artigo ecology and sociedade

Copyright © 2005 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.Pereira, E., C. Queiroz, H. Pereira and L. Vicente 2005. Ecosystem services and human well-being: aparticipatory study in a mountain community in portugal. Ecology and Society 10(2): 14. [online] URL:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art14/

Research, part of a Special Feature on Strengthening adaptive capacity

Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being: a ParticipatoryStudy in a Mountain Community in Portugal

Elvira Pereira1, Cibele Queiroz2, Henrique Miguel Pereira2, and Luis Vicente2

ABSTRACT. Ecosystem services are essential for human well-being, but the links between ecosystemservices and human well-being are complex, diverse, context-dependent, and complicated by the need toconsider different spatial and temporal scales to assess them properly. We present the results of a study inthe rural community of Sistelo in northern Portugal that formed part of the Portugal Millennium EcosystemAssessment. The main purpose of our study was to assess the linkages between human well-being andecosystem services at the local level, as perceived by the community. We used a range of tools that includedparticipatory rural appraisal and rapid rural appraisal as well as other field methods such as directobservation, familiarization and participation in activities, semistructured interviews, trend lines, well-being ranking, and other ranking and scoring exercises. Sistelo has a unique landscape of agriculturalterraces that are now being abandoned because of the depopulation of the region, a common trend inmountainous rural areas of Europe. From the community perspective, some components of well-being suchas material well-being have been improving, whereas some ecosystem services, e.g., food production, havebeen declining. Although a few of the local criteria for well-being are closely related to local ecosystemservices, most of them are not. People recognize many of the services provided by ecosystems, in particular,provisioning, cultural, and regulating services, although they feel that provisioning services are the mostimportant for well-being. It is apparent that, for the Sistelo community, there is an increasing disconnectbetween local well-being and at least some local ecosystem services. This disconnect is associated withgreater freedom of choice at the local level, which gives the local inhabitants the power to find substitutesfor ecosystem services. The consequences of land abandonment for human well-being and ecosystemservices at different temporal and spatial scales are discussed.

Key Words: ecosystem services; human well-being; participatory rural appraisal; rapid rural appraisal;participatory study; biodiversity; rural community; land abandonment; mountain landscape; MillenniumEcosystem Assessment

INTRODUCTION

The well-being of present and future generationsdepends on the continuous flow of ecosystemservices, which are the benefits people obtain fromecosystems (Daily 1997). Links between humanwell-being and ecosystem services are multiple andcomplex (Salzman et al. 2001). Improvements inthe well-being of present generations can havenegative impacts on the supply of ecosystemservices to future generations if those improvementsare based on unsustainable exploitation of the

environment. Furthermore, there are trade-offsbetween ecosystem services, and different interestgroups can have different priorities with regard towhich ecosystems services should be enhanced tomaximize the well-being of a particular group(McMichael et al., in press).

In recent years, the study of the relationship betweenecosystem services and human well-being hasreceived a fair amount of attention (Salzman et al.2001, Michaelidou et al. 2002, Deutsch et al. 2003,Wainger and Price 2004). For instance, Deutsch etal. (2003) focused on the dependence of human

1Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, 2Universidade de Lisboa

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art14/

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/viewissue.php?sf=16

mailto:[email protected]




Ecology and Society 10(2): 14http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art14/

well-being on ecosystem services at the global leveland the decreasing capacity of ecosystems tocontinue producing those services, whereasMichaelidou et al. (2002) studied the relationshipbetween community well-being and ecosystemviability at the local scale, noting that they are bothinterconnected and interdependent.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) wasthe largest study ever conducted of the linkagesbetween ecosystems and human well-being. TheMA was unique in that it was carried out at multiplescales, from the local to the regional to the global.The multiscale nature of the MA acknowledges thatpeople and ecosystems interact in different temporaland spatial domains, as illustrated in the MAconceptual framework (Fig. 1). The conceptualframework connects human well-being, indirectdrivers of change, direct drivers of change, andecosystem services (Millennium EcosystemAssessment 2003). Our study is part of the PortugalSub-Global Assessment (http://www.ecossistemas.org) of the MA, and usesthe MA conceptual framework to assess the linkagesbetween human well-being and local ecosystemservices from the perspective of a rural mountaincommunity in northern Portugal. Local communitiesare often the most direct link to ecosystems (Folkeet al., in press), because they frequently depend onlocal ecosystem services and are the most directlyaffected by ecosystem degradation (MillenniumEcosystem Assessment 2003). Local communitiesmay also be active managers of the local ecosystemsthat they depend on (Folke et al., in press).Therefore, it is essential to understand how peopleuse, perceive, and value different ecosystemservices.

