Conceptualizing ecosystem services using social–ecological networks

Social–ecological networks (SENs) provide a promising approach to represent the complex ecological, social, and social–ecological relationships that influence ecosystems service supply. Ecosystem services can be represented in SENs as nodes, links, attributes, or as emergent properties of the network, each bringing distinct aspects of ecosystem services into focus to address different questions. Applications of SENs in ecosystem service research can foster: (i) understanding of the social and ecological drivers of ecosystem services; (ii) forecasting of the impacts of stressors; (iii) investigation of trade-offs between ecosystem services; and (iv) assessment of the effects of alternative management options. Ecosystem service research would benefit from a typology to conceptualize particular ecosystem services in SEN analyses and from greater clarity of when ecosystem service research can benefit from a SEN approach. Social–ecological networks (SENs) represent the complex relationships between ecological and social systems and are a useful tool for analyzing and managing ecosystem services. However, mainstreaming the application of SENs in ecosystem service research has been hindered by a lack of clarity about how to match research questions to ecosystem service conceptualizations in SEN (i.e., as nodes, links, attributes, or emergent properties). Building from different disciplines, we propose a typology to represent ecosystem service in SENs and identify opportunities and challenges of using SENs in ecosystem service research. Our typology provides guidance for this growing field to improve research design and increase the breadth of questions that can be addressed with SEN to understand human–nature interdependencies in a changing world. Social–ecological networks (SENs) represent the complex relationships between ecological and social systems and are a useful tool for analyzing and managing ecosystem services. However, mainstreaming the application of SENs in ecosystem service research has been hindered by a lack of clarity about how to match research questions to ecosystem service conceptualizations in SEN (i.e., as nodes, links, attributes, or emergent properties). Building from different disciplines, we propose a typology to represent ecosystem service in SENs and identify opportunities and challenges of using SENs in ecosystem service research. Our typology provides guidance for this growing field to improve research design and increase the breadth of questions that can be addressed with SEN to understand human–nature interdependencies in a changing world. network depicting ecological entities, such as species, functional groups, or patches, and the processes that connect them (e.g., species interactions, connectivity through dispersal). material or immaterial benefits people receive from nature. They are often classified as provisioning (e.g., food, water), cultural (e.g., learning, inspiration, aesthetic value), and regulating (e.g., carbon sequestration, water purification). The Nature Contributions to People [1.Díaz S. et al.The IPBES Conceptual Framework – connecting nature and people.Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015; 14: 1-16Crossref Scopus (1137) Google Scholar] concept can also be used. rate at which people use ecosystem services derived from a stock (for provisioning and cultural services) or regulating services derived from species interactions (e.g., predation). an overall outcome, or property of the network, which results from the interactions between network components. connection between two nodes (e.g., dispersal between patches, resource exchange between actors); synonyms are arc, edge, interaction, and tie. a family of networks that model multiple layers of information. Multilevel networks include multiple types of nodes (called multipartite), as in Figure 1. Multilayer (or multirelational) networks allow multiple kinds of links between nodes. Certain multilevel approaches (called multiplex networks) incorporate multiple link types (e.g., trophic and mutualistic interactions [72.Pilosof S. et al.The multilayer nature of ecological networks.Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2017; 1: 0101Crossref PubMed Scopus (236) Google Scholar]) between nodes of the same kind. Here, we loosely use the term ‘multilayer; to refer to all of these networks. Related concepts include multinetworks and networks of networks. a system of connected entities (nodes) and their pattern of interactions conceptualized and/or analyzed to understand how relations between entities of interest affect specific outcomes and/or are the results of specific underlying processes. an identifiable component of a network (e.g., user, beneficiary, species); synonyms are actor, alter, ego, entity, and vertex. a characteristic of a node (e.g., market price of a fish; Figure 1). a network that considers connections within and between the social and ecological layers (i.e., a fully articulated [2.Sayles J.S. et al.Social–ecological network analysis for sustainability sciences: a systematic review and innovative research agenda for the future.Environ. Res. Lett. 2019; 14093003Crossref Scopus (37) Google Scholar] or type III [9.Kluger L.C. et al.Studying human–nature relationships through a network lens: a systematic review.People Nat. 2020; 2: 1100-1116Crossref Scopus (15) Google Scholar] network), in contrast to ecological networks or social networks, which account only for interactions within one of these layers. For simplicity, we also consider as SENs those networks that only include the interactions between social and ecological nodes (i.e., partially articulated [2.Sayles J.S. et al.Social–ecological network analysis for sustainability sciences: a systematic review and innovative research agenda for the future.Environ. Res. Lett. 2019; 14093003Crossref Scopus (37) Google Scholar] or type II [9.Kluger L.C. et al.Studying human–nature relationships through a network lens: a systematic review.People Nat. 2020; 2: 1100-1116Crossref Scopus (15) Google Scholar] networks). network depicting interactions (e.g., knowledge exchange, trust, collaboration, resource sharing) between social actors (e.g., individuals, communities, organizations).