EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues No 426 (2025) Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst., 426 (2025) 31 References
Issue
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 426, 2025
Ecosystem services and economics
Article Number 31
Number of page(s) 10
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2025028
Published online 23 December 2025
  • Alberti P, Gonzalez JC, Domínguez E, Anderson CB. 2024. Social perceptions regarding rivers associated with the sugar industry in Tucumán, Argentina. Reg Environ Change 24 (3): 135. [Google Scholar]
  • Anderson CB. 2025. COP16 and the process of consolidating an inclusive conservation paradigm. Conserv Biol 39 (1): e14438. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14438 [Google Scholar]
  • Barros C, Gutiérrez J, García-Palomares J. 2022. Geotagged data from social media in visitor monitoring of protected areas; a scoping review. Curr Issues Tour 25 (9): 1399–1415. [Google Scholar]
  • Barry SJ. 2014. Using social media to discover public values, interests, and perceptions about cattle grazing on park lands. Environ Manage 53: 454–464. [Google Scholar]
  • Bennett NJ, Blythe J, Tyler S. 2016. Communities and change in the Anthropocene: understanding social-ecological vulnerability and planning adaptations to multiple interacting exposures. Reg Environ Change 16: 907–926. [Google Scholar]
  • Brown AD, Pacheco S. 2006. Propuesta de actualización del mapa ecorregional de la Argentina. La situación ambiental Argentina 28–31. [Google Scholar]
  • Buijs AE. 2009. Public support for river restoration. A mixed-method study into local residents' support for and framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains. J Environ Manage 90 (8): 2680–2689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.02.006 [Google Scholar]
  • Chai-Allah A, Fox N, Brunschwig G, Bimonte S, Joly F. 2023. A trail-based approach using crowdsourced data to assess recreationists' preferences for landscape. Landsc Urban Plan 233: 104700. [Google Scholar]
  • Clemente P, Calvache M, Antunes P, Santos R, Cerdeira JO, Martins MJ. 2019. Combining social media photographs and species distribution models to map cultural ecosystem services: the case of a Natural Park in Portugal. Ecol Indic 96: 59–68. [Google Scholar]
  • Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD/COP15). 2022. Final Decision of the Fifteenth Meeting: CBD/COP15/L.25. Montreal, Canada, 7–19. [Google Scholar]
  • Cord AF, Brauman KA, Chaplin-Kramer R, Huth A, Ziv G, Seppelt R. 2017. Priorities to advance monitoring of ecosystem services using earth observation. Trends Ecol Evol 32 (6): 416–428. [Google Scholar]
  • Da Mota VT, Pickering C, Chauvenet A. 2022. Popularity of Australian beaches: insights from social media images for coastal management. Ocean Coast Manag 217: 106018. [Google Scholar]
  • Da Silva C, Pascoal C, Pace G, Vaz AS, Carvalho‐Santos C. 2024. Using social media and citizen science to assess cultural ecosystem services along riverine landscapes. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 34 (8): e 4233. [Google Scholar]
  • DataReportal. Digital 2021 October global statshot report. 2021. Available from: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-october-global-statshot [Google Scholar]
  • Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, Ash N, et al. 2015. The IPBES Conceptual Framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14: 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • Díaz S, Pascual U, Stenseke M, Martín-López B, Watson RT, Molnár Z, et al. 2018. Assessing nature's contributions to people. Science 359 (6373): 270–272. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Díaz Achával M. 2017. Cuenca del río Salí-Dulce: la calidad del agua de los ríos que desaguan en el embalse de Río Hondo: línea de base y conocimientos adquiridos en cuatro años y medio de controles diarios realizados por Santiago del Estero. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Eudeba. [Google Scholar]
  • Domínguez E, Romero F, Fernández HR, Cuezzo MG. 2020. Aplicación de indicadores biológicos en el Noroeste Argentino: el caso de la cuenca Salí-. [Google Scholar]
  • Dunkel A. 2015. Visualizing the perceived environment using crowdsourced photo geodata. Landsc Urban Plan 142: 173–186. [Google Scholar]
  • Fernández HR. 2017. El “estado ecológico” como concepto para la gestión de la cuenca Sali-Dulce (Tucumán, Argentina). Acta Zool Lilloana 61 (2): 181–187. [Google Scholar]
