Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40516098›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025

The generations of cultural ecosystem services research.

Rachelle K Gould, Terre Satterfield, Kirsten Leong, Jonathan Fisk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The generations of cultural ecosystem services research.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rachelle K GouldRubenstein School of Environment and Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6307-8783
Terre SatterfieldInstitute for Environment, Resources, and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Kirsten LeongNOAA Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, Honolulu, Hawai'i, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5798-5977
Jonathan FiskNOAA Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, Honolulu, Hawai'i, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the cultural dimensions of human-nature relationships and integrating them into decision-making is a central goal of conservation social science. One prominent avenue for this work is the characterization and analysis of cultural ecosystem services (CES) (i.e., nonmaterial aspects of the benefits derived from human-nature relationships). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment introduced the term CES in 2005, and the ensuing decades have seen a blossoming of work on this topic-including extensive critique and the development of multiple closely related concepts. Because the need to recognize CESs (by whatever name) is not going away, we reflected on where CES research has been, where it is now, and where it might go. We refer to the current field as second-generation CES: a suite of approaches and innovations (biocultural indicators, relational values, and nonmaterial nature's contributions to people) that enhance, reject, or modify some of the premises of first-generation CES. These new approaches can be understood as a pluralistic menu of options to capture the essence of what CES aimed to, or failed to fully, represent. Nonmaterial factors (i.e., CES and conceptual offspring of CES) can affect conservation decision-making via 4 main channels: evaluation or assessment, elucidation of trade-offs, epistemic and social recognition, and, in some cases, the reclassification of what nature itself is.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesCultureEcosystemDecision MakingHumansbioculturalcontribuciones de la naturaleza para las personashuman–nature relationshipsnature's contributions to peoplenonmaterial valuesrelaciones humano‐naturalezarelational valuesvalores no materialesvalores relacionales

Identifiers

PMID40516098
PMCPMC12451494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.