| Title |
A social–ecological analysis of ecosystem services in two different farming systems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-014-0603-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erik Andersson, Björn Nykvist, Rebecka Malinga, Fernando Jaramillo, Regina Lindborg |
| Abstract |
In this exploratory study we use existing in situ qualitative and quantitative data on biophysical and social indicators to compare two contrasting Swedish farming systems (low intensity and high intensity) with regard to ecosystem service supply and demand of a broad suite of services. We show that the value (demand) placed on a service is not necessarily connected to the quantity (supply) of the service, most clearly shown for the services recreation, biodiversity, esthetic experience, identity, and cultural heritage. To better capture this complexity we argue for the need to develop portfolios of indicators for different ecosystem services and to further investigate the different aspects of supply and demand. The study indicates that available data are often ill-suited to answer questions about local delivery of services. If ecosystem services are to be included in policy, planning, and management, census data need to be formatted and scaled appropriately. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 3 | 1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 222 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 48 | 20% |
| Researcher | 46 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 34 | 14% |
| Unknown | 39 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 87 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 49 | 20% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 7% |
| Unknown | 59 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,766,117
of 23,994,935 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#770
of 1,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,443
of 359,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#13
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,994,935 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,715 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,067 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.