  • Fox N, Graham LJ, Eigenbrod F, Bullock JM, Parks KE. 2021. Enriching social media data allows a more robust representation of cultural ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 50: 101328. [Google Scholar]
  • Gaston KJ, Soga M. 2020. Extinction of experience: The need to be more specific. People Nat (3): 575–81. [Google Scholar]
  • Ghermandi A, Sinclair M. 2019. Passive crowdsourcing of social media in environmental research: a systematic map. Glob Environ Change 55: 36–47. [Google Scholar]
  • Ghermandi A, Langemeyer J, Van Berkel D, Calcagni F, Depietri Y, Vigl LE, et al. 2023. Social media data for environmental sustainability: A critical review of opportunities, threats, and ethical use. One Earth. 6 (3): 236–50. [Google Scholar]
  • Gómez-Baggethun E, Barton DN. 2013. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol Econ 86: 235–245. [Google Scholar]
  • Graziano M, Giorgi A, Feijoó C. 2021. Estresores múltiples y trampas socioecológicas en arroyos pampeanos (Argentina): un modelo conceptual. Sci Total Environ 765 (142785): 49. [Google Scholar]
  • Hidalgo MDV, García MG, Galindo MC, Perondi ME, Vece MB, Apella MC, Blesa, MA. 2006. Impacto del conglomerado urbano gran San Miguel de Tucumán sobre la calidad de las aguas del Río Salí. http://hdl.handle.net/11336/132765 [Google Scholar]
  • Huang H, Gartner G, Turdean T. 2013. Social media data as a source for studying people's perception and knowledge of environments. Mitt Osterr Geogr Ges 155: 291–302. [Google Scholar]
  • Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. 2010. Censo Nacional de la Población, Hogares y Vivienda 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • Jarić I, Roll U, Arlinghaus R, Belmaker J, Chen Y, China V, Correia RA. 2020. Expanding conservation culturomics and iEcology from terrestrial to aquatic realms. PLoS Biol 18 (10): e3000935. [Google Scholar]
  • Kalous L, Nechanská D, Petrtyl M. 2018. Survey of angler's internet posts confirmed the occurrence of freshwater fishes of the genus Ictiobus (Rafinesque, 1819) in natural waters of Czechia. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 419: 29. [Google Scholar]
  • Kelemen E, García-Llorente M, Pataki G, Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E. 2014. Non-monetary techniques for the valuation of ecosystem service. OpenNESS Reference Book EC FP7 Grant Agreement, 308428 (4). Available from: http://www.openness-project.eu/library/reference-book [Google Scholar]
  • Kellert SR. 2008. A biocultural basis for an ethic toward the natural environment. In: The foundations of environmental sustainability: the coevolution of science and policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press p. 321–332. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309454.003, 21, 321-332. [Google Scholar]
  • Kellert SR. 2012. Birthright: People and nature in the modern world. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Khan WA, Ali S, Shah SA. 2022. Water pollution: sources and its impact on human health, control and managing. J Int Coop Dev 5 (1): 69. [Google Scholar]
  • Komossa F, Wartmann FM, Verburg PH. 2021. Expanding the toolbox: assessing methods for local outdoor recreation planning. Landsc Urban Plan. 212: 104105. [Google Scholar]
  • Leung YF, Spenceley A, Hvenegaard G, Buckley R, Groves C. 2018. Tourism and visitor management in protected areas: Guidelines for sustainability (Vol. 27) Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. [Google Scholar]
  • López-Santiago CA, Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Plieninger T, Martín EG, González JA. 2014. Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: the case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecol Soc 19 (2): 27. [Google Scholar]
  • Martínez-Harms MJ, Bryan BA, Wood SA, Fisher DM, Law E, Rhodes JR. 2018. Inequality in access to cultural ecosystem services from protected areas in the Chilean biodiversity hotspot. Sci Total Environ 636: 1128–1138. [Google Scholar]
  • Martínez Pastur G, Peri PL, Lencinas MV, García-Llorente M, Martín-López B. 2016. Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia. Landsc Ecol 31: 383–399. [Google Scholar]
  • Mastrandrea A, Angeles G, Olavarría J. 2019. Evaluación de la percepción social del espacio fluvial urbanizado del arroyo Napostá Grande, Bahía Blanca, Argentina. Estudios Geográficos 80 (287): e017–e017. [Google Scholar]
  • Nicolás-Ruiz N, Suárez ML, Vidal-Abarca MR, Quintas-Soriano C. 2024. Can dry rivers provide a good quality of life? Integrating beneficial and detrimental nature's contributions to people over time. Ambio 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  • Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Fagerholm N, Bieling C, Plieninger T. 2018. Using social media photos to explore the relation between cultural ecosystem services and landscape features across five European sites. Ecol Indic 94: 74–86. [Google Scholar]
  • Pascual U, Berry P, Balvanera P, Díaz S, Pataki G, Roth E, et al. 2017. Revealing the diversity of values of nature and its benefits to people for a good quality of life: the IPBES approach. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 26: 7–13. [Google Scholar]
  • R Core Team. 2022. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [Google Scholar]
  • Raymond CM, Anderson CB, Athayde S, Vatn A, Amin AM, Arias-Arévalo P, Zent E. 2023. An inclusive typology of values for navigating transformations towards a just and sustainable future. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 64: 101301. [Google Scholar]
  • Richards DR, Friess DA. 2015. A rapid indicator of cultural ecosystem service usage at a fine spatial scale: Content analysis of social media photographs. Ecol Indic 53: 187–95. [Google Scholar]
  • Rossi SD, Barros A, Walden-Schreiner C, Pickering C. 2020. Using social media images to assess ecosystem services in a remote protected area in the Argentinean Andes. Ambio 49: 1146–60. [Google Scholar]
  • Ruiz A, Busnelli J. Hidrografía. In: Moyano S, Puchulu ME, Fernandez DS, Vides ME, Nieva S, Aceñolaza G, editors. 2014. Geología de Tucumán. Tucumán: Colegio de Graduados en Ciencias Geológicas de Tucumán. p. 257–75. [Google Scholar]
  • Sherren K, Smit M, Holmlund M, Parkins JR, Chen Y. 2017. Conservation culturomics should include images and a wider range of scholars. Front Ecol Environ 15 (6): 289–90. [Google Scholar]
  • Šmelhausová J, Riepe C, Jarić I, Essl F. 2022. How Instagram users influence nature conservation: A case study on protected areas in Central Europe. Biol Conserv 276: 109787. [Google Scholar]
  • Tscholl M, Sturm U. 2022. Posting nature: a critical perspective on analysing cultural ecosystem services on Instagram. J Envirom Media 3 (2): 255–271. [Google Scholar]
  • Thiagarajah J, Wong SK, Richards DR, Friess DA. 2015. Historical and contemporary cultural ecosystem service values in the rapidly urbanizing city state of Singapore. Ambio 44: 666–677. [Google Scholar]
  • Van Berkel DB, Verburg PH. 2014. Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape. Ecol Indic 37: 163–174. [Google Scholar]
  • Van Zanten BT, Van Berkel DB, Meentemeyer RK, Smith JW, Tieskens KF, Verburg PH. 2016. Continental-scale quantification of landscape values using social media data. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113 (46): 12974–12979. [Google Scholar]
  • Vidal Llamas A, Nicolás-Ruiz N, Alonso MLS, Gutiérrez MRVA. 2024.Exploring the cultural ecosystem services of arid watersheds: a social media analysis. J Arid Environ 221: 105141. [Google Scholar]
  • Walden-Schreiner C, Rossi SD, Barros A, Pickering C, Leung YF. 2018. Using crowd-sourced photos to assess seasonal patterns of visitor use in mountain-protected areas. Ambio 47: 781–93. [Google Scholar]
  • Wang Z, Jin Y, Liu Y, Li D, Zhang B. 2018. Comparing social media data and survey data in assessing the attractiveness of Beijing Olympic Forest Park. Sustainability 10 (2): 382. [Google Scholar]
  • West S, Haider LJ, Stålhammar S, Woroniecki S. 2020. A relational turn for sustainability science? Relational thinking, leverage points and transformations. Ecosyst People 16 (1): 304–25. [Google Scholar]
  • Willemen L. 2020. It's about time: Advancing spatial analyses of ecosystem services and their application. Ecosyst Serv 44: 101125. [Google Scholar]
  • Wu J. 2013. Landscape sustainability science: ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes. Landsc Ecol 28: 999–1023. [Google Scholar]
  • Wylie J. 2007. Landscape. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  • Zagarola JPA, Anderson CB, Veteto JR. 2014. Perceiving Patagonia: an assessment of social values and perspectives regarding watershed ecosystem services and management in southern South America. Environ Manag 53 (4): 769–782. [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang H, Huang R, Zhang Y, Buhalis D. 2022. Cultural ecosystem services evaluation using geolocated social media data: a review. Tour Geogr 24 (4-5): 646–668. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.