Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.author
Staiano, Luciana  
dc.contributor.author
Gallego, Federico  
dc.contributor.author
Altesor, Alice  
dc.contributor.author
Paruelo, José  
dc.date.available
2023-09-28T18:36:26Z  
dc.date.issued
2022-09  
dc.identifier.citation
Staiano, Luciana; Gallego, Federico; Altesor, Alice; Paruelo, José; Where and why to conserve grasslands socio-ecosystems? A spatially explicit participative approach; Frontiers Media; Frontiers in Environmental Science; 10; 9-2022; 1-17  
dc.identifier.issn
2296-665X  
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/213501  
dc.description.abstract
Grasslands of southern South America are being replaced by annual crops and forest plantations. The environmental and social consequences of this expansion generate the need for its regulation. If a conservation policy were established, it would be critical to define which areas would have priority for conservation. Multi-criteria analysis techniques are useful tools in territorial planning processes since they allow incorporating diverse and even opposing opinions and objectives. We present a methodological approach to define the Grasslands’ Conservation Value (GCV) from a spatially explicit territorial diagnosis, based on multiple criteria and incorporating explicitly and quantitatively the valuations and opinions of stakeholders. The study was developed as part of the strategy of a public inter-institutional entity to contribute in defining grasslands conservation policies. The methodological approach included workshops in which the definitions of the conservation criteria and their weighting were agreed upon. Definitions were based on a multidimensional technical characterization of the territory through indicators, for which the information used was compiled, analyzed, shared, and synthesized. Based on multi-criteria analysis, each of 12 stakeholders’ groups representatives established the individual weighting of the criteria for determining the GCV and then, established a consensus weighting. The GCV was mapped by integrating territorial diagnosis of these criteria with the weightings carried out by the stakeholders. The degree of agreement among stakeholders in the differential valuation of the ecological criteria was high for 8 of the 12 stakeholders (Pearson’s correlation coefficients >0.92), showing a high agreement between their opinions and those resulting from the group consensus. In all cases, the agreement about the spatial variation of conservation value was higher than on the criteria weights (Pearson’s correlation coefficients ≥0.92 for 10 stakeholders). Furthermore, the sites with lower values in the consensus map corresponded mostly to those sites with lower agreement among stakeholders. The proposed methodology allowed the incorporation of different perceptions not only in the definition of conservation criteria but also in their prioritization, in a transparent and auditable process. This could contribute to the implementation of future regulations that restrict the replacement of grasslands, increasing the legitimacy of territorial planning processes.  
dc.format
application/pdf  
dc.language.iso
eng  
dc.publisher
Frontiers Media  
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess  
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/  
dc.subject
DECISION-MAKING  
dc.subject
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES  
dc.subject
GIS  
dc.subject
MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS  
dc.subject
REMOTE SENSING  
dc.subject
SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS  
dc.subject
STAKEHOLDERS  
dc.subject
TERRITORIAL PLANNING  
dc.subject.classification
Ciencias Medioambientales  
dc.subject.classification
Ciencias de la Tierra y relacionadas con el Medio Ambiente  
dc.subject.classification
CIENCIAS NATURALES Y EXACTAS  
dc.title
Where and why to conserve grasslands socio-ecosystems? A spatially explicit participative approach  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article  
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion  
dc.date.updated
2023-07-28T10:29:57Z  
dc.journal.volume
10  
dc.journal.pagination
1-17  
dc.journal.pais
Suiza  
dc.journal.ciudad
Lausana  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Staiano, Luciana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; Argentina  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Gallego, Federico. Universidad de la República; Uruguay  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Altesor, Alice. Universidad de la Republica; Uruguay  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Paruelo, José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; Argentina. Universidad de la República; Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuaria;  
dc.journal.title
Frontiers in Environmental Science  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.820449/full  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.820449