Sistelo has a unique landscape of agriculturalterraces that are now being abandoned because ofthe depopulation of the region. The abandonmentof mountainous rural areas is a common trend inEuropean countries (Baudry 1991, Farina 1997,MacDonald et al. 2000), and in recent years therehas been increasing concern about the environmental,economic, and social consequences of this. Theconsequences of farmland abandonment for localecosystems and their ability to provide servicesremain a controversial issue. This controversy isfueled by the existence of trade-offs betweendifferent ecosystem services and by the extensivetemporal and spatial variability in the effects of thisabandonment, which are influenced by numerousfactors (MacDonald et al. 2000, Höchtl et al. 2005).

Although the conversion of abandoned agriculturalland to natural habitats can have positive impactson some species (Farina 1991), it has been arguedthat low-intensity agriculture in Europe has becomeessential to the conservation of local biodiversityand ecosystem services (Bignal and McCracken1996, Moreira et al. 2001a). Therefore, theconsequences of agricultural land abandonment forlocal ecosystems vary with the context and theconservation goals (Correia 1993, Burel and Baudry1995, MacDonald et al. 2000).

Although the MA recognizes that biodiversity hasan intrinsic value, it focuses mainly on theconsequences of ecosystem changes for humanwell-being (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment2003). Well-being is multidimensional, dynamic,complex, and context-dependent (Narayan et al.2000a,b). Therefore, it is crucial to understand localcriteria for human well-being. In our study we usea participatory approach to examine both the localcriteria for well-being and the links to ecosystemservices. We chose a participatory approachbecause of the context dependence of well-beingand because conventional analyses tend to disregardsome fundamental aspects of well-being (Pereira2001). Studies of local criteria for well-beingreceived a strong impetus in the 1990s, in particularwith the dissemination of Participatory PovertyAssessments or PPAs (Norton et al. 2000), whichadopted methods developed in the context ofParticipatory Rural Appraisals (PRA) and RapidRural Appraisals (RRAs). During the 1990s, theWorld Bank conducted 81 PPAs in 50 countriesaround the world, and in 1999 PPAs were conductedin 23 countries under the World Bank's “Voices ofthe Poor” initiative (Narayan et al. 2000a,b).Participatory approaches have also been used instudies of natural resources management,agriculture, health and nutrition, poverty, andlivelihoods (Sustainable Agriculture and RuralLivelihoods Programme 1988–2001, Chambers2003).

Our study demonstrates the complex links betweenecosystem services and human well-being from theperspective of a rural mountain community. We askfour questions: (1) What are the local criteria forhuman well-being? (2) Which ecosystem servicesare recognized and valued by the community? (3)What are the main trends in those services and theirimpacts on well-being? (4) What are the plausiblefutures of ecosystem services and human well-beingin Sistelo?


http://www.ecossistemas.org


Fig. 1. The Millennium Assessment Conceptual Framework (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003).

STUDY AREA

Sistelo is a rural parish in the Peneda MountainRange in northwest Portugal (41° 58' N; 8&#176,22' W) with an area of 26.2 km2 (Fig. 2). Its altituderanges from 180 m to 1360 m. In this region, themean annual temperature is 13ºC, the risk of frostis high except from June to October, and the meanannual rainfall is approximately 2000 mm; all ofthese are characteristics of a maritime Mediterranean

climate (Rey 2000). Sistelo is composed of Igreja,Estrica, Quebrada, Padrão, and Porto Cova, fivesmall localities isolated from one other by distanceand the lack of public transportation. According tothe Instituto Geográfico Português (IGP 1990), themain land uses in Sistelo are cropland (8%),scrubland and pasture (43%), oak forest (16%), pineforest (11%), urban areas (1%), and other (21%).



Fig. 2. The geographic location of Sistelo, Portugal.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Sistelo was arural community highly adapted to the mountainousterrain. The livelihoods of the local population werebased on agro-pastoralism, and the restrictionsimposed by the geography of the mountain,including steep slopes and extreme climaticconditions, led to diversified land uses. Agriculturewas carried out on terraces called socalcos atsuccessive heights on the mountain slope (Fig. 3),and the main cultivated crops were corn, potatoes,and rye (Rey 2000). Soil fertilization was assuredby animal manure. Animal husbandry wassupported mainly by the baldio or common propertyarea (Medeiros 1984). The organization of pastorallife was based on the mobility of the livestock fromthe valleys in the winter inverneiras to the higher

zones with better pastures in the summer, knownlocally as the brandas (Graça 1996).

After a demographic peak in the 1950s, the 1960smarked the beginning of increasing emigration toother countries (Graça 1996). The appropriation ofthe baldio by the State in the 1940s, followed by itsafforestation, drastically reduced the area availablefor pasture. This imposed land-use changeassociated with the lack of opportunities for lifeimprovement and the attractive situation of the labormarket in foreign countries were strong incentivesfor emigration (Medeiros 1984). Emigration,particularly male emigration, became a livelihoodstrategy for families in Sistelo. By the late 1970s,the number of animals had declined, and traditional



Fig. 3. The agricultural terraces or socalcos of Sistelo.

seasonal mobility strategies were being progressivelyabandoned despite the return of the baldio to thecommunity in 1974. With reduced local laborbecause of emigration and insufficient income tohire farm workers, there was also a reduction in thearea under cultivation (Caldas 1982).

The trend toward depopulation and abandonment ofthe fields has continued to the present. Between1960 and 2001, the population in Sistelo decreasedby 57% (INE 1964, 2001). The current number ofresidents in the community is 341 (INE 2001). Thereis a high proportion of women and elderly, and theilliteracy rate is very high (Table 1 and Fig. 4).

Pensions are the main means of living (INE 2001).Other major sources of income are emigrantremittances and agricultural subsidies. The crudeactivity rate is 61%, and about 84% of the laborforce is employed in agriculture, animal husbandry,and the forestry sector (INE 2001).

With regard to access to key facilities and services,10.6% of the resident population does not havepiped water in the household, 28.7% does not havea bath or shower, 21.7% does not have a toilet, and78.9% uses fireplaces as the only heating system(INE 2001). Health facilities are nonexistent in the



community. Igreja, the central locality, has the onlyprimary school, with five students.

Sistelo was proposed as a study case for themountain system in the Portugal MillenniumEcosystem Assessment by the National Park ofPeneda-Gerês (Pereira et al. 2003). Sistelo bordersthe National Park and is included in the recentlyapproved Natura 2000 Network site, which spansthe National Park.

Table 1. Comparison of some Sistelo sociodemographicindicators with Portuguese national averages.

Indicator Sistelo Portugal

Population density(persons/km2)

13 112

Women (%) 62 52

Residents 65 yrand older (%)

39 16

Illiterates 10 yrand older (%)

36 9

METHODS

A participatory approach was used to study well-being and the links between well-being andecosystem services. This participatory approachwas based on behavioral and epistemologicalprinciples shared by the Rapid Rural Appraisal(RRA) and the Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)approaches; these include a reversal of learning,learning rapidly and progressively with flexible useof methods, accepting appropriate imprecisions,offsetting biases, triangulating, seeking diversity,facilitating, being self-critical, and sharinginformation and ideas (Chambers 1992).

Participants in the study were selected using anonprobability sample of residents in thecommunity, i.e., no effort was made to sample eachelement of the population with a fixed probability.Nonprobability sampling is particularly suited tounderstanding qualitative and relational issues(Narayan 1996). The sample size was notdetermined prior to data collection. Instead,sampling was conducted sequentially in each

locality and for each tool, using snowball sampling,i.e., asking key informants to name other peoplewho should be contacted by the researchers, andaccidental sampling, i.e., groups of people orindividuals met randomly when walking throughthe localities or with key informants and availableto participate. We purposely included men andwomen, younger and older people, people engagedin different activities, and people considered worseor better off economically if the initial sample didnot reflect this diversity. This technique, known asdiversity or common sense sampling, was used toensure diversity and avoid sampling errorscontaining biases related to leadership, gender, age,visibility, and wealth (Narayan 1996).

For the tools for which we wanted to perform sometype of quantitative data analysis, we tried to ensurethat at least 10% of the residents of each of the fivelocalities were included. We also made sure that theproportion of women and men sampled was thesame as the sex ratio in the population, which is aform of quota sampling.

Because we used a combination of these samplingstrategies for each tool and could not control the sizeof the groups casually encountered, none of thesubsamples were the same size. Although we triedto ensure diversity, we cannot claim that this sampleis statistically representative. Eighty-six individualsparticipated in this study, including 80 residents(about 24% of the population) and six nonresidentkey informants. Of the total participants, 61% werewomen, who represent 62% of the population.

After reviewing the available secondary information,we made seven visits of 3–4 d each from December2003 to July 2004 (Table 2), plus one final meetingwith local organizations in December 2004. Thefield methods and tools used in this research werechosen and adapted from Narayan (1996),Rietbergen-McCracken and Narayan (1998), andSEAGA (2001). They included direct observation,semistructured interviews, trend lines, ranking, andscoring. Besides these methods and tools,familiarization with the community and participationin its daily activities were considered important sothat we could learn more about the community andestablish a relaxed rapport and some measure oftrust with the local people. The analysis of data wasbased mainly on frequencies of references/responses within each of the categories created,including those made in the semistructuredinterviews and visual tools, and the outputs of visual



Fig. 4. Age-structure pyramid of the Sistelo population.

tools, which included trends, scoring, and ranking.Key anecdotes and quotes were chosen to illustratesome findings.

Fieldwork was performed by two researchers, oneof whom had a background in the social sciencesand the other in biology. We chose not to tape recordthe application of tools, so one of the researchersplayed the role of facilitator and the other of note-taker. To ensure the trustworthiness of our findingswe triangulated the information sources, methods,and people to assess reliability or constancy offindings and used community validation of findingsto assess validity, i.e., closeness of a finding to“reality.”

Semistructured interviews

We performed the semistructured interviews usinga flexible interview guide focused on four issues:well-being, ecosystem services, major trends, and

major problems. These issues were presented in aconversational way to 18 residents. One of theseresidents (the priest) was selected by the researchersas a key informant, Sistelo's local authority selectedone key informant in each of the five localities, andthe others were purposively selected by theresearchers to ensure diversity, usually by askinglocal residents, including key informants, to identifyinformants in the same locality of a different gender,age, and economic status. If these informants werewith one or two other local residents whenencountered, the interview would be conducted withthe group. Following the interviews, the datacollected were organized into categories for each ofthese four issues. We then created graphs and cardswith cartoons and photographs to facilitate trendanalysis, ranking, scoring, and the discussion ofdifferent points of view.



Table 2. Organization of the fieldwork. Researchers also made direct observations and attempted to becomefamiliar with and take part in community and daily activities during all the visits listed below.

Visit Tools and methods Local participants Location

Meetings with local authority, localorganizations, and organizations operating inthe area

Key informants Sistelo at large

1 and 2

Semistructured interviewing Key informantsSelected individualsCasual groups

The five small localities in Sistelo

Trend lines Purposively selectedgroups:1) Young peopleof both genders2) Middle-agedand older women3) Middle-agedand older men

Igreja

3

Well-being ranking Casual groupsrandomly encounteredSelected individuals

Igreja

4 Agro-ecosystem resourcesscoring and rankingCriteria for well-being ranking

Casual groupsrandomly encounteredSelected individuals

Igreja

5 Agro-ecosystem resourcesscoring and rankingLandscape scoringWell-being rankingCriteria for well-being rankingSpecies list


Padrão andPorto Cova

6 Agro-ecosystem resourcesscoring and rankingLandscape scoringWell-being rankingCriteria for well-being rankingSpecies list


EstricaQuebradaIgreja

Well-being ranking

We used two approaches to identify relevant localcriteria for well-being. Respondents were selectedusing accidental sampling, quota sampling,diversity sampling, and snowball sampling, e.g., byasking local residents to name people they

considered worse or better off than they were. Themost commonly used approach, which weintroduced to 39 residents, was to ask them to (1)identify and rank different groups in the communityin terms of well-being or explain what theyconsidered the criteria of a good life, (2) rankdifferent localities in terms of well-being, and (3)



devise a simple ranking of rural and urbancommunities. At the end of each of these rankingswe then asked for the criteria used by the participantsto make the ranking. A ranking of criteria for well-being was also introduced for triangulation purposesto 17 residents. Participants had to divide criteriaselected from the semistructured interviews intofour major groups ranging to very important tounimportant for a good life.

Trend lines

Trend lines were used for a more detailedassessment of the main changes in the communityidentified in the semistructured interviews. Trendlines were applied to 11 residents. This tool wasapplied in Igreja in three different meetingsorganized by the researchers with young people ofboth genders, middle-aged and older women, andmiddle-aged and older men. Members of each groupwere selected using diversity, snowball, andaccidental sampling. This tool was not applied tothe other localities because the most importantchanges perceived in the semistructured interviewswere common to all localities. A graph was drawnfor each trend. The idea was to encourage discussionof the perceived causes for each trend, to discoverlinkages between trends, and to elicit people’sperspectives on whether these trends were likely tochange in the future.

Scoring and ranking of agro-ecosystemresources and landscape scoring

We also performed an exercise to score and rankagro-ecosystem resources to encourage theidentification of ecosystem services by thecommunity and to understand which services aremore valued in terms of well-being. Forty-oneindividuals were sampled using accidentalsampling, quota sampling, diversity sampling, andsnowball sampling, e.g., by asking local residentsto name people associated with different activitiessuch as hunting, farming, commerce, etc. We usedphotographic cards to represent eight agro-ecosystem resources: water springs, the Vez River,cattle, agricultural fields, scrubland baldio, forestbaldio, biodiversity, and the terraced socalcos landscape. Each participant received three stonesand distributed them on the cards representing theresources they considered the most important forwell-being. Participants were encouraged to explain

the reasons for their choices. At the end of theexercise, the total for each resource was calculated,and the resources were ranked based on these scores.These rankings were then discussed, includingpositive and negative criteria associated with eachresource.

The landscape preferences of the residents wereassessed using a scoring exercise. Thirty-nineindividuals were selected using accidental,diversity, snowball, and quota sampling. In theexercise, people had to score five differentlandscapes: agricultural fields, scrubland, oakforest, pine forest, and eucalyptus forest. Eachparticipant was asked to choose his or her preferredlandscape(s) and explain the reasons for thesechoices. A discussion based on the choices madewas encouraged, including positive and negativecriteria associated with each landscape.

Biodiversity known to local residents

Finally, we asked 21 residents to enumerate localspecies of plants, birds, mammals, reptiles, andamphibians as well as their main characteristics toassess local knowledge about biodiversity. Five ofthe individuals in this sample were selected byasking residents in each locality to name individualswith a good knowledge of different species; theothers were selected using accidental and diversitysampling to ensure that both genders and youngerpeople were included.

Scenarios

One final meeting was held to present the mainfindings of the study and to conduct a scenariosexercise with representatives of organizations whohad implemented or were in the process ofimplementing projects in Sistelo. These organizationsincluded the forestry association ATLÂNTICA, aregional development association called theAssociação Regional de Desenvolvimento do AltoLima, the regional office of the Portuguese RedCross, and the National Park of Peneda-Gerês. Inthis exercise, these representatives were asked toimagine plausible scenarios for Sistelo in a timelineof 40 yr, the consequences for ecosystem servicesand human well-being, and the drivers of changeassociated with each scenario.



Fig. 5. The criteria for human well-being most often cited by the participants in the areas identified by theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment. The criteria on the left all feed into freedom of choice and action.

RESULTS

Local criteria for human well-being

Nearly 40 different criteria for human well-beingwere identified. We organized the most frequentlymentioned criteria (Figs. 5 and 6) according to thecomponents of well-being considered in theconceptual framework of the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment (Millennium EcosystemAssessment 2003).

Material well-being, or criteria related to it, wasalways cited by individuals when discussing well-being and improvements in living conditions.Income was universally considered a determinantof well-being. However, it is important to note thatlocal participants distinguished between wealth andwell-being: when speaking about well-being,people always referred to other criteria besideswealth. Access to goods and services was also veryimportant for well-being. Participants consistentlymentioned the importance of having better roads toimprove access to goods and services from theoutside. Access to services at the local level wasalso stressed. Assets such as a house, cattle, fields,

or a house garden were considered important.Because of the shortage of labor, fields have becomeless important than they once were, but they werestill a valuable source of food as a complement tofood purchased from the outside. Nevertheless,some people felt that having fields was negativelyrelated to well-being because fields mean morework and more worries. This feeling was expressedin statements such as “Before those who had fieldswere rich, today people who have fields are poor.”People referred to the importance of food abundancebut also of food quality. Some people were of theopinion that, although nowadays there is no shortageof food, the quality of the available food is worsebecause of the chemicals and artificial substancesused in food production that could be harmful tohuman health.

Physical well-being, or criteria related to it, was alsomentioned by everyone. In particular, localresidents stressed health, leisure or not having towork so hard, the capacity to work, and not beingold as fundamental aspects of a good life.

Criteria related to social well-being were widelymentioned as a critical aspect of a good life. Localresidents emphasized the problem of loneliness and



Fig. 6. Expressions of well-being and poverty used by the residents of Sistelo.

the importance of living with family. Mutual help,conviviality, and joy were also consideredimportant for a good life.

With regard to security, most people referred toaspects such as the security attained from retirementpensions, tranquility, and a safe environment. Theimportance of retirement pensions was particularlystressed in the context of security in old age. Theimportance of tranquility and a safe environmentwas emphasized when individuals compared well-being in Sistelo with the situation in urbancommunities. People gave the example of air andwater quality as an advantage of living in Sistelo.

Freedom of choice and action can be defined as the“freedom to lead the kind of lives people have reasonto value” (Sen 1999). Many people consideredfreedom an important component of well-being.Some local residents used this criterion to justifythe differences between people. For them, at leastsome of those differences, e.g., choosing not to havepiped water in the house, were considered to be theresult of a conscious decision. Although freedom ofchoice and action is closely related to the other fourconstituents of well-being, people emphasized thatthey had more choices now than in the past,particularly with regard to having more cash income



and improved access to goods and services. Theexpressions “land of slavery” and “slave work,&#8221 both of which were frequently repeated bythe study participants, reflect the importance of thechoices now available because of mobility andincome sources unrelated to agriculture. Education,which can be considered important for theenhancement of freedom of choice and action, wasrarely referred to when ranking individuals indifferent groups of well-being, although it wasalmost universally classified as very importantwhen ranking the criteria for well-being. Educationwas considered important mainly because itconferred the ability to read and write.

The great majority of participants reported that theyare generally better off now than 30 yr ago becauseof improvements in criteria related to material well-being and the enhancement of choices.Nevertheless, people also reported a deterioratingsituation with regard to some of the criteria relatedto well-being, notably those related to social well-being. People stated, for example, that thecommunity is now worse off in terms of joy,conviviality, and mutual help. The reasons statedfor this decline were the decrease in and the agingof the population and the disappearance of sometraditional practices related to agriculture. Thesetraditional practices consisted of regular gatheringsof people to help work each other's fields and toaccomplish certain production activities such asfiadas (spinning wool) and desfolhadas (strippingcorn leaves). During fiadas and desfolhadas, peopleusually sang and danced together. These traditionalactivities had an important role in the enhancementof the social capital, broadly defined as socialnetworks and the associated norms and values(Grootaert and Bastelaer 2001), that enables peopleto coordinate actions and to achieve desired goals(Narayan 1999).

Interestingly, most people (36 out of 39 residents)preferred to live in Sistelo rather than in moreurbanized areas. The criteria used to justify thischoice were a healthy environment, tranquility, theability to be self-sufficient, a sense of place, andfreedom.

Agro-ecosystem resources

The agro-ecosystem resources that were mostfrequently mentioned in the semistructuredinterviews as being affected by important changes

were cultivated fields, livestock animals, and forest(Table 3). Local residents indicated that theseresources had been in decline for the previous 30yr. Their perception of this trend is corroborated byinventories and other surveys (Caldas 1982,Medeiros 1984, IGP 1990, INE 1989, 1999,ARDAL 2002). Data from the National Institute ofStatistics show that the amount of arable open landdecreased from 176 ha in 1989 to 55 ha in 1999, andthat the amount of permanent pasture open landexcluding the baldio common area increased from15 ha in 1989 to 181 ha in 1999 (INE 1989, 1999).This shows that most of the recently abandonedcultivated areas are being converted to pasture. Withregard to livestock, from 1972 to 1999 there was a28% reduction in the number of head of cattle anda 34% decrease in the number of sheep (Medeiros1984, INE 1999). However, it is important to notethat in the period from 1999 to 2002 there was anincrease of 14% in the number of cattle (ARDAL2002). Total forest area in the Arcos de Valdevezmunicipality, which encompasses Sistelo, decreased6% from 1974 to 1990, with a 21% reduction in theamount of pine forest over the same period (IGP1990).

With the exception of the forest, in which losseswere caused mainly by forest fires, the shrinkingand aging population was considered the mainreason for the reduction in the amount of agro-ecosystem resources (Table 3). Furthermore, thepeople of Sistelo believe that this decline isirreversible. “Sistelo is dead!” was the expressionused to illustrate the deterministic character of thesetrends and the absence of a future.

The perceptions of the local people with regard totrends in biodiversity were not assessed in this studybecause local residents did not refer it as asignificant change. Nevertheless, during semistructuredinterviews we asked key informants about perceivedtrends in numbers of wild animals. There was a greatdeal of variation in the responses. The onlyconsistent response was that some hunted specieswere decreasing. Data from neighboring areassupported this perception. For instance, the greypartridge (Perdix perdix) has become extinct in thearea, and the hare (Lepus granatensis) has becomeextremely rare (Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental2002).

Cattle, agricultural fields, and scrubland baldio orcommons were ranked as the most importantresources for well-being (Table 4). Cattle were



Table 3. Trends in agro-ecosystem resources identified in the semistructured interviews and by means ofinventories and other surveys, and the main causes of those trends according to the semistructured interviewsand trend lines exercises.

Agro-ecosystemresources

Trend perceivedby locals

Trend basedon objectiveindicators

Causes

Cultivated fields ↓ ↓ Decreasing and aging populationHigh production costsFlood damage to irrigation channels

Cattle ↓ ↓ Decreasing and aging population. Since1999, this downward trend has started toreverse, with an increase in the number ofhead of cattle because of subsidies.

Goats and sheep ↓ ↓ State appropriation of the communitypasture in the 1940sDecreasing and aging population

Forest ↓ ↓ Occurrence of firesInsufficient monitoring of forest areas

considered an important source of income becauseof agricultural subsidies. In addition to the economicimportance of this resource, people also had anemotional attachment to livestock and to pastoralpractices. Agricultural fields were referred to asimportant by most of the participants. However, asmentioned in the well-being section, some peoplealso considered the possession of agricultural fieldsto be a source of discomfort because they had toworry about maintaining and clearing them.Scrubland baldio was considered a very importantsource of fuel and pasture, especially by people whodid not own their own land. The statement “Baldio belongs to the poor!&#8221 was often used by thelocal residents as an example of the importance thatthis resource has to the people of Sistelo. Theregulating services provided by the forest that weredeemed important to well-being were airpurification and a healthy environment. In fact, fewregulating services were mentioned throughout thisexercise. Water springs were pointed out asimportant because of their role in the irrigation ofagricultural fields. In addition, the provision ofdrinking water was also often mentioned as a serviceprovided by water springs. In contrast, the Vez Riverwas mentioned as important both for theprovisioning of water and for cultural andrecreational services. The landscape of the socalcos did not seem to be important to the people of Sistelo

despite its general appeal to outsiders. In fact, mostpeople answered “yes” to a hypothetical questionabout whether or not they would like to see thesocalcos disappear, because they associate theseterraces with a great deal of hard work.

The residents surveyed did not immediately thinkof biodiversity as something important to their well-being, although in the ranking exercise some didrefer to biodiversity as a priority in the maintenanceof a healthy and clean environment. People hadconflicting feelings about biodiversity: on the onehand, they appreciated the beauty of biodiversity,mainly of birds and plants, the feeling of joyprovided by bird songs, and the utilitarian value ofcertain plants, particularly those that have medicalproperties. On the other hand, people felt that someof these animals and plants were harmful to agro-pastoral practices. For example, the wild-boar wasassociated with crop damage, and the wolf with theloss of livestock. In the species list exercise, 12participants identified a total of 80 plant species, 26bird species, 16 mammalian species, seven reptilespecies, and three amphibian species. Medicalproperties were recognized in 26 plant species,mainly by older people who had used them in thepast when they had no access to modern medicines.



Table 4. Combined results of agro-ecosystemresources scoring and ranking. Agro-ecosystemresources are listed in decreasing order ofpreference.

Agro-ecosystemresources

Services provided

Cattle IncomePleasure and joyManure to fertilize the fields

Agricultural fields FoodIncomeFodder

Scrubland baldio Wood, fuel, and fodderFood for the hunt animals

Forest/forested baldio Wood, fuel, and fodderIncome to the parishAir purificationHealthy environmentWater springsOxygen

Water springs Water for irrigationPotable water

Vez River Water for irrigationCultural values: part of local historyand traditionFishHealthy pure waterRecreational activities

Terraced landscape Aesthetic valueFodderAvailable land

Biodiversity Healthy environmentHerbs for tea and medicineAesthetic valueHunt animalsRegulation of the food chainPastureJoy and pleasure

The results of the landscape scoring demonstratedthat agricultural fields and oak forest were thepreferred landscapes (Table 5). Agricultural fieldswere favored mainly because they provide food andfodder. Local residents valued the oak (Quercusrobur) because it provides high-quality wood andcontributes to a healthy environment. Wood supplywas also mentioned as a reason by participants who

chose pine and eucalyptus forests. Many individualsjustified not choosing eucalyptus forest, the leastpreferred landscape overall, because it absorbs greatquantities of water. The scrubland areas were valuedby local residents who stressed the importance ofthis landscape in the support of pastoral activities.Aesthetic values were rarely mentioned as thereason for choosing a particular landscape.

Scenarios for the future

Two main scenarios were developed incollaboration with local organizations. The firstscenario corresponds to the continuation of thecurrent trends of depopulation and agriculturalabandonment in Sistelo in a society that is notconcerned with the environment. The secondscenario corresponds to a reversal of the currenttrends in an environmentally friendly society.

For most participants, the consequences of the totalland abandonment scenario would be quitenegative, both for most local ecosystem services andfor human well-being. The two dominant themes ofthis scenario are: (1) the cessation of the activitiesof terrace maintenance as a result of abandonmentand depopulation and (2) the development ofscrubland vegetation associated with earlysuccessional stages. According to the participants,these two changes would present serious threats,including the potential for large-scale fires becauseof the characteristics of the new vegetation cover,the loss of soil through run-off erosion, andlandslides caused by the progressive collapse of theterraces. The participants projected that, in 40 yr,local biodiversity would decrease. Land abandonmentwould lead to a more simplified landscape, with lessvariety of land-use types. Large-scale fires wouldhave negