Realising the benefits of nature

The benefits that people derive from nature, ecosystems and biodiversity (ecosystem services, hereafter ES), are vital for human existence and a good quality of life. Given that nature and ES are deteriorating across the world, there is a pressing need to understand the interactions between people, society, biodiversity and ecosystems. The ES concept is increasingly being operationalised and focused towards sustainability. This thesis presents a social–ecological empirical study of ES in a rural mountain landscape within a natural protected area. I aim to reveal important interactions between ecosystems, ES, and people, and address the main sustainability challenge of reconciling local livelihoods and nature conservation. The study site consists of a small rural farming community located within a biosphere reserve in south-eastern Mexico. The general research questions are: (1) Where and how are ES co-produced? (2) How are ES governed? (3) Who benefits from the provision of ES? Mixed methods research was used to address these questions alongside stakeholder participation.First, I carried out a biophysical assessment of ES supply across the landscape, including ES valued by local stakeholders. Farmers valued a production landscape that supported their livelihoods, whereas conservation institutions were interested in biodiversity conservation, habitat protection, and water regulation services at larger geographic scales. Closed forests and riparian areas were complementary ES hotspots, and together supplied a diverse array of ES across a multifunctional landscape. Nonetheless, forage cover presented important trade-offs against most other ES, especially tree-based goods and services, revealing the impacts of agricultural expansion and opposing ES demands by different stakeholders. Still, stakeholders found a common interest in forest goods and services, mainly through institutional programs aimed at increasing forest-based benefits to support local livelihoods and conservation goals.Second, an integrated ES cascade framework was used to study the co-production pathway of pine resin, a traded forest product. Substantial human input and coordinated efforts were required to extract pine resin and realise its benefits. People’s values were central to resin co-production, such as values in peasant farming, people’s relation to forests, and the societal importance ascribed to resin. Though there were stark differences in farmers’ resource endowments, i.e. in owned land and pine trees, working farmers gained a high share of resin’s income through labour, labour relations and social networks. However, most social conflicts occurred over labour relations and organisation as well, revealing power struggles in the access to natural resources. Resin-project stakeholders also mediated several access mechanisms and thus had control over the community’s ability to derive benefits from the landscape. Overall, resin provided an appreciated income and forests were being restored. But the resilience of this socio-environmental innovation project and its capacity to deliver sustained and substantial benefits was uncertain.Third, an assessment of ES in alternative land use scenarios was carried out. I selected three representative ES for local livelihoods and three for conservation goals, and analysed their trade-offs under four scenarios at the landscape and farm level. The intensive cattle ranching and forest restoration scenarios presented hard ES trade-offs, compared to the more moderate land use zoning and integrated agroforestry practices scenarios. A recurring trade-off between forage production and the other ES was found generally across scenarios and spatial scales. Cattle ranching benefitted local livelihoods but also impacted other ES. Lastly, though farms experienced similar ES trade-offs in each scenario, the magnitude of these trade-offs—how much was gained and lost—varied considerably for small and large farms.The wider implications of making ES operational in support of sustainable land management and local decision-making are discussed. The importance of human input in local ES co-production shifts the emphasis on nature as a provider of services to people having agency in their own well-being. Hence, land planning and environmental policy instruments should support local communities as promoters of biodiverse agroecosystems and active stewards of nature. We need to examine the role of labour and labour relations in the provision of multiple ES, all within a framework of sustainable land use intensification. Landscape multifunctionality should be explicitly integrated into land planning, with attention to fine-scale (farm level) analysis and farm diversity. Riparian areas are especially relevant as ES hotspots, and given their current degradation, present a great opportunity to engage local stakeholders in restoration efforts. Forage production was involved in most ES trade-offs, thus improving the productivity and sustainability of cattle ranching remains a priority. Research on biodiversity-based land management practices is needed, including the contribution of specific components, e.g. organisms, to forage and ES supply.A hierarchical governance based on top-down projects and policies has brought only temporary local benefits contingent upon external interventions. New modes of environmental governance are called for, in which macro-level structures support community-based governance, and enable local ES beneficiaries to take responsibility for self-organising and making their own rules. The shift from regulatory to incentive-based governance needs to be seriously considered. Learning organisations can enhance collaboration and communication between different stakeholders to advance shared goals. And in particular, researchers can engage with communities in knowledge co-generation, through processes of participatory action research that address local priorities in development.People’s values in ES co-production should be placed at the centre of subsequent ES assessments, as well as in land management and planning initiatives. The community’s diverse views, ways of relating with nature, and socio-cultural perspectives need to be integrated. We must also develop a better understanding of human well-being in the local context, and investigate how human well-being is affected by environmental impacts, changing access to ES, and the distribution of benefits within the community. Learning organisations that promote close stakeholder interaction, can play an essential role in forming shared social values around nature and people’s well-being.