressed the questions of knowledge utilization and policy learn-
ally (Hauck et al., 2013). Waylen and Young (2014) find that ing: what is learned, by whom and what are the conditions under
despite its original rationale, the UK NEA has provided little oper- which it may or may not have effects on policy. This literature usu-
ational support for decision-making. In an analysis of environmen- ally distinguishes three main modes of knowledge use (Weiss,
tal assessments in general, Cowell and Lennon (2014, p. 278) find 1979; Waylen and Young, 2014; McKenzie et al., 2014; Russel
that an initial take-up of knowledge occurs mainly in places that et al., 2016): (i) instrumental or technical use, when knowledge
already share environmental concerns. The authors find no support directly informs decisions and helps to select the appropriate
for the assumption that environmental values would be given means to reach the goal; (ii) political or strategic use, when knowl-
greater weight if they are represented in economic terms: ‘‘[W] edge is employed to attain political objectives or to argue for a par-
here novel assessment approaches lead to conclusions that chal- ticular case; and (iii) conceptual use, when knowledge informs
lenge economic priorities, the fact that environmental values decision-making by introducing new ideas, challenges existing
might come clothed in economic language of ‘capital’ or ‘services’ beliefs and opens up new opportunities for policy change.
offers little protection against them being criticized or set aside”. Knowledge utilization can be seen both as a process and an out-
Turnpenny et al. (2014) find that there are still significant obstacles come. Elaborating on this insight, Rich (1997) has provided a typol-
standing in the way of the systematic embedding of an ecosystem ogy of the various stages of knowledge use (see also Jordan and
service approach in UK policy appraisal documents. They maintain Russel, 2014). In the simplest form, knowledge is ‘used’ when it
that understanding the use of knowledge on ecosystem services in has been received and taken in. It has ‘utility’, when a user judges
decision-making requires an understanding of the barriers and knowledge as having potential value but the purpose for which has
enabling factors operating at different levels within institutions. yet to be identified. It has ‘influence’ when it has contributed to a
On a more optimistic note, Haines-Young and Potschin (2014), decision, and finally, it has ‘impact’ when information has led to
McKenzie et al. (2014), Ruckelshaus et al. (2015) and Saarela and clear and concrete action. These categories recognize the fact that
Rinne (2016) observed that local actors were able to form an knowledge can have multiple pathways, including the framing of

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 3

policy problems and proposals as well as putting forward, defend- tional hierarchical, top-down governance processes (Muradian
ing and rejecting arguments in policy processes (Kingdon, 2003). It and Rival, 2012; Primmer et al., 2015).
can generate both visible, short term responses as well as more Some scholars have approached knowledge use from a policy
subtle and diffuse changes in policy frames that are time-lagged learning perspective. Through policy learning, individuals and col-
but traceable—and in some case also untraceable but nevertheless lectives acquire new information, assess and evaluate it, and
existing (Owens, 2015). accept, adopt and act on it (Heikkilä and Gerlak, 2013). The degree
The analyses of knowledge use are not only about the modes of policy learning depends on several factors (Cash et al., 2003;
and impacts of knowledge but importantly also about the reasons Rydin and Falleth, 2006; Heikkilä and Gerlak, 2013), including (i)
why knowledge is used, or not used, in decision-making. Some knowledge co-production between relevant actions to increase
authors emphasize the role of competing interests and political the ownership, relevance, credibility and legitimacy of knowledge
agendas (Cashore et al., 2001; Owens et al., 2004; Nykvist and for stakeholders and policy-makers; (ii) social capital, which refers
Nilsson, 2009) or advocacy coalitions (Sabatier, 1988) in the com- to trusting and reciprocal patterns of relationships, and supports
plex and contested areas of public policy as well as the underlying open communication and sharing of ideas and knowledge; (iii)
political climate and power relations, which contribute to the suc- the presence of policy champions, or brokers, who can bridge the
cess of interests and agendas as well as the related ideas and knowledge producers and users, and foster new ideas and open-
knowledge claims (Kingdon, 2003; Juntti et al., 2009). In highly ness to information sharing; and (iv) intellectual capital, such as
contested policy-making situations, imperatives located in the knowledge and expertise of individuals and organizations, as well
political sphere often dominate scientific evidence, and knowledge as technical resources and tools like databases and information
is used not to inform decision-making but to legitimize pre- systems, which can determine the type of information that collec-
existing positions (Sharman and Holmes, 2010). Others have tives will be interested in learning, seeking out, or having access to
focused on formal and informal institutions and looked at the ways (Heikkilä and Gerlak, 2013).
in which knowledge is actually used to shape decisions and man- The issues that influence knowledge uptake and function either
agement processes in general (March and Olsen, 1984) and on as constraining or enabling factors are summarized below. We
ecosystem services in particular (Loft et al., 2015; Primmer, have used them to structure our analysis (Section 4) but as we
2016). Formal institutions, such as laws, regulations and policies, explain in the methodology (Section 3), we added a few categories
set the framework for the use and management of ecosystems, that arose from the data and not from the theoretical literature.
and often define the types of information that can be used in
decision-making (Primmer, 2016; Bouwma et al., 2016; Ruhl,  Competing interests and political agendas (Section 4.2.1)
2016). Integrating the concept of ecosystem services into planning  Power relations and modes of governance (Section 4.2.2)
and policy-making processes is seen to require vertical policy inte-  Contested knowledge claims (Section 4.2.3)
gration between different levels of government (EU-level, national,  Regulatory frameworks and property rights (Section 4.2.4)
regional and municipal) as well as horizontal integration across  Vertical and horizontal policy integration (Section 4.2.5)
different policy fields and thematic objectives. Competencies to  Professional norms, competencies and codes of conduct
address the management of ecosystem services are dispersed over (Section 4.2.6)
several political and administrative levels, and strategies to  Knowledge co-production (Section 4.3.1)
improve effective decision-making on ecosystem services must  Social capital (Section 4.3.2)
be balanced vertically. In a similar way, the management of ecosys-  Policy champions (Section 4.3.3)
tems is affected by several policies (e.g. agricultural, urban and  Intellectual capital (Section 4.3.4)
regional developmental) which might have contradictory objec-
tives (Schleyer et al., 2015). Another key determinant is property
rights, which define the ownership of ecosystems and ecosystem 3. Materials and methods
services, as well as the access to them (Vatn, 2010). Poorly defined,
inadequately enforced or non-existent property rights have been Our analysis is based on the researchers’ first-hand experiences
identified as a major driver of natural resource exploitation (Loft in working with policy-makers, practitioners and place-based
et al., 2015; Rinne and Primmer, 2016). Informal institutions, such experts to put the concept of ecosystem services into practice in
as professional norms and practices as well as organizational rou- 22 case studies (Fig. 1) of the OpenNESS project (see Jax et al., in this
tines and standard ways of operating, play a major role in how for- issue), covering thirteen European and two Latin American coun-
mal rules are interpreted and implemented on the ground tries. The case study research design aimed at comparing similar
(Primmer et al., 2013; Loft et al., 2015). Waylen et al. (2015) use types of land and water management situations, such as urban
the term ‘sticking points’ to denote the legacy effects of formal and land use planning, and forest and farmland management, in dif-
rules and informal norms, pre-existing ways of framing and know- ferent geographical and institutional contexts (Table 1). The bound-
ing, and pre-existing power relations and interests. They point out ary conditions for case study selection—focus on European land and
that these categories are overlapping as it is often difficult to dis- water management case studies with some research effort in non-
tinguish between ways of working (institutional sticking points) European countries—were set in the call for FP7 funding in 2011, to
and ways of knowing (cognitive sticking points). Furthermore, they which the OpenNESS project responded. A further case study selec-
observe that cognitive and political sticking points often reinforce tion criterion was that the cases involved real-world planning and
each other as certain framings are used to defend existing interests. management processes, or timely policy problems, and that the
Finally, modes of governance influence the relations between soci- key actors involved in these processes, the ‘problem owners’, were
etal interest and the state, for example, by specifying how citizens interested in working with the case study research teams and par-
and interest groups can participate in the policy processes and ticipating in a transdisciplinary research project.
bring up knowledge and ideas to influence public policy (Cashore The case study research teams interacted closely with case
et al., 2001). Multi-level participatory governance processes, by study advisory boards (CAB), which were established by the
which the use of common pool resources, such as most ecosystem research teams and the problem owners, and included natural
services, are decided upon by a broad range of societal actors, are resource managers and/or land-use planners, decision-makers,
seen to be more open to new ideas and innovations than tradi- interest groups representatives and local actors (see Table 1). The

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
4 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Fig. 1. Case study locations.

role of the CABs was to define the ecosystem service management In analyzing the data, we used thematic analysis, which aims at
or decision-making problem at hand, to identify the research needs identifying patterns, or themes, across the data that are important
with the case study research teams, to discuss the premises as well to understand the research question (Silverman, 1993), in this case
as outputs of the analyses, and to provide local knowledge and/or the factors that conditioned the successes and failures in introduc-
value information needed by some assessment methods. This par- ing the concept of ecosystem services in planning and decision-
ticipatory action research approach allowed the case study making. The coding of the data was informed by the theoretical
researchers to assess the ways in which the CAB members received framework, which sensitized us to the categories listed at the
and processed the ecosystem service knowledge and planned or end of Section 2. However, the coding was partly inductive as some
indicated an interest in acting on it, as well as the institutional con- of the categories such as conceptual and methodological shortcom-
straints and opportunities for integrating the knowledge in man- ings (Section 4.2.5) and links between ecosystem services and
agement and decision-making processes. The CAB members’ human well-being (Section 4.3.4) arose from the narrative case
feedback on the ES assessment methods and their results were also study descriptions and not from the theoretical literature. We
collected through questionnaires, semi-structured face-to-face organized the coded data in initial Appendices 1 and 2, and sent
interviews, focus groups discussions and workshops with the the tables back to the case study teams for completion and valida-
CAB members and/or other knowledge users. The details of the tion. This procedure helped to enrich the data as case study teams
research methods in each case study are presented in Table 1. were invited to consider whether the categories and observations
To crystalize the lessons on knowledge use across the case stud- by other case studies were relevant for their case studies. If this
ies, a two-hour workshop with the case study researchers was was not the case, they were asked to mark N/A to make sure that
organized in April 2016. The members of the case study teams dis- they covered all categories systematically.
cussed the successes and failures in knowledge uptake, as well The analyses were carried out throughout the research process
as associated constraints and enabling factors, in facilitated cross- and right after it and therefore we could not trace the long-term
case study breakout groups. The results of these discussions were effects of the new knowledge in ensuing management and policy
written down by the facilitators and constituted part of the data. processes (see e.g. Owens, 2015). On the other hand, we could
The main body of data was written narratives by the case study examine closely the ways in which actors in the transdisciplinary
team members, addressing the same questions as the break-out research processes under study received the information, judged
groups, collected in templates in May 2016. its usefulness and indicated an interest in or plan to act on it. We

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
 Table 1
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

The case study code, focus, impact, participants and sources of data.

Code Case focus Utilization of ecosystem service knowledge Participants engaged in the research process Sources of data
ALPS Multi-functional forest Participatory work helped to identify knowledge gaps in Representatives of the National Forest Office Participant observation of three Case Study Advisory Board
management for Vercors economically and ecologically viable management options that and other regional stakeholders including (CAB) meetings (n = 20); e-mail survey (n = 8) at the end of the
Mountains Range in the are not sufficiently understood in French forest policy-making, forest owners, farmers, landowners and policy process + field visits
French Alps region and opening a debate on the compromise between forest makers at the municipality level
productivity and conservation. The research contributed to a
learning process among the key stakeholders; the results are
available for next regional rural development planning exercise.
The CAB had a very good representativeness at the regional level
but missed national level actors. Local actions for conservation
were undertaken improving biodiversity targets
BARC Urban planning in the The ES approach provides a link between ecosystems Representatives of local and regional Participant observation of three CAB meetings; e-mail survey
metropolitan region of conservation and human well-being, which was very much authorities, public agencies, research (n = 11) at the end of the process
Barcelona, Spain appreciated by planners and policy-makers. The Provincial institutes, farmer’s union and NGOs
Council was very interested in integrating ES maps in their
decision-support tool. However, the CAB didn’t have an explicit
mandate to integrate the ES approach in landscape/urban
planning

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

BIOB Sugarcane bioenergy The decision-makers were particularly interested in the water- Decision-makers, sugarcane and food CAB meetings; participatory workshops. Open-ended interviews
production of from in related ES of the PES scheme producers (n = 5); semi-structured questionnaire with break-out groups
interior São Paulo, Brazil (n = 50)
BIOF Forest bioenergy production The regional CAB was an ad hoc group, set up as a sounding 1st stage: Regional level stakeholders including Participant observation of four CAB1 meetings; CAB member
in Finland board for the research results, without any specific role in forest owners, forest industries and face-to-face semi-structured interviews (n = 10); focus group
decision-making. The national level CAB included key actors in environmental authorities (CAB1). 2nd stage: and questionnaire (n = 10) in the last meeting; participant
forest policy making, and we tried to engage them in knowledge Representatives from the relevant ministries, observation of two CAB2 workshops; CAB2 member face-to-face
co-production. However, it was difficult to engage national-level ENGOs and forest owners and bioenergy lobby semi-structured interviews (n = 10); questionnaire (n = 6) at the
actors in a process which required frequent interaction organisations (CAB2) end of the process
BIOG Crop bioenergy production The CAB members were very interested in the perspective of ES Policymakers, representatives of federal and Formal and informal discussions during the four CAB meetings;
in Saxony, Germany and the results, and they found the exchange of ideas with other national scale institutions, NGOs and questionnaire (n = 6) at the end of the process
stakeholders helpful. However, the land use planners were associations
reluctant to adopt the concept of ES; they felt that it did not add
value to the previously used concepts GI and Multifunctional
Landscapes
CAPM Forest management and Local authorities were not interested in ES provided by the The local forest administration service, local Correspondence and collaboration with the local decision-
illegal logging in Romania forests, one of the main arguments was: ”If we have the chance authorities including mayor, local council, local makers, the general public perception on the forests was
to cut forest and we do not do it, our competitors will say we are police and local forest inspectorate surveyed. 53 interviews based on cognitive-psychological
stupid” method with ordinary members of the communities. 51 semi-
structured interviews conducted with mayors, forest inspectors,
prosecutors, police officers, members of the local councils, forest
management planners, forest guards and 5 priests
CNPM An integrated management Transdisciplinary research is still relatively new in Scotland, and Local decision-makers and residents Participant observation of three CAB meetings (n = 10) and
plan for biodiversity and the participants were cautious of the process and wished to informal discussions with CAB members. Three workshops
tourism in Cairngorms explore the concept, tools and outputs without a commitment to (n = 5, 6 12) and face-to-face interviews with CAB chairmen.
National Park, Scotland make a decision based solely on the results of a piece of research Two stakeholder evaluation of specific methods (n = 15, 15) and
which they did not exactly understand questionnaire with stakeholders at the end of the process
(n = 15)
CRKL Farmland management and The land user planners committed themselves to consider the Project coordinators of the land consolidation Participant observation of two participatory stakeholder events
planning for green corridors research results seriously, and to act upon them (if useful and project ‘De Cirkel’, representatives of local with focus group discussions on four main project themes;
in agricultural land in De feasible) administrations, nature conservation NGO, regular discussions with project coordinators; 18 individual
Cirkel, Belgium social employment NGOs, farmers, local interviews and questionnaire at the end of the process (n = 18)
businesses and schools, local residents
DANU An integrated and adaptive Participatory processes were well appreciated at the CAB level, Representatives of management authorities, Focus-group discussions (n = 6); semi-structured interviews
management plan for Lower but the process would have needed national level participants to decision-makers, local residents, local SMEs (n = 5); observation of participants in the 10 CAB meetings and
Danube River, Romania have a policy impact. However, there is evidence that the long- and professional associations, tourism other stakeholders meetings (n = 15); face-to-face interviews
term work by the research team in the area has contributed to operators, NGOs etc. and discussions with key stakeholders representatives (n > 25);

(continued on next page)

5
 6
Table 1 (continued)
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

Code Case focus Utilization of ecosystem service knowledge Participants engaged in the research process Sources of data
an integrated and adaptive governance of Delta region questionnaire at the end of the process (n = 11)
DONN Management of Doñana The recent decline of the vineyard sector made its 1st stage: ES beneficiaries; 2nd stage: 1st stage: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders
National Park and the representatives to welcome the ES approach as an opportunity Representatives from: natural park (n = 10); survey (n = 172) administered to local population. 2nd
surrounding landscape in to highlight the importance of the sector in providing multiple development agency, environmental NGO, stage: Participant observation of three CAB meetings, oral
Spain and synergistic ES wine farmers, municipalities, regional interviews (n = 9) with key stakeholders; e-mail questionnaire
government, etc. (n = 2) at the end of the process
ESSX Bioiversity and ecosystem The research intervention had limited impact on planning Planners, wildlife trusts, offset providers, Meetings with key stakeholders and participant observation of
service offsetting in Essex, practice due to lack of data. The environment has also been seen developers etc. two participatory workshops. Questionnaire (n = 11) at the end
UK as a barrier to growth of the process
GOMG Multipurpose wetland The actors involved in the case study showed a lot of interest in Representatives of local administration, Observation of three CAB meetings; a focus group discussion;
construction in a peri-urban the study but would have needed further proof of the regional institutions and NGOs questionnaires at the end of the process (n = 11)
area, Gorla Maggiore, Italy functioning and feasibility of multipurpose wetlands to treat
sewage overflows. The final application of the knowledge
created in the case study by water managers is uncertain and
beyond the control of the case study researchers
KISK Water management in semi- By identifying the main problems and involving local Representatives of local water management Preference assessment study by photo elicitation (n = 150);
arid region in Kiskunság, stakeholders the basis was laid for the resolution of the water- authority, water management experts, land participant observation of five CAB meetings and four
Hungary management conflicts in the area and the introduction of ES users, nature conservationists, regional stakeholder workshops; Drawing competition for local youth

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

perspective. However, despite its initial intent, the research did development agencies, NGOs, local school (n = 45); semi-structured interviews + questionnaires at the end
not change the water management in the area teachers, churches, healthcare workers etc. of the process (n = 10)
LLEV Management of lake Loch The CAB meetings helped to build consensus between some Representatives of local management and CAB meetings; focus group discussions with the CAB members
Leven, Scotland stakeholders who had previously been at odds with each other decision-making, representatives of anglers (n = 10) and questionnaire following CAB meeting (n = 5)
(e.g. fishing vs nature conservation). Through this process they and recreational users of the area
learnt they had some common goals that they could work
together to achieve (e.g. more control on water level
management)
OSLO Urban planning in Oslo, The participatory process was characterized by a fruitful Representatives of the Urban Environment Eight CAB meetings and a one day seminar where 15 method
Norway cooperation between the research team and the main Agency, the Planning and Building Agency and tests were carried out and evaluated; questionnaire at the end of
stakeholder in this case – Oslo Municipality’s Urban the Water and Sewage Agencies the process (n = 3); semi-structured interviews with involved
Environment Agency researchers (n = 4)
SACV Management of Coastal The case study was not conducted in the scope of an actual Representatives of the SACV Natural Park Participation and input collected in CAB meetings and five
Natural Park (Sudoeste decision context and participants had no mandate to take authority, association of local nature-based stakeholder workshops.Individual semi-structured interviews in
Alentejano e Costa decisions. Top-level decision makers did not participate in the tourism operators, municipalities, farmers’ the initial scoping stage. Individual meetings with some actors
Vicentina), Portugal participatory events, although they were always invited and association, local actors, environmental NGOs, to clarify key aspects. Interviews with CAB members and
showed interest. However, the Association of Local Tourism fishermen’s association, regional water experts.
operators is currently using the information that was generated administration Questionnaire at the end of the process (n = 14)
in the case study, in particular recreation ES maps, to draw a
plan for the expansion of the existing network of Nature Trails in
the area. Furthermore, the farmers participating in the research
process changed their perception regarding the role of natural
vegetation in providing nesting and foraging resources for
pollinators
SIBB Sibbesborg urban planning The researchers worked closely with municipal land use Municipal planners, planning consultancy and Participating in early stage planning workshops and CAB
process in Finland planners, first in establishing criteria for a planning competition local stakeholders meetings; questionnaire at the end of the process (n = 7)
to convert a rural area to residential area, and then providing
information about ecosystem service provisioning of alternative
planning options. The report by the case study researchers was
included as background material of the Local Master Plan
SPAT Forest management in Industry and private sector representatives actively participated Representatives of the government, local CAB meetings with web based semi-structured interviews and
Southern Patagonia, in the study and in several instances also adopted the authorities and producers (owners of ranches questionnaires (n = 8); web based semi-structured interviews
Argentina suggestions arising from the case study work, even though this and sawmills), forest offices, universities etc. (n = 8) with the final inputs
was not a compulsory requirement by of the Forest Office
STEV Developing a shared vision Some important stakeholders were absent (especially private Local stakeholders including policy makers, Stakeholder analysis report; observations during two CAB
for Stevoort flood control forest owners). Tapping on an on-going planning process limited water management experts and NGOs meetings; regular discussions with the project coordinator;
area, Belgium the degree of freedom: some of the issues were already decided questionnaire (n = 2)
and the planners did want to have them re-opened.
 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 7

could also identify the reasons why the actors found the informa-

Meetings with key stakeholders; participant observation of two

with selected key stakeholders; results of face to face interviews
Participant observation of five CAB meetings and five meetings
tion useful and actionable, or why they did not make use of it.
with 25 representatives of municipalities; questionnaire with

CAB meetings; questionnaire at the end of the process (n = 2) 4. Results and discussion

stakeholder workshops with key stakeholders and a

CAB members at the end of the process (n = 11)

questionnaire (n = 5) at the end of the process

4.1. Utilization of ecosystem service knowledge in the case studies

All case studies engaged a broad range of stakeholders, includ-

ing public authorities and decision-makers, and looked at real-life
policy or management problems in actual decision-making con-
text. Furthermore, the case studies were highly successful in terms
of adopting a holistic approach and addressing multiple ecosystem
services instead of thinking about the environment in terms of sin-
gle issues or problems (cf. Waylen et al., 2015). However, most
cases were mainly research driven interventions, not commis-
sioned by the authorities or policy-makers, and hence it is not sur-
prising that there were not many instances where knowledge
informed management and decision-making directly. For example,
water regulation in Kiskunság Sand Ridge (KISK) aimed at influenc-
ing water retention management and combatting a drop in ground
university, land use planning company, NGO

water level resulting from drainage, carried out in the last century
environmental experts and urban planners

Planners, wildlife trusts, offset providers,

to convert wetland area to agricultural land, and currently used to

authorities, Ministry of Environment,
Representatives of local and regional

protect farmlands from inland water. Yet because of a lack of man-

Representatives of the municipality,

date of the researchers, and a mismatch in timing of the research

within the local administration

intervention and management decisions, the researchers found

and private business sector

that they did not have a significant impact on the decision-

making process: the project did not change the water management
system in the region, nor did it provide more water for traditional
land-uses such as pastures small-scale arable fields, vineyards and
developers etc.

orchards. Lack of mandate (e.g. BARC, BIOF, GOMG) and attention

by national level policy makers (e.g. ALPS, DANU, SACV) was a
major impediment of knowledge uptake also in other cases.
However, knowledge was used in most case studies in the sense
that it was received and taken in by the key actors involved in the
The case study is one of the first examples of ES assessment and
certainly the first attempt to implement ES concept in land use

The concept was already well known by the city planners. Now,

the city interventions in the future. The research provided a new

they are even more conscious about how this could be useful to

District planners took a keen interest in the research process and

functions of the river landscapes, the ES-approach added some

planning process in Slovakia. Trnava case study is serving as a

pilot study for the Slovakian Ministry of Environment and the

CABs. Knowledge also had utility in several cases (ALPS, BARC,

CNPM, CRKL, DANU, DONN, GOMG, KISK, LLEV, OSLO, SACV, SIBB,
were happy to provide their data-sets for the researchers
Although water management already works on multiple

SPAT, STEV, TRNA, VGAS, WCSO) in which researchers worked clo-

approach that may be used in future urban planning

sely with local authorities and land-use planners who were

findings feed directly into Slovakian MAES process

involved in the selection of the tools to be tested and providing

the data needed for the analyses (see also Harrison et al., this
issue). In these cases, the results will stay with the planners, public
authorities or other relevant actors who can draw on them in the
future. Moreover, some cases succeeded in having an actual impact
on decision-making. An example is the Sibbesborg urban case
(SIBB) in Finland, in which researchers worked closely with munic-
ipal land-use planners, first in establishing criteria for a planning
competition to convert a rural area in southern Finland to housing
for 100,000 residents, and then providing information about
ecosystem service provisioning of alternative planning options.
extra layers

The report by the case study researchers was included as back-

ground material of the Local Master Plan. In a similar vein, the
ecosystem service maps developed for the metropolitan region of
Barcelona by the case study researchers (BARC) have been included
planning in urban and peri-

in a decision-support tool by the city of Barcelona. Another positive

Biodiversity and ecosystem
Gasteiz municipality, Spain
Urban planning in Vitoria-

example is from Portugal, where the Association of Local Tourism

urban areas in Trnava,
Landscape-ecological

operators is currently using the information that was generated

Warwickshire, UK
service offsetting,

in the case study (SACV), in particular recreation ecosystem service

maps, to draw a plan for the expansion of the existing network of
Nature Trails in the area. The potential for knowledge feeding into
Slovakia

decision-making is also quite high in the Trnava case study (TRNA),

which was serving as a pilot study for the Ministry of Environment
and fed into mapping and assessment of ecosystem services (the
WCSO

MAES process) in Slovakia.

TRNA

VGAS

None of the case studies reported instrumental use of knowl-

edge in the sense that ecosystem service knowledge would have

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
8 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

been the ‘missing piece’ of information needed to make decisions research. Therefore, it seems that a view of the environment either
(see Weiss, 1979). This is quite understandable because most cases as an asset or a barrier to growth determined the success of
involved trade-offs between ecosystem services and related inter- research initiatives. This observation agrees with Cowell and
ests and values; knowledge as such cannot serve as an impartial Lennon (2014), who noted that assessment techniques which
arbiter in such decision-making situations (Bijker et al., 2009). mobilize conceptions of environmental limits, such as ecosystem
Even in cases like Gorla-Maggiore (GOMG), which demonstrated services and biodiversity offsetting, resonated most strongly in
the benefits from multi-purpose wetlands (Masi et al., 2016; locations where popular politics and institutional norms embody
Liquete et al., 2016), authorities were cautious and needed more a sense of threat to the countryside and wider environmental
proof of the functioning of nature-based solutions. Strategic use quality.
of knowledge was reported in the Doñana case (DONN) in which
wine growers used the research results to support their argument,
4.2.2. Power relations and modes of governance
that is, to ensure the viability of traditional vineyards, which pro-
Policy-making is shaped by the participating actors and their
vide multiple provisioning, cultural and regulating services.
concerns reading the political, technical and financial feasibility
In most cases there was some evidence of conceptual use of
of the policy options, often conditioned by the relative power of
knowledge as a result of close interaction between stakeholders
these actors (Mann et al., 2015; da Conceição et al., 2015). Power
in the CABs. For example, stakeholders in the Oslo case felt that
differences have shaped forest policy-making in Finland, where
the mapping and valuation research process resulted in changed
forest owners and forest industries have traditionally had a privi-
understanding of the importance of green spaces, and green struc-
leged access to national forest policy formulation (Ollonqvist,
tures such as city trees, and that it will contribute to the ways in
2002). Promoting forest bioenergy ranks particularly high on the
which nature will be seen in urban planning in the future. In a sim-
current right-wing government agenda, and critical voices on the
ilar vein, the Patagonian case study (SPAT) increased understand-
negative consequences of forest bioenergy on biodiversity and car-
ing of the synergies between biodiversity and forest ecosystem
bon sequestration have not had much influence in decision-
services among stakeholders who previously had focused mainly
making. Against this backdrop, and in the political climate of eco-
on provisioning services (Martínez Pastur et al., 2017). In the Costa
nomic recession, the Finnish forest bioenergy case (BIOF) did not
Vicentina Natural Park case in Portugal (SACV), farmers participat-
succeed in contributing much to the national-level policy debate.
ing in the research process changed their perception regarding the
The privileged position of business sector representatives, and con-
role of natural vegetation in providing nesting and foraging
sequent lack of interest in voicing their concerns via the case study
resources for pollinators, and agreed that agricultural planning
work, was observed also in other cases (e.g. DANU, TRNA).
and practices could be changed accordingly.
Several of the case studies, especially the local level land use
In the next two sections we discuss in detail the factors that
planning and nature park management cases, could be character-
prevented or slowed down the real uses of ecosystem service
ized as multi-level governance processes (Muradian and Rival,
assessment and valuation results in the case studies as well as
2012) in which the managers and planners worked closely with
the factors that facilitated their employment in practice.
the stakeholders and researchers to seek new solutions to ensure
the flow of ecosystem services. These cases (e.g. CRKL, LLEV, SACV,
4.2. Constraints to the use of ecosystem services information
SIBB, VGAS) were also the ones which allowed more openings for
ecosystem service research (see also Loft et al., 2015). In contrast,
4.2.1. Competing interests and political agendas
ecosystem service knowledge played a minor role in cases with
Most of the case studies lent support to the observation that
more hierarchical modes of governance. In the forest management
environmental knowledge alone does not shift priorities from
case study in Romania (CAPM), the centralized policy regime did
unsustainable development to environmental protection (Nykvist
not allow public concerns for forest ecosystem services important
and Nilsson, 2009; Cowell and Lennon, 2014), especially when
for local communities to enter the decision-making agenda at the
strong economic interests and established political priorities like
higher levels. The legacy of hierarchical policy regime was also
job-growth are at stake. For example, the economic drivers to
observed in the Hungarian case study, where rigid regulatory
develop Sipoo Bay to attract affluent taxpayers replaced the origi-
frameworks made it very difficult to adapt scientific results into
nal idea to save the unique bay with fjord-like characteristics and
the management process in Kiskunság (KISK).
natural values (SIBB). In a similar way, the traditional trade-offs
between provisioning services (timber, biofuels) and regulating
(water purification, erosion control) and cultural services (land- 4.2.3. Contested knowledge claims
scape, recreation) were at play in the forest management case In some cases the strong interests and political agendas took the
studies (ALPS, BIOF) and bioenergy case studies (BIOG, BIOB). The form of scientific conflicts and contested knowledge claims. For
ecosystem services concept also did not succeed in erasing con- example, the arguments about net greenhouse gas (GHG) emis-
flicting interest-group goals in several other cases (CAPM, CNPM, sions from forest bioenergy in Finland (BIOF) were highly con-
CRKL, DANU, DONN, ESSX, KISK, OSLO, SACV, SPAT, STEV, TRNA), tested as some studies maintained that forest bioenergy is
reflecting the fact that the same spaces cannot provide all ecosys- carbon neutral (Kilpeläinen et al., 2016; Torssonen et al., 2016)
tem services at the same time. while other studies predicted increases in GHG emissions as a con-
An interesting case in point are the two biodiversity and ecosys- sequence of increased use of forest bioenergy (Repo et al., 2015a,b).
tem services offsetting cases in the UK, which had a similar focus, The conflicting results left the stakeholders puzzled and undecided
but different trajectories of success. Warwickshire (WSCO) is a and allowed policy-makers to select information which matched
rural county where nature and landscape beauty is considered an their preexisting attitudes and assumptions (see Heikkilä and
important asset and attraction, whereas Essex (ESSX) is a growing Gerlak, 2013). Conflicting knowledge claims were an issue also in
county, which houses commuters to London, and hence experi- the Patagonian case (SPAT) where scientists habitually disagree
ences greater pressures to develop and expand. Both were UK off- on the merits of traditional vs. retention forestry, and in the Kis-
setting pilots, but in Warwickshire district planners have taken a kunság case (KISK), where the scientific disputes on the role of
very positive approach to offsetting, and were keen to collaborate drainage in desiccation have paralyzed decision-making and
with the project researchers, while Essex planning authorities were played an important role in inaction to save the region from
more cautious and initially had no time to offer support for the desiccation.

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 9

4.2.4. Regulatory frameworks and property rights 2016). In some cases, ecosystem services did serve as a boundary
The EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 asks Member States to concept (Schleyer et al., 2015; Saarela and Rinne, 2016) that facil-
map and assess their ecosystem services and to value them (by itated communication across different sectors, in the Oslo case
2020). Yet the existing regulatory frameworks that were relevant between urban planners and managers in the Urban Environment
for the decision-making contexts in the case studies did not pro- Agency, Planning Agency and Water and Sewage Agency (OSLO)
vide any specific methodological or other guidance on – or even and in the Costa Vicentina case (SACV) between people from nat-
induce or encourage – ecosystem services assessments or valua- ure conservation, agriculture and tourism.
tions. For example, while ecosystem services are recognized in Vertical integration between different levels of government was
national level strategy documents, operational guidance for con- a key problem in the French Alpine forest management case (ALPS),
sidering ecosystem services in municipal level planning and Lower Danube River case (DANU), and the Doñana case study
impact assessment is largely lacking in Norway. Therefore, ecosys- (DONN) where lack of communication between management
tem services knowledge could not be utilized in building permit- authorities at the local, regional and national level did not allow
ting processes (OSLO). An exception was the Water Framework ecosystem services information generated at the local level to
Directive (WFD) in the Loch Leven case study (LLEV), as it empha- enter regional and national level decision-making. In a similar
sizes the good ecological quality of water bodies and potentially way, rigid regulatory frameworks, as well as hierarchical modes
includes valuation of ecosystem services in the cost-benefit analy- of governance, made it difficult to communicate local case study
sis in management action plans. The stakeholders in this case felt results to decision-makers and initiate adaptive management in
an ecosystem service approach could help the WFD deliver wider the Kiskunság case (KISK). Even the multipurpose wetland con-
policy imperatives of sustainability and live up to the directive’s struction case in Gorla Maggiore (GOMG), which was highly suc-
original ambition, rather than just the technical goal of good eco- cessful in terms of demonstrating an innovative, multifunctional
logical status. and affordable solution for drainage water purification at a local
Existing legislation can also become a direct or indirect obstacle level (Masi et al., 2016; Liquete et al., 2016), struggled with upscal-
for the implementation of the ecosystem services concept on the ing the results and promoting them to national decision-making
ground (see also Waylen et al., 2015; Ruhl, 2016). For example, arenas.
the Stevoort case (STEV) explored deforestation of poplar planta-
tions as a possible strategy for creating more open landscapes for
4.2.6. Professional norms, competencies and codes of conduct
specific species living in relatively open river-habitats. However,
Traditional ways of working were an impediment to introduc-
the current legislation regarding compensation for deforestation
ing the ecosystem service approach in several cases (BIOF, CAPM,
in Belgium, and the uncertainty induced by an ongoing revision
DANU, GOMG, OSLO, KISK, SIBB, SPAT, STEV, TRNA, VGAS). The Oslo
of this piece of legislation, ruled out deforestation as a manage-
(OSLO) and Vitoria-Gasteiz urban planning cases (VGAS) demon-
ment option to be considered. Another example is the Hungarian
strated that part of this kind of institutional inertia resulted from
national park regulations that restrict the supply of some provi-
professionals being burdened with their day-to-day commitments
sioning services such as hay and crop production in Kiskunság
and responsibilities, which led to them holding on to their routines
(KISK), and thereby also traditional land-uses such as grazing
and established practices. The case studies showed that outside
(Kovács et al., 2015).
initiatives by researchers were welcomed if they provided assis-
Ecosystem services assessments and valuations, both processes
tance to immediate problems; the challenge was to get the new
and outcomes, as well as policy instruments like payments for
ideas and practices sustained after the projects would be over. This
ecosystem services (PES) schemes, can influence property rights
was identified as a key problem in the cases of wetland construc-
and land market prices. For example, in the Brazilian case (BIOB),
tion in Gorla Maggiore (GOMG) and the Cairngorms National Park
there was a danger that introducing a PES scheme would give rise
(CNPM).
to land speculation on farmland (Silva et al., 2016). They might also
Professional norms as a source of friction for taking up a new
impose restrictions on specific land-uses, for example through
concept extended beyond routines and resources. This was illus-
legal protection status. Furthermore, while ecosystem services like
trated by the reluctance of land use planners in the German bioen-
air purification and carbon sequestration are common pool
ergy case (BIOG) to use the concept of ecosystem services. In their
resources, the ecosystems that contribute to them are often private
view, the concept did not provide any added value to the concept
property. The Vercors Mountains case (ALPS) demonstrates that
of multifunctional landscapes that they had been working with
privately owned forest tend to remain dominant use regimes
for several years. Another example is the Sibbesborg urban plan-
(Ruhl, 2016), which prioritize one land use over others, in this case
ning case (SIBB), in which the planning process had started out
timber, despite attempts to promote multifunctional forest man-
as a very ambitious attempt to take ecosystem services and biodi-
agement. Finally, there might be significant discrepancies between
versity as a starting point in developing a new residential area in
formal rights and duties with respect to natural resource use and
Southern Finland. However, the initial ethos of planning with nat-
de facto use demonstrated by the case of illegal forestry activities
ure was gradually replaced by a traditional planning approach
in Romania (CAPM).
(Kopperoinen, 2015) consistent with the established landscape
architectural and technical design principles.
4.2.5. Lack of vertical and horizontal integration
Lack of horizontal integration between central and local govern-
ment agencies across different thematic objectives was a key issue 4.2.7. Conceptual and methodological shortcomings
in some urban and peri-urban planning cases (BARC, SIBB, TRNA, In general, the concept of ecosystem services was well received
VGAS), as well as water management (DANU, LLEV, SACV) and nat- by the stakeholders in most of the cases. However, in some cases it
ural resource management cases (BIOF, DANU, STEV) where sec- was found to be too abstract, descriptive and difficult to under-
toral legislation and planning processes held back advancing the stand, especially for local actors and practitioners (ALPS, BARC,
cross-cutting concept of ecosystem services. For example, green BIOB, BIOF, BIOG, CAPM, DANU, LLEV, OSLO, SIBB, STEV, TRNA).
areas provide water storage and infiltration services, but these can- In some case studies the conceptual problems were countered by
not be taken into account by sewage planners unless they work fine-tuning the ecosystem services terminology using the local lan-
closely with green area planners to develop multi-functional green guage and concrete terms like fishing and tourism (BIOB, CRKL,
and blue infrastructures (GOMG, SIBB) (see also Grizzetti et al., DONN, KISK, LLEV).

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
10 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

In some cases, the ecosystem services concept did not capture way, spatially explicit methods like ESTIMAP (Zulian et al., 2014;
concerns that were paramount for some stakeholders. For example, this issue), Greenframe (Kopperoinen et al., 2014) and QUICKScan
in the Finnish bioenergy case (BIOF) provisioning services ‘bioen- (Verweij et al., 2016) turned out to be useful ‘boundary objects’
ergy’ and ‘timber’ were insufficient approximations of the related which assisted stakeholder interaction and enabled the use of local
aspects of human well-being like forest owner income, employ- knowledge e.g. about areas that are important for recreation (BIOB,
ment and regional economy. Sustainability assessment criteria, BARC, CNPM, KISK, LLEV, SPAT, SACV, SIBB, TRNA) as well as for
including ecological, economic and social sustainability, fared bet- bird habitat and production of hay and honey (KISK, LLEV, OSLO).
ter in representing the aspect of the natural resource management Transparency of the methods and a possibility to participate in
situation that mattered to local stakeholders. Traditional economic generating the knowledge base, like scoring recreation potential
and employment indicators were also found necessary to comple- in ESTIMAP, or participatory model building in BBN, was regarded
ment ecosystem service indicators in the Doñana National Park as positive by the stakeholders in several cases (BARC, BIOF, CNPM,
case (DONN). In the Loch Leven case study (LLEV) and the Stevoort KISK, LLEV, SACV, TRNA).
flood control case (STEV), several stakeholders, notably conserva-
tion agencies, felt the ecosystem service approach ignored exis- 4.3.2. Social capital
tence value of biodiversity and so there would be a real risk of The level of social capital was particularly high in those cases in
under-valuing some services or species. which the case study researchers had worked with the CAB mem-
In others, shortcomings of the methods and opaqueness of the bers previously (ALPS, DANU, DONN, SACV, SIBB, SPAT, TRNA), or
results were considered to undermine their effectiveness (see also invested a lot of time building trust in the beginning of the
Harrison et al., this issue). For instance, difficulties in obtaining research process (CRKL, KISK, OSLO), and these were also the cases
reliable economic value information (ALPS, DANU, GOMG, LLEV, with good experiences in knowledge acceptance and uptake
TRNA) and lack of transparency of some methods like QUICKscan among participating stakeholders. For example, in Doñana
(STEV) or ESTIMAP Air Quality model (BARC) turned out to be a (DONN), the fact that the researchers had built trust and rapport
problem in some case studies (see also Zulian et al.; in this issue). among the local actors during previous research projects facilitated
The BBN method was found helpful in some cases (LLEV) while in the strong commitment of several stakeholders to the research
others (BIOF) the complexity of the method, especially the proba- process. In Warwickshire (WCSO), an organizational structure in
bility tables, discouraged stakeholder involvement (see also which planning officer, wildlife trust member and an Environment
Smith et al., in this issue). In the Cairngorms National Park manage- Bank Ltd staff member worked closely, and even shared an office,
ment case (CNPM), the participants were cautious of the process facilitated information exchange and learning on the potential of
and wished to explore the concept, tools and outputs without a ecosystem service offsetting.
commitment to make a decision based solely on the results of a
piece of research which they did not exactly understand (Dick 4.3.3. Policy champions
et al., 2016). In Oslo, the officials in Urban Environmental Agency Some of the cases also benefitted from policy champions who
felt that while the concept of ecosystem services has great poten- took an active role in connecting different actors and promoting
tial, it will take some time before research on ecosystem services is the ecosystem services approach. The arrival of a person tasked
sufficiently reliable to be used in the daily work of the municipality to commission research on Essex’s natural capital meant Essex
(OSLO). (ESSX) was more able to join the research effort toward the end
of the project. The backdrop was the economic opportunities and
4.3. Enabling factors in the use of ecosystem service information political clout behind Natural Capital arguments. Policy champions
played an important role also in the early stages of Sibbesborg
4.3.1. Knowledge co-production (SIBB) innovative planning-with-nature approach and in the
Most case studies succeeded in engaging a broad range of actors Trnava case (TRNA), where a former Slovakian Minister of Environ-
with divergent interests and agendas, and managed to keep them ment and high-level authorities at the Ministry lent political
engaged and interested throughout the research process. In some weight to the research process. In the Cairngorms National Park
cases, the stakeholder interaction even helped to build some con- case (CNMP), an influential CAB member helped to open doors
sensus between stakeholders who had previously been at odds for the researchers in the area, and in the De Cirkel case (CRKL) a
with each other: in Loch Leven between stakeholders interested local planner acted as a bridge builder, helping to mobilize local
in fishing vs. nature conservation (LLEV); in Spain between tradi- people and providing necessary contacts. In the Costa Vicentina
tional wine farmers and managers of the Doñana National Park Natural Park case (SACV), the commitment of a member of the Nat-
managers (DONN); in Italy between designers of traditional grey ural Park authority to the research process encouraged the engage-
infrastructures and innovative green infrastructures to treat sewer ment of other stakeholders.
overflow in Gorla Maggiore (GOMG); and in Portugal between nat-
ure conservation officials and farmers in the terrestrial part of the 4.3.4. Intellectual capital
Park and between fishermen and tourism operators (dolphin In countries like the UK and Spain, influential national ecosys-
watch) in the Marine Park (SACV). An action research approach tem service assessments had already introduced the concepts of
in which the land-use planners co-designed the research approach ecosystem services and natural capital and helped to establish a
was instrumental in making the knowledge useful for land-use common language on ecosystem services. The effects of conceptual
planning in the De Cirkel area (CRKL). In Sibbesborg (SIBB), learning were evident in the Essex (ESSX), Warwickshire (WCSO),
researchers supported the planning process throughout the pro- Loch Leven (LLEV) and Cairngorms National Park (CNPM) as well
ject, from the idea stage to the planning phase, which increased as Victoria-Gasteiz (VGAS) and Barcelona (BARC) cases where the
mutual understanding between planners and researchers. ecosystem service concept was well-known and the CAB members
Participatory scenario analysis turned out to be a particularly readily adopted it. These experiences are in line with Waylen and
helpful method in facilitating stakeholder interaction and creative Young (2014) and Berry et al. (2016) who suggest that the persua-
thinking (ALPS, BIOG, KISK). It seems that the future orientation of sive power of national ecosystem service assessments can open
the scenario methodology created a ‘safe place’ (Innes and Booher, doors to productive collaboration that would later allow their con-
1999) which allowed participants to play with ideas freely without tent to be used in more efficient policy making and problem
commitment to certain management or policy options. In a similar solving.

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 11

The level of knowledge and expertise of managers and decision- stakeholders to articulate their interests and concerns for distribu-
makers on ecosystem services as well as technological resources tion of benefits from ecosystem services. However, our case studies
and tools, such as databases, influenced the ways in which these show less room for instrumental knowledge use, understood as
actors received the case study results. For example, Warwickshire impartial arbiter among policy options, than previously observed
(WCSO) had an extensive land-use data-set, which was suitable as (e.g. McKenzie et al., 2014). It was evident that the concept of
a basis for assessing ecosystem services. The planning authorities ecosystem services as such cannot erase the tensions between eco-
took pride in the database and were keen to work with the project nomic and ecological goals (see also Cowell and Lennon, 2014;
researchers to make further use of it. Conversely, Essex (ESSX) had Turnpenny et al., 2014; Mann et al., 2015; Waylen et al., 2015).
no consolidated land-use data, which initially reduced the interest Instead, they surfaced as conflicts between regulating and/or cul-
of the planning authorities to join the research effort. In the de Cir- tural services and provisioning services.
kel case (CRKL), the concept of ecosystem services was new to the Ecosystem service knowledge had particularly little bearing in
landscape planners but their familiarity with a similar notion of those planning and policy-making situations where it challenged
multifunctional landscapes helped them to grasp the idea of established interests and the current distribution of benefits from
ecosystem services easily and adopt a shared language with the ecosystems and their services. This was manifested especially in
researchers. Interestingly, in some cases (BIOG), the existence of case studies with hierarchical modes of governance and central-
similar concepts made the practitioners reluctant to adopt new ized policy regime. Schleyer et al. (2015) have suggested that the
ones, which they found superfluous and even confusing (see ecosystem services concept has the capacity to promote horizontal
Section 4.2.7). and vertical policy integration. However, this capacity was not
fully realized in our case studies, where lack of horizontal cross-
sector collaboration and vertical multi-level governance between
4.3.5. Links between ES and human well-being
central and local government agencies were major impediments
Clear synergies between ecosystem services and aspects of
for effective knowledge use. The concept of ecosystem services is
human well-being were reported in some of the case studies
not yet integrated into national level regulatory frameworks and
(BARC, CRKL, DONN, LLEV, OSLO, SACV, SIBB, SPAT, VGAS, WCSO).
hence the knowledge generated in the case studies was mostly
These were also the cases where the local practitioners were keen
perceived as useful but voluntary add-ons lacking policy driven
to adopt the concept of ecosystem services and work with the
substance and momentum. One critical factor, which prevented
researchers to find management options to ensure ecosystem ser-
knowledge uptake, was also established professional norms, com-
vices provisioning. For example, vineyards located close to the
petencies and codes of conduct, which made practitioners to rely
Doñana National Park (DONN) provide regulating services like ero-
on traditional solutions, like grey infrastructure instead of green-
sion control and ecological corridors; uprooting and abandonment
blue infrastructure. Cognitive sticking points, which often go
of the vineyards due to lack of economic profit have resulted in
hand-in-hand with individuals’ training and previous working
erosion and siltation in the park (Gaitán-Cremaschi et al., 2017).
experiences, have also previously been observed a major challenge
The local farmers and the vineyard sector readily adopted the con-
in implementing ecosystem approach (Waylen et al., 2015).
cept of ecosystem services and joined the researchers in searching
However, we also detect several instances in which ecosystem
for options to counter the decline of the vineyard sector, and
service knowledge is utilized by the key actors involved in the
ensure the ecosystem services (erosion control, grapes, wine, cul-
research process, is helpful for them and even influence decision-
tural identity, aesthetic value, wine tourism) and the related eco-
making (see Russel et al., 2016). Influence and impact are evident
nomic benefits. Likewise, CAB members of the Loch Leven case
in cases where researchers have worked with the planners and
study (LLEV) felt that the ecosystem service approach can help to
managers over a long time, building rapport and working relations.
illustrate how human well-being is dependent on ecological
From practitioner and policy-maker perspectives, new ideas can be
health, demonstrating how good ecological status of water bodies
risky and require experimenting before they can be mainstreamed
supports wider societal goals, such as recreational fishing and
into planning and policy-making processes. Our analysis indicates
nature-based recreation and tourism. In Slovakia (TRNA), the
that a key determinant of ecosystem service knowledge use is also
ecosystem service approach had the potential to widen the scope
the presence of policy champions (see also Cowell and Lennon,
of traditional landscape-ecological planning to include
2014; Rall et al., 2015; Sattler et al., 2015) and the ways in which
ecosystem-based benefits, including social and economic benefits,
new knowledge matches the pre-existing knowledge-use and
for the whole society and thereby strengthen the role of landscape-
intellectual resources like data-bases of planning and natural
ecological planning in urban and territorial planning (Bezák et al.,
resource management agencies. Most importantly, the research
2017). In Oslo, outdoor recreation (‘friluftsliv’) is an important part
interventions were more effective the better they were integrated
of the Norwegian lifestyle and information on the economic value
in the actual planning and decision-making processes from early
of natural areas (‘‘The nature in Oslo is worth of billions of kroner”)
on and were aligned with the aims and timelines of decision-
resonated well among Oslo city authorities and policy-makers
making agendas. In a similar way, transparent and spatially explicit
(Barton et al., 2015). In Barcelona, the ecosystem services with
methods, which facilitated interaction between key actors, are par-
direct link with human health and well-being (air purification, out-
ticularly helpful in building trust and shared knowledge-base that
door recreation) (Langemeyer et al., 2017) were considered partic-
was deemed useful by the key actors (see also Harrison et al.; in
ularly relevant by planners and policy-makers.
this issue).
The implications of our findings for future practice are that
5. Concluding remarks increasing the use of ecosystem service knowledge in planning
and policy-making practices requires support on micro, meso and
The findings from the 22 case studies, which aimed at integrat- macro level (see Turnpenny et al., 2008). At micro level, practition-
ing the concept of ecosystem services in real-life planning and ers need training and education to develop and utilize new kinds of
decision-making processes, largely agree with earlier studies knowledge and competencies that transcend the established pro-
(Waylen and Young, 2014; McKenzie et al., 2014; Ruckelshaus fessional norms and codes of conduct. They also need support to
et al., 2015) showing that ecosystem service knowledge can be uptake and maintain these new competencies in their daily prac-
used conceptually to alter beliefs and understandings about the tices. Furthermore, the concept of ecosystem services needs to be
role of ecosystems for human well-being, and strategically to help ‘translated’ for each assessment purpose in a way that the services

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
12 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

and related benefits make sense to local practitioners and stake-

holders. At meso level, there is a need for new organizational pro-

The lack of reliable data for some ES

information to translate final maps

credibility of some modeling and

cedures and management structures, such as cross-sectoral

into real monetary values was

networks, which can break the current ‘silo’ effect, and assist

methodological shortcomings

might have undermined the

Lack of financial economic
urban and land use planners as well as sectoral authorities to

perceived as a problem
Lack of knowledge and
jointly develop nature-based solutions and multi-functional
green and blue infrastructures. Knowledge brokers (Saarela and

mapping outputs
Rinne, 2016) could be used purposefully to facilitate this kind
of cross-sectoral interaction. There is also a clear need for more
effective science-policy-society interface mechanisms (Roux
et al., 2006; Vadineanu et al., 2014; Carmen et al., 2015), which

N/A
can ensure the relevance and reliability, and consequently also
effectiveness, of ecosystem service knowledge from planners

some of them associated the concept

basically to monetary valuation while
others were mostly interested on the

was some confusion in relation to the

scientific language of ES difficult. The

Ecosystem services as a framework
and policy-makers perspective. At macro level, it would be

Local actors in particular found the

Most stakeholders in the CAB were

‘translation’ of the concept of ES to

biophysical flows. Moreover, there
familiar with the ES concept. Yet,
descriptive, rather than problem-
important to integrate ecosystem services into EU level regula-

ecological function versus ES)

ES cascade components (e.g.,
has been too conceptual and
tory frameworks such as the Thematic Strategy on the Urban
Environment (Bouwma et al., 2017), as well as national level poli-
cies and other regulatory frameworks guiding spatial planning
and natural resource management (see Bezák et al., 2017). In par-

Conceptual issues
ticular, Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment process could
provide an entry point for integration of ecosystem services into

oriented
land and water management and planning.
Lastly, the usefulness of the concept of ecosystem services for
a particular problem needs to be carefully considered at the out-
set. Our findings suggest that the concept of ecosystem services

Lack of knowledge among small-scale

did provide added value in most cases, but in some cases familiar conduct, professional competencies
Professional norms and codes of

concepts like green infrastructure, multi-functional landscapes or

impediment of PES scheme

sustainable development could have been more helpful. To make

uneducated farmers is an
the ecosystem service framework more useful for real-life plan-
ning and policy problems, it is also necessary to pay more atten-
tion to the socio-economic benefits—or aspect of human well-
being—like employment and regional economy, as well as the dis-
tribution of benefits among different societal groups.
The analysis in this paper is based on the ways in which the
N/A

N/A
practitioners and policy-makers involved in a four-year research
process received and used the results in the short term. As a next
complicated integration between the

Urban planning is a responsibility of

step, it would be very interesting to carry out longitudinal studies

property rights and are reluctant to
national targets. Authorities cannot

planning is difficult and sometimes

steer landowners who have private

implement and operationalize PES.

conflicting. SEA could be an entry-

references to ES assessment in the

planning, yet there are no explicit
different municipal levels and the

legislation specifically oriented to

reduce loggings for BD protection

municipal authorities, yet it must

Regulatory frameworks, property

point for ES integration in urban

on the ways in which ecosystem service knowledge contributes
planning guidelines. Reconciling

Catalan/Spanish SEA regulations

comply with regional landscape

to longer term processes of policy learning and change (see e.g.

sectoral planning with urban

There is no national piece of

Too many layers of decision
rights and lack vertical and

Owens, 2015). Further research is also needed on the precondi-

tions of effective integration of ecosystem services into manage-
horizontal integration

ment, planning and policy-making practices, focusing especially

Factors that constrained the use of ecosystem service information in the case studies.

on case studies in which the concept of ecosystem services has

successfully served as a boundary object and promoted horizon-
tal and vertical policy integration. The case study finder function-
ality of a new knowledge platform Oppla (www.oppla.eu) can
provide a very rich source of data for comparative case study
analyses as well as a community of practice to share experiences
stakeholders that recognize the value
Competing interests between private

production and the impacts of large-

owners and the public sector (Forest

urbanization, provision of certain ES

scale monocultures on biodiversity.

office); landowners are reluctant to

of green areas for the well-being of

and BD conservation. However, our

and good practices in ecosystem service research.

governance & scientific conflicts
Competing interests and goals;

CAB was mostly composed by

power relations and modes of

Competing interests between

Conflicts between sugarcane

Acknowledgements
increase forest protection

The authors wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for

their comments on an earlier version of this paper. Most impor-
urban dwellers

tantly, we want to acknowledge the participants in the case stud-

ies whose input was instrumental for this research project. The
research was carried out in the project Operationalisation of Nat-
ural Capital and Ecosystem Services: From Concepts to Real-world
Applications (OpenNESS), funded by the European Union FP7 (EC-
forests in Vercors

Barcelona, Spain
Urban planning
Multifunctional

308428). Heli Saarikoski and Eeva Primmer also want to acknowl-

production in
metropolitan

edge the support of the Academy of Finland (project 275772).

Mts Range,

Bioenergy
region of
France

in the
Table A1

Appendix
BARC
ALPS

BIOB
Case

See Tables A1 and A2.

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
 interior São Rural food producers are not Small-scale farmers mostly do not implementation the local circumstances facilitated
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

Paulo, Brazil sufficiently organized and are comply with Brazilian forest PES-scheme construction
mistrustful of the local government legislation
BIOF Competing interests between the National level policy making is not Forest sector practitioners have a The ES concept did not capture well The BBN method was quite
Forest bioenergy forest cluster and stakeholders sensitive to local contexts; different traditional focus on timber social considerations like complicated which might have
in Finland interested in BD and recreational sectors such as forest management production; competencies in BD employment and regional economy; discouraged the CAB members to
values. The forest sector has and energy policy, at different levels, protection (and even less ES) are still the category timber as a provisioning participate in the process. However,
traditionally had a privileged access use a limited set of information largely lacking service was too narrow the stakeholder appreciated the
to policy-making. Scientific sources. No requirements for impact participatory model building phase of
disagreements about the carbon assessment on large scale forestry BBN
neutrality of forest bioenergy operations
BIOG Competing interests between The spatial scale at which research N/A The concept of ES is not well-known N/A
Bioenergy landowners producing bioenergy was conducted only partly matched in Germany. It also overlaps with
production in crops and stakeholders interested in the scale at which CAB members are well- established concepts such as
Saxony, the recreational and landscape values working. Thus, results were multi-functional landscapes; this
Germany of farmlands informative but only partly useful for hinders adoption of a new concept
decision making
CAPM Despite attempts to influence local ES Inadequately enforced legislation of Traditional focus on timber Unfamiliarity of the concept in N/A
Forest policies there was a strong loggings in national parks production, no competencies on Romania
management opposition of external actors, which multifunctional forestry (including
and illegal were very interested in maintaining multiple ES provisioning)

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

logging in the status quo. The general public
Romania tends to obey to illegal practices,
even if they disagree with it. This
might be a result of the centralized
political regime which existed in
Romania before 1989
CNPM Recreational use (tourism, hunting) N/A N/A N/A The actors were unsure of the process
Management of vs. wildlife management and wished to explore the concept,
the Cairngorms tools and outputs without a
National Park, commitment to make a decision
Scotland based solely on the results of a piece
of research which they did not
exactly understand
CRKL Conflicts between farmers (apple N/A Some initial skepticism by planners N/A Some initial errors in a recreation
De Cirkel: Nature growers) and people using the area who had experience in multi- map undermined the reliability of the
development in for recreational purposes. Some functionality. However, they finally maps in the eyes of the planners. The
an agricultural important stakeholder groups were admitted the added value of the ES maps have been improved since then
area, Belgium initially absent, especially private approach in the course of the project
sector and tourism representatives
DANU Different interests of stakeholders The policies are designed at national Due to their education and training, Due to time constraints, the common Due to incomplete data sets and
Adaptive were a barrier for knowledge uptake. and EU level without any but also day by day routine and understanding of terms was not information or/and their availability
management For example, the interests of big recommendations for commitments to implement sectoral always reached prevented effective application of all
plan for Lower economic agents who manage large implementation at local level. Lack of policies and management plans selected tools and methods for the
Danube River, and intensive farms vs. land- communication between many stakeholders consider it to be case study (e.g. integrated monetary
Romania waterscape integrity; or hydropower management authorities at different difficult to apply the ES approach and non-monetary valuation of the
generation and waterway transport levels (e.g. central and local), and supplied services; and scenarios)
vs. recovering longitudinal between sectoral authorities. ES
connectivity enabling migration of concept does not appear frequently
endangered fish species to the within regulatory frameworks.
upstream spawning river. Agriculture However, they are covered by terms
scientists and engineers argue for like renewable natural resources and
maintenance and rehabilitation of reduction of nutrient loads and
existing infrastructure as an effective discharges
flood-protection measure, while
ecologists and environmental
engineers argue for floodplain
restoration

(continued on next page)

13
 14
Table A1 (continued)
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

Case Competing interests and goals; Regulatory frameworks, property Professional norms and codes of Conceptual issues Lack of knowledge and
power relations and modes of rights and lack vertical and conduct, professional competencies methodological shortcomings
governance & scientific conflicts horizontal integration
DONN Competing interests between A scale mismatch between the case N/A N/A Updated information on the current
Doñana National traditional vineyards and other cash study (local) and the scale at which trends of vineyards (extension,
Park crops with higher economic returns. incentives for the maintenance of production, number of employees)
management, Some policies in the case study vineyards are implemented. The scale would be useful
Spain resulted from top-down processes of the later is in several cases regional
originating at broader scales or European. Governance at broader
scales has highly influenced the case
study through subsidies, agro-
environmental schemes, etc.
ESSX Conflict between BD protection and N/A Little coordination between districts, N/A The absence of data limited
Bioiversity ES provision; pressure to develop and no overall data layer or holistic engagement in the issue
offsetting in grow (the county very much feeds approach to data capture
Essex, UK commuters to London); the
environment has often been seen as a
barrier to growth
GOMG N/A Scale issues: Local and regional Lack of time by the regional N/A All stakeholders (especially

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Multipurpose stakeholders welcomed and praised managers (who finally implement managers) requested simple
wetland the local results, but they would need and fund the solutions) and lack of guidelines to implement this kind of
construction and more case studies to upscale the power by the local stakeholders (the studies in other sites. ES concept and
landscape results to the river basin ones with high interest) specially ES economic valuation are
restoration in, (management) level too complex to be used by them
Gorla Maggiore,
Italy
KISK Very strong conflict between The relations between institutional Water management and forestry N/A N/A
Water stakeholder groups, some of which stakeholders in agriculture, nature practitioners have their own
management fight for land drainage, others for protection, forestry, and water institutionally well-regulated codes
Kiskunság, water retention. Knowledge on the management are rather volatile at of conduct focusing on drainage and
Hungary main cause of the drop of water level national level. This makes the local timber production, respectively.
is debated. Ecologists state that level collaboration difficult These norms are a major obstacle in
artificial drainage is the ultimate shifting the focus to ES
cause while water management
authorities blame intensive farming
and timber plantation for the
desiccation. Political decisions are
still centralized and bureaucratic in
Hungary to a very high degree. The
whole institutional process is weak to
accommodate real adaptive mgt at
the landscape level
LLEV N/A Synergies between qood quality EU policies (e.g. CAP) may be a barrier N/A The concepts of ES were regarded The lack of data on ES at many
Loch Leven, of water bodies and nature tourism to embracing the ES approach as they difficult by the public, farmers, and freshwater sites prevented further
Scotland (fishing) have single services (agricultural landowners; discussing services by elaboration of general relationships
production, hydropower) as their their more specific names (fishing, between policy (WFD status) and
priority tourism) was widely supported. services. The lack of simple methods
Several stakeholders (notably for valuing ES and including non-
conservation agencies) felt the ES monetary benefits were also a barrier
approach ignores ‘‘existence value” of
biodiversity
OSLO Competing interests between Planning takes place within the Municipal employees have limited At times ecosystem services as a Initial lack of detailed GIS data on
Urban ecosystem housing development & related framework of the Municipal plan to time to participate in research framework has been too conceptual blue-green structures across the
services in Oslo, economic interests vs. preservation 2030. ES are not planning criteria as initiatives, unless they are directly and descriptive, rather than problem- whole city. Lack of data for
Norway of urban green spaces. Contention such. Implementing ES in related to problem solving oriented. It was also hard to establish quantification of biodiversity and
regarding the extent to which administrative procedures such a information and decision-making ecological functions (e.g. interactions
 recreational urban bee keeping building permitting is complicated tools parallel with other on- between native and domestic bees in
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

activities threatens red listed wild and expensive going/past concepts and ways of the pollination sub-project)
pollinators within the city management
SACV Conflict between agriculture Sectoral policies, defined at EU and N/A N/A Lack of data at the required spatial
Operationalising (expansion of intensive irrigated national level, do not adjust to local and temporal resolution has
ecosystem agriculture) and nature conservation contexts. Scale mismatch might constrained or delayed the
services in the goals. Also conflict between nature- hinder use of the results: the production of useful results. This
Sudoeste based tourism activities and boundaries of the Natural Park do not difficulty is even more acute when
Alentejano e agriculture and also with Natural match with the area for planning at dealing with marine ES. Lack of field
Costa Vicentina Park objectives several levels. Authorities are data to validate the results was an
Natural Park, increasingly interested in applying issue for some ES (pollination)
Portugal the concept in planning processes but
existing regulatory frameworks do
not explicitly require consideration of
ES
SIBB Conflict between environmental The Finnish Land Use and Building Planners trained in landscape The planners welcomed the ES Knowledge gained by participatory
Sibbesborg values (saving a unique Fjord-like Act refers to the need of recreation planning and architecture followed concept but it was first found difficult methods could have been even better
urban planning, Sibbesborg bay area) and pressures to areas and the connectivity of green their professional norms and by the stakeholders. However, they integrated in the planning
Finland develop the bay area (profitable infrastructure but there is no clear architectural notions of beauty become familiar with it, even with
building sites) guidance on how these should be instead of taking into account the the intangible cultural ES categories
taken into account natural contours of the planning area

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

SPAT Conflicts between conservation, National policy focuses in the The Government policy and Local specific knowledge is limited,
Sustainable tourism and timber production. The northern Argentina where regulations tend follow the especially at landscape level. This
forest government and private sector tends deforestation is the main issue (land traditional alternatives (e.g. limits the implementation of
management in to focus primarily on provisioning use change from forest to crops). shelterwood cuts) rather than the environmental management policies
Southern services. Some scholars support the Argentinian legislation basically new paradigms (e.g. retention in the field
Patagonia, traditional silviculture, some the allows protection of a supply of a forestry)
Argentina combination of different ES supply to broad range of ES but the
design a new management strategy implementation is lacking
STEV Deforestation in Flanders is often The current legislation regarding Traditional ways of working: top- Conservationists criticized the ES Some methods like QuicScan were
Stevoort flood contested, even when this is planned compensation for deforestation down development of an ecological concept for being anthropocentric; not transparent
control area, for nature conservation. Also some of narrowed down the possibilities for vision with consensus-building only did not help to articulate the value of
Belgium the forest owners – especially poplar the Stevoort project area (and for a amongst major institutes/ biodiversity with respect to the high
plot owners – might not accept wide-open participatory discussion). stakeholders involved instead of a value of timber production
deforestation. Finding the right real bottom-up participatory process
balance is always a challenge
(whether the ES-approach is used or
any other concept)
TRNA Different interest groups value ES Persistent sectoral decision making Misunderstanding of the The ES approach is and probably will Missing financial/economic values for
Landscape- differently; currently preference is based mainly on partial and sectoral comprehensive ES issue by some be too abstract for some (mainly most of ecosystem services; the
ecological given to interest-group goals instead legislation. Missing legislation tools participants of the process (persisting local) stakeholders project did not succeed in finding an
planning in of public benefits from ES. Industrial for ES assessment and sectoral management and planning) economic language for expressing the
urban and peri- sector participated only in the first implementation in Slovakia value of ES
urban areas in CAB meeting and since then there has
Trnava, Slovakia not been interest from their side to
participate
VGAS Consultants already working for the The governance setting is complex Planners are not always capable to N/A N/A
GI Strategy in municipality provided sometimes and although the coordination get involved, possibly due to their
Vitoria-Gasteiz contradictory recommendations instruments exists, the procedures day to day commitments and
municipality, are somewhat tedious responsibilities
Spain
WCSO N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Biodiversity
Offsetting in
Warwickshire,
UK

15
 Table A2

16
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

Factors that facilitated the use of ecosystem service information in the case studies.

Case Knowledge co-production Social capital and policy champions Intellectual capital, incl. methods and data Links between ES and human well-being
ALPS Participatory work helped to identify The researchers had established good working The participatory territory game method The ecosystem service approach was helpful in
Multi-functional knowledge gaps in terms of economically and relations with the local actors, including forest helped to incorporate the different visions and drawing attention to the role of biodiversity for
forest management ecologically viable alternative management management authorities, during previous work goals of forest management practices. Scenario sustainable forests including the needs from
for Vercors options that are not sufficiently understood in in the area. Trust was build up with local actors analysis was also useful in envisioning visitors and forest users
Mountains Range French forest policy-making, and opening a allowing a good exchange of experience and alternative futures and making projections into
in the French Alps debate on the compromise between forest views the future
region productivity and conservation. The research
contributed to a learning process among the
key stakeholders
BARC Stakeholder participation was instrumental in The case study benefited from the interest of Most stakeholders in the CAB were familiar Environmental planning in the case study area
Urban planning in identifying relevant ES in the case study area as the Barcelona Provincial Council (CAB with the ES concept/approach. ES maps was traditionally based on BD conservation
the Barcelona well as the relevant implementation scales of member). They were very interested in facilitated stakeholder interaction and made criteria. The ES approach provides a link
metropolitan ES-based or green infrastructure strategies/ integrating ES maps in their decision-support the ES concept more ‘usable’ for landscape/ between ecosystems conservation and human
region, Spain policies tool for landscape/urban planning processes so urban planning. The ESTIMAP recreation model well-being, which was very much appreciated
they were keen to provide data for the case was generally clear for stakeholders since it by planners and policy-makers. Especially the
study research and chair CAB meetings was based on (their) expert knowledge (for the ES with direct/straightforward link with
scoring). The ESTIMAP air quality model was human well-being / health were considered

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

more complicated to understand since it was relevant (e.g., air purification, outdoor
based on a land use regression model recreation)
BIOB Participatory methods were instrumental in N/A Land use map was helpful in identifying ES and The decision-makers were particularly
Sugarcane bringing up local actors’ perspective, which is participatory methods provided information interested in the water-related ES provisioning
bioenergy important to understand the potential for PES about the feasibility of PES implementation of the PES scheme
production in scheme implementation
interior São Paulo,
Brazil
BIOF The public debate about forest bioenergy had N/A No previous intellectual capital to build on. The The research highlighted the links between soil
Forest bioenergy been quite polarized but the MCDA application actors were not familiar with the ES concept productivity and long-term impacts on timber
production in showed a wide agreement among the regional and had not carried out previous research. production
Finland stakeholders about using above the ground MCDA was helpful to illustrate trade-offs and
logging residue but leaving stumps in the find a solution with balanced the pros and cons
forests
BIOG CAB members were very interested in the N/A Scenario methodology was felt useful by the N/A
Crop bioenergy perspective of ecosystem services and the CAB to explore the ideas freely without
production in results presented and discussed with the CAB. committing themselves to any specific policy
Saxony, Germany CAB members also stated that liked the option
exchange of ideas with other stakeholders
CAPM N/A N/A A survey was helpful in capturing the values of N/A
Forest the general public
management and
illegal logging in
Romania
CNPM Transdisciplinary research is still relatively new An influential CAB member helped to open The stakeholders were generally quite familiar N/A
An integrated in Scotland.A major success was the doors for the researchers in the area with the ES concept, which facilitated the
management plan consultation of local people about local participatory research process
for biodiversity recreational use of the area by using a
and tourism in the questionnaire
Cairngorms
National Park,
Scotland
CRKL The land user planners co-designed the One of the planners had been working in the De ES concept was new for the landscape Clear synergies between green corridors and
Farmland research so that it answered their knowledge Cirkel area for 15 years, and had built up good planners. However, as they work on cultural ES to which there was a strong
management and needs. A key issue was that researchers were relationships with local stakeholders. multifunctional landscapes already a long demand
planning for green willing to adjust their research agenda to the Therefore, she could easily mobilize local time, they grasped the ES idea fairly easy.
corridors in local knowledge needs. The concept of ES was people, and provide necessary contacts Socio-economic valuation methods were
agricultural land in discussed with the local people in terms that helpful in bringing in the views of local people
De Cirkel, Belgium made sense to them (‘‘translation”)
 DANU Stakeholders were open to new concepts like The case study research benefitted from The previous work within the Lower Danube The concepts of NC and ES were perceived as
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

An integrated and the ES and were willing to collaborate with the capacity building in previous research efforts watershed has created also intellectual capital useful both biodiversity conservation and
adaptive researchers. The successful stakeholder focusing on Lower Danube River which could be drawn upon in this case study; traditional economic activities; stakeholders
management plan interaction was based on appropriate it was one success factor appreciated the possibility of combining these
for Lower Danube identification of key stakeholders and a
River, Romania transdisciplinary research approach. The
researchers also succeeded to use language that
was understandable to the stakeholders
DONN The case study included a close collaboration The ES delivered by vineyards were well known The ES concept was easily understood and There were clear synergies between erosion
Management of with local stakeholders including the private by local actors but they felt that having accepted by the stakeholders in the vineyard control provided by the vineyards and the
Doñana National sector (individual and cooperative wine ‘outside’ neutral and credible researchers to sector. This is possibly due to the fact that the provisioning (grapes, wine, and vinegar), and
Park and the producers), NGOs, municipalities, in all phases, articulate them to decision-makers is likely to concept was introduced to highlight the cultural services (cultural identity, aesthetic
surrounding including problem framing, elaboration of have a greater impact on policy positive aspects of vineyards. Further reasons value or wine tourism). The recent decline of
landscape in Spain alternative policies and strategies to sustain ES, were the intuitiveness of the concept and the the vineyard sector made its representatives to
as well as the selection of criteria and the attempts by researchers to translate the welcome the ES approach as an opportunity to
evaluation of impacts of each alternative on concept into local language and terms. The highlight the importance of the sector in
these criteria MCDA process incorporated economic providing multiple and synergistic ES
revenues and employment generation as
evaluation criteria. This facilitated an
assessment of ES related to traditional
economic and employment indicators

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

ESSX N/A The arrival of person tasked to commission The ES concept was familiar for the The importance of Natural Capital for human
Bioiversity and research focused on Essex’s natural capital stakeholders and local practitioners from the wellbeing, including economic wellbeing, was
ecosystem service facilitated identifying pieces of research that UK NEA recognized
offsetting in Essex, might be useful for Essex County Council
UK
GOMG Inviting and involving stakeholders with N/A Local measurements allowed providing The holistic and interdisciplinary ES approach
Multipurpose different and contrasting opinions and accurate data to the stakeholders. It increased highlights multi-functionality and the
wetland backgrounds (e.g. from NGOs to SMEs, from the credibility of the research. MCDA process sometimes hidden multiple benefits
construction in a grey to green supporters, from local to regional increased transparency and was found helpful
peri-urban area, managers) increased the credibility of the by the stakeholders. They also received the
Gorla Maggiore, process and usefulness of the research results of a WTP and CBA with interest but also
Italy lots of criticism
KISK The research problem was defined with the Some of the researchers had established god Some stakeholder groups (like bird-watchers, The link between ESs and human well-being is
Water stakeholders; this, as well as a balanced and working relations with the local level bee keepers and farmers) liked the fact that the easy to understand in the case study site which
management in inclusive approach, ensured that they were stakeholders map of their own ES was developed in a the study group characterized as ‘‘living on the
semi-arid region in motivated to participate in the process participatory way. The concept of ES was new edge”; i.e. the water provision and water
Kiskunság, throughout the whole process. Participants for most of the stakeholders. By means of using quantity regulation obviously affect almost
Hungary maintained that the process provided a great more familiar phrasing like ‘‘benefits from every aspects of human and non-human life
opportunity to exchange ideas with nature”, the stakeholders easily learnt and there
professionals in different fields, which is not applied the concept of ES, e.g. conflicts of
usual interests or trade-offs
LLEV Stakeholders became more aware of the N/A The familiarity of UK NEA facilitated the Stakeholders felt the ES approach can help
Management of language and concepts of ecosystem services. discussions with stakeholders. The maps illustrate how human well-being is dependent
lake Loch Leven, The CAB meetings helped build some produced by ESTIMAP analysis were well on ecological health; demonstrating how good
Scotland consensus between some stakeholders who received. The CAB saw the maps as useful at ecological status supports wider societal goals
had previously been at odds with each other visualizing recreation potential and hot-spots
(e.g. fishing vs nature conservation). Through for examining conflicts with nature
this process they learnt they had some conservation, but found it difficult to
common goals that they could work together to understand precisely what the maps
achieve (e.g. more control on water level represented. The GIS behind the maps was also
management) not available providing limited usefulness. The
CAB liked the fact they could access the BBN
tool online and it was easy to use for predicting
the outcomes of future management and water
quality improvements
OSLO The participatory process was characterized by A lot of time was invested in building trust by GIS data of blue-green structures, in particular ‘‘Friluftsliv” (outdoor recreation) is a strong
Urban planning in a fruitful cooperation between the research between researchers and the Urban detailed data on particular structures such as part of Norwegian identity, and it was
Oslo, Norway team and the main stakeholder in this case – Environment Agency. The CAB coordinator At city trees, enabled biophysical quantification important to take that aspect up in the urban

(continued on next page)

17
 18
Table A2 (continued)
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services

Case Knowledge co-production Social capital and policy champions Intellectual capital, incl. methods and data Links between ES and human well-being
Oslo Municipality’s Urban Environment Agency Agency has been a ‘‘critical champion” for ES in and was the basis for economic valuation. ES is context; it facilitated an uptake of knowledge
municipal planning a bridging concept that has in part facilitated concerning recreation as a cultural value.
communication between planners and Reports highlighting that nature in Oslo is
managers in Urban Environment Agency, worth ‘‘billions” of kroner annually were well
Planning Agency and Water and Sewage received in the media
Agency
SACV Local actors’ knowledge was fundamental to The commitment of a member of the Natural Some stakeholders were familiar with the ES The link between nature conservation and
Management of adjust to local conditions and to validate the Park authority as a central actor in the process concept, while others were not. However, all well-being of local actors, such as nature-based
Coastal Natural maps of ES that were produced for recreation, has encouraged the engagement of other stakeholders adopted the ES language tourism operators, was very clearly
Park (Sudoeste pollination and coastal and marine ES stakeholders. The coordinator of a network of relatively easily and were able to relate it with demonstrated by the results of the recreation
Alentejano e Costa local tourism operators also acted as a local their interests and activities. ES maps ES mapping exercise. Also the dependency of
Vicentina), champion facilitated interaction among stakeholders and agricultural production from land
Portugal triggered discussions about future management practices that are wild pollinator-
development paths for the area and on how friendly was acknowledged by participants in
agricultural practices can be adjusted to the pollination workshop
promote wild pollinators
SIBB Participation was helpful in sharing the The urban planners who wanted to adopt a Maps facilitated stakeholder interaction and Unique environment, local food production
Sibbesborg urban knowledge and ideas about ecosystem services novel and innovative planning approach and made the concept of ES tangible and other ES were one of the selling points of

H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

planning process in the urban ecologist they selected to set up the the new residential area
Finland criteria for sustainability targets acted as policy
champions
SPAT Industry and private sector representatives The case study researchers acted as a nexus The CAB members were familiar with the ES The case study demonstrated that it is possible
Forest actively participated in the study and in several between the private sector and the concept, and the research process contributed to improve biodiversity conservation by new
management in instances also adopted the suggestions arising Government to further conceptual learning. Combination of forest management practices (retention
Southern from the case study work, even though this was maps that indicated supply and values of forestry) without a significant decrease of
Patagonia, not a compulsory requirement by of the Forest multiple ES, including BD, allowed detection provisioning services. The possibility of
Argentina Office synergies and trade-offs among the ES, and achieving multiple objectives at the same time
were considered helpful by the participants contributed to the positive reception of the
research results by the Government
STEV A stakeholder analysis was carried out. Key The local project coordinator was a champion ES concept was rather new to most The most obvious links with well-being are all
Developing a stakeholders (except forest owners) were of the ES-approach within the government stakeholders. The list of ES was considered a benefits related to the flood protection (as the
shared vision for actively engaged in the research process. agency he is working in and he is also familiar useful checklist to see how they could project area was selected as a flood control
Stevoort flood Amongst the participants, there was a lot of with the project area. He knew a lot of local contribute to the goals for the project area. ES area)
control area, expertise available (for instance regarding people, which helped the process a lot when maps have also been helpful for local planners
Belgium nature management) mobilizing them
TRNA Most stakeholders participated actively in the A CAB member (General Director of Nature Most of the used tools were considered as The ES concept emphasizes a wide range of
Landscape- process; only industry representatives opted Protection Unit of the Ministry of the interesting and promising by city planners ecosystem based benefits for the whole
ecological planning out at an early stage Environment) ensured that the information (QuickScan, GreenFrame) society, and therefore it was more easily
in urban and peri- generated in the case study was directly acceptable to most policy makers, including
urban areas in available for the national level decision- ‘‘economically-oriented” actors than
Trnava, Slovakia makers. He also acted as a ‘champion’ of the traditional landscape-ecological planning in
research outputs Slovakia, which aims at ecological optimization
of land-use
VGAS Close interaction with researchers and N/A The concept was already well known; Vitoria-Gasteiz is a pioneer city not only in the
Urban planning in practitioners was helpful existence of common language facilitated Spanish context but internationally in
Vitoria-Gasteiz stakeholder interaction. Spatially explicit introducing long-term green vision and
municipality, Spain methods such as the Blue Green Factor were strategy for Green Infrastructure in the urban
particularly helpful and interesting to city planning. The city was awarded as European
planners Green Capital in 2012 for that reason
WCSO N/A The Warwickshire Wildlife Trust member who The ES concept was familiar from the UK NEA. One of the attractions of Warwickshire is its
Biodiversity and had coordinated the survey was based in the The Warwickshire case study was very data rural beauty; the idea of BD off-setting is
ecosystem service same open-plan office as the Warwickshire rich (they had very detailed maps of land use – consistent with maintaining the rural
offsetting, planning officer coordinating offsets – similarly down to the field scale with a high level of landscape and environmental quality. The
Warwickshire, UK the Environment Bank (an SME looking to link habitat classification information associated) district planner has taken the line that if people
offset targets with developers) had a staff want to develop they have to offset –it was
member in the same office. This facilitated a also a UK biodiversity offsetting pilot and they
greater buy into the ES concept have kept on with offsetting
 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 19

References Kovács, E., Kelemen, E., Kalóczkai, A., Margóczi, K., Pataki, G., Gébert, J., Málovics, G.,
Balázs, B., Roboz, A., Krasznai Kovács, E., Mihók, B., 2015. Understanding the
links between ecosystem service trade-offs and conflicts in protected areas.
Albert, C., Hauck, J., Buhr, N., von Haaren, C., 2014. What ecosystem services
Ecosyst. Serv. 12, 117–127.
information do users want? Investigating interests and requirements among
Langemeyer, J., Camps-Calvet, M., Calvet-Mir, L., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Barthel, S.,
landscape and regional planners in Germany. Landscape Ecol. 29 (8), 1301–
2017. Stewardship of Urban Ecosystem Services. Understanding the value(s) of
1313.
urban gardens in Barcelona. Forthcoming.
Barton, D.N., Stange, E., Blumentrath, S., Vågnes, N.T., 2015. Economic valuation of
Laurans, Y., Rankovic, A., Billé, R., Pirard, R., Mermet, L., 2013. Use of ecosystem
ecosystem services for policy. A pilot study on green infrastructure in Oslo.
services economic valuation for decision making: questioning a literature blind
NINA Report 1114. 77 pp.
spot. J. Environ. Manage. 119, 208–219.
Berry, P., Fabok, V., Blicharska, M., Bredin, Y., Llorente, M., Kovacs, E., Geamana, N.,
Liquete, C., Udias, A., Conte, G., Grizzetti, B., Masi, F., 2016. Integrated valuation of a
Stanciu, A., Termansen, M., Jaakelainen, T., Haslett, J., Harrison, P., 2016. Why
nature-based solution for water pollution control. Highlighting hidden benefits.
conserve biodiversity? A multi-national exploration of stakeholders’ views on
Ecosyst. Serv. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.011. in press.
the arguments for biodiversity conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. http://dx.doi.
Loft, L., Mann, C., Hansjürgens, B., 2015. Challenges in ecosystem services
org/10.1007/s10531-016-1173-z.
governance: Multi-levels, multi-actors, multi-rationalities. Ecosyst. Serv. 16,
Bezák, P., Mederly, P., Izakovičová, Z., Špulerová, J., Schleyer, Ch., 2017. Divergence
150–157.
and conflicts in landscape planning across spatial scales in Slovakia:
Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J.P., Grizzetti, B.,
opportunity for an ecosystem services-based approach? Int. J. Biodivers. Sci.
Drakou, E.G., La Notte, A., Zulian, G., Bouraoui, F., Paracchini, M.L., Braat, L.,
Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 13 (2), 119–135. ISSN 2151-3732.
Bidoglio, G., 2012. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision
Bijker, W., Bal, R., Hendriks, R., 2009. The Paradox of Scientific Authority: The Role of
making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 1 (1), 31–39.
Scientific Advice in Democracies. The MIT Press, Cambridge.
Mann, C., Loft, L., Hansjurgens, B., 2015. Governance of ecosystem services: lessons
Bouwma, I., Schleyer, C., Primmer, E., Winkler, K.J., Berry, P., Young, J., Carmen, E.,
learned for sustainable institutions. Ecosyst. Serv. 16, 275–281.
Špulerová, J., Bezák, P., Preda, E., Vadineanui, A., 2017. Adoption of the
March, J.G., Olsen, J.P., 1984. The new institutionalism: organizational factors in
ecosystem services concept in EU policies. Ecosyst. Serv. In press.
political life. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 78 (3), 734–749.
Braat, L.C., de Groot, R., 2012. The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of
Martínez Pastur, G., Peri, P.L., Huertas Herrera, A., Schindler, S., Díaz Delgado, R.,
natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and
Lencinas, M.V., Soler Eesteban, R., 2017. Linking potential biodiversity and three
private policy. Ecosyst. Serv. 1 (1), 4–15.
ecosystem services in silvopastoral managed forests landscapes of Tierra del
Carmen, E., Nesshover, C., Saarikoski, H., Vandewalle, M., Watt, A., Wittmer, H.,
Fuego, Argentina. Int. J. Biodivers Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 13 (2), 1–11.
Young, J., 2015. Creating a biodiversity science community: Experiences from a
Masi, F., Rizzo, A., Bresciani, R., Conte, G., 2016. Constructed Wetlands for Combined
European Network of Knowledge. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 497–504.
Sewer Overflow treatment: ecosystem services at Gorla Maggiore, Italy. Ecol.
Cash, D.W., Clark, W.C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N.M., Eckley, N., Guston, D.H., Jager, J.,
Eng. in press.
Mitchell, R.B., 2003. Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc.
McKenzie, E., Posner, S., Bernhardt, J.R., Howard, K., Rosenthal, A., 2014.
Natl. Acad. Sci. 100, 8086–8091.
Understanding the use of ecosystem service knowledge in decision making:
Cashore, B., Hoberg, G., Howlett, M., Rayner, J., Wilson, J., 2001. In Search of
lessons from international experiences of spatial planning. Environ. Planning C:
Sustainability: British Columbia Forest Policy in the 1990s. University of British
Government Policy 32, 320–340.
Columbia Press, Vancouver.
MEA, 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-
da Conceição, H.R., Börner, J., Wunder, S., 2015. Why were upscaled incentive
being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC, p. 137.
programs for forest conservation adopted? Comparing policy choices in Brazil,
Muradian, R., Rival, L., 2012. Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of
Ecuador, and Peru. Ecosyst. Serv. 16, 243–252.
governing ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 1 (1), 93–100.
Cowell, R., Lennon, M., 2014. The utilisation of environmental knowledge in land
Nykvist, B., Nilsson, M., 2009. Are impact assessment procedures actually
use planning: drawing lessons for an ecosystem services approach. Environ.
promoting sustainable development? Institutional perspectives on barriers
Plann. C: Government Policy 32, 263–282.
and opportunities found in the Swedish committee system. Environ. Impact
De Groot, R.S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., Willemen, L., 2010. Challenges in
Assess. Rev. 29, 15–24.
integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning,
Ollonqvist, P. 2002. Collaboration in the forest policy arena in Finland—From neo-
management and decision making. Ecol. Complexity 7, 260–272.
corporatist planning to participatory program preparation. In: National Forest
Dick, J., Verweij, P., Carmen, E., Rodela, R., Andrews, C., 2016. Testing the ecosystem
Programmes in a European Context, ed. G. Olav and N. Ine, 27–47. EFI
service cascade framework and QUICKScan software tool in the context of land
Proceedings No. 44. European Forest Institute. Saarijärvi, Finland: Gummerus
use planning in Glenlivet Estate Scotland. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv.
Printing.
Manage. 13 (2), 12–25.
Owens, S., 2012. Experts and the Environment: The UK Royal Commission on
Gaitán-Cremaschi, D., Palomo, I., Molina, S.B., De Groot, R., Gómez-Baggethun, E.,
Environmental Pollution 1970–2011. J. Environ. Law 24 (1), 1–22.
2017. Applicability of economic instruments for protecting ecosystem services
Owens, S., 2015. Knowledge, policy and expertise. The UK Royal Commission of
from cultural agrarian landscapes in Doñana, SW Spain. Land Use Policy 61,
Environmental Pollution 1970–2011. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
185–195.
Owens, S., Rayner, T., Bina, O., 2004. New agendas for appraisal: reflections on
Grizzetti, B., Liquete, C., Antunes, P., Carvalho, L., Geamănă, N., Giucă, R., Leone, M.,
theory, practice, and research. Environ. Plann. A 36, 1943–1959.
McConnell, S., Preda, E., Santos, R., Turkelboom, F., Vădineanu, A., Woods, H.,
Plant, R., Ryan, P., 2013. Ecosystem services as a practicable concept for natural
2016. Ecosystem services for water policy: insights across Europe. Environ. Sci.
resource management: some lessons from Australia. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci.
Policy 66, 179–190.
Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 9 (1), 44–53.
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., 2014. The ecosystems approach as a framework for
Primmer, E., 2016. An institutional perspective. In: Potschin, M., Haines-Young, R.,
knowledge utilization. Environ. Plann. C: Government Policy 32, 301–319.
Fish, R., Turner, R.K. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services.
Hauck, J., Görg, C., Varjopuro, R., Ratamäki, O., Jax, K., 2013. Benefits and limitations
Routledge, London and New York, pp. 582–585.
of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy and decision
Primmer, E., Paloniemi, R., Similä, J., Barton, D.N., 2013. Evolution in Finland’s forest
making: some stakeholder perspectives. Environ. Sci. Policy 25, 13–21.
biodiversity conservation payments and the institutional constraints on
Heikkilä, T., Gerlak, A., 2013. Building a conceptual approach to collective learning:
establishing new policy. Soc. Nat. Resour. 26 (10), 1137–1154.
lessons for public policy scholars. Policy Stud. J. 41 (3), 484–512.
Primmer, E., Jokinen, P., Blicharska, M., Barton, D.N., Bugter, R., Potschin, M., 2015. A
Innes, J.E., Booher, D.E., 1999. Consensus building as role playing and bricolage:
framework for empirical analysis of ecosystem services governance. Ecosyst.
toward a theory of collaborative planning. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 65 (1), 9–26.
Serv. 16, 158–166.
Jasanoff, S., 1987. Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Soc. Stud. Sci. 17
Rall, E.L., Kabisch, N., Hansen, R., 2015. A comparative exploration of uptake and
(2), 195–230.
potential application of ecosystem services in urban planning. Ecosyst. Serv. 16,
Jordan, A., Russel, D., 2014. Embedding the concept of ecosystem services? The
230–242.
utilization of ecological knowledge in decision making. Environ. Plann. C:
Repo, A., Ahtikoski, A., Liski, J., 2015a. Cost of turning forest residue bioenergy to
Government Policy 32, 192–207.
carbon neutral. For. Policy Econ. 57, 12–21.
Juntti, M., Russel, D., Turnpenny, J., 2009. Evidence, politics and power in public
Repo, A., Tuovinen, J.-P., Liski, J., 2015b. Can we produce carbon and climate neutral
policy for the environment. Environ. Sci. Policy 12, 207–215.
forest bioenergy? GCB Bioenergy 7 (2), 253–262.
Kareiva, P., Tallis, H., Ricketts, T., Daily, G., Polasky, S., 2011. Natural Capital. Theory
Rich, R.F., 1997. Measuring knowledge utilization: processes and outcomes.
and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Knowledge Policy 10, 11–24.
Kilpeläinen, A., Torssonen, P., Strandman, H., Kellomäki, S., Asikainen, A., Peltola, H.,
Rinne, J., Primmer, E., 2016. A case study of ecosystem services in urban planning in
2016. Net climate impacts of forest biomass production and utilization in
Finland: benefits, rights and responsibilities. J. Environ. Planning Policy Manage.
managed boreal forests. GCB Bioenergy 8 (2), 307–316.
18 (3), 286–305.
Kingdon, J., 2003. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Longman, New York.
Roux, D.J., Rogers, K.H., Biggs, H.C., Ashton, P.J., Sergeant, A., 2006. Bridging the
Kopperoinen, L., 2015. Biodiversity and ecosystem services as offsets for urban land
science–management divide: moving from unidirectional knowledge transfer
use planning in finland. Policy Brief, BESAFE project. http://www.besafe-
to knowledge interfacing and sharing. Ecol. Soc. 11 (1), 4.
project.net.
Ruckelshaus, M., McKenzie, E., Tallis, H., Guerry, A., Daily, G., Kareiva, P., Polasky, S.,
Kopperoinen, L., Itkonen, P., Niemelä, J., 2014. Using expert knowledge in combining
Ricketts, T., Bhagabati, N., Wood, S., Bernhardt, J., 2015. Notes from the field:
green infrastructure and ecosystem services in land use planning: an insight
lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world
into a new place-based methodology. Landscape Ecol. 29 (8), 1361–1375.
decisions. Ecol. Econ. 115, 11–21.

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
20 H. Saarikoski et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Ruhl, J.B., 2016. Adaptive management of ecosystem services across different land Torssonen, P., Kilpeläinen, A., Strandman, H., Kellomäki, S., Jylhä, K., Asikainen, A.,
use regimes. J. Environ. Manage. 183, 418–423. Peltola, H., 2016. Effects of climate change and management on net climate
Russel, D., Jordan, A., Turnpenny, J., 2016. The use of ecosystem services knowledge impacts of production and utilization of energy biomass in Norway spruce with
in policy-making: drawing lessons and adjusting expectations. In: Potschin, M., stable age-class distribution’. GCB Bioenergy 8 (2), 419–427.
Haines-Young, R., Fish, R., Turner, R.K. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Turnpenny, J., Nilsson, M., Russel, D., Jordan, A., Hertin, J., Nykvist, B., 2008. Why is
Services. Routledge, London and New York, pp. 586–596. integrating policy assessment so hard? A comparative analysis of the
Rydin, Y., Falleth, E., 2006. Networks and Institutions in Natural Resource institutional capacities and constraints. J. Environ. Planning Manage. 51 (6),
Management. Edward Elgar, Celtenhamn, UK. 759–775.
Saarela, S.-R., Rinne, J., 2016. Knowledge brokering and boundary work for Turnpenny, J., Russel, D., Jordan, A., 2014. The challenge of embedding an ecosystem
ecosystem service indicators. An urban case study in Finland. Ecol. Ind. 61, services approach: patterns of knowledge utilisation in public policy appraisal.
49–62. Environ. Plann. C: Government Policy 32 (2), 247–262.
Sabatier, P., 1988. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of Vădineanu, A., Bucur, M.M., Geamănă, N.A., 2014. An emerging Multi-level SPSI for
policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sci. 21 (2/3), 129–168. sustainable Management of the Romanian Watersheds. In: Gonenc, I.E., Wolflin,
Sattler, C., Schröter, B., Jericó-Daminello, C., Sessin-Dilascio, K., Meyer, C., Matzdorf, J.P., Russo, R.C. (Eds.), Sustainable Watershed Management. CRC Press, pp. 3–6.
B., de Wortmann, L., Almeida Sinisgalli, P.A., Meyer, A., Giersch, G., 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b17433-3. Print ISBN: 978-1-138-00018-6, eBook
Understanding governance structures in community management of ISBN: 978-0-203-76470-1.
ecosystems and natural resources: the Marujá case study in Brazil. Ecosyst. Vatn, A., 2010. An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services.
Serv. 16, 182–191. Ecol. Econ. 69, 1245–1252.
Schleyer, C., Görg, C., Hauck, J., Winkler, K.J., 2015. Opportunities and challenges for Verweij, P., Janssen, S., Braat, L., van Eupen, M., Perez-Soba, M., Winograd, M., de
mainstreaming the ecosystem services concept in the multi-level policy- Winter, W., Cormont, A., 2016. QUICKScan as a quick and participatory
making within the EU. Ecosyst. Serv. 16, 174–181. methodology for problem identification and scoping in policy processes.
Sharman, A., Holmes, J., 2010. Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence Environ. Sci. Policy 66, 47–61.
gathering? Biofuels, the EU and the 10% target. Environ. Policy Governance 20, Waylen, K.A., Young, J., 2014. Expectations and experiences of diverse forms of
309–321. knowledge use: the case of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Environ.
Silva, R.A., Lapola, D.-M., Patricio, G.B., Teixeira, M.C., Pinho, P., Priess, J.A., 2016. Plann. C: Government Policy 32 (2), 229–246.
Operationalizing payments for ecosystem services in Brazil’s sugarcane belt: Waylen, K.A., Blackstock, K.L., Holstead, K.L., 2015. How does legacy create sticking
how do stakeholder opinions match with successful cases in Latin America? points for environmental management? Insights from challenges to
Ecosyst. Serv. 22, 128–138. implementation of the ecosystem approach. Ecol. Soc. 20, 1–13.
Silverman, D., 1993. Interpreting Qualitative Data: methods for Analysing Talk, Text Weiss, C., 1979. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration
and Interaction. Sage Publications, London. Review 39 (5), 426–431.
Smith et al., 2017. Applications of Bayesian Belief Networks within OpenNESS. Zulian, G., Polce, C., Maes, J., 2014. ESTIMAP: a GIS-based model to map ecosystem
Ecosystem Services, this issue. services in the European Union. Ann. Bot. 4, 1–7.
TEEB, 2010. Foundations, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological
and Economic Foundations. In: Kumar, Pushpam (Ed.). Earthscan, London.

Please cite this article in press as: Saarikoski, H., et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosystem Services
(2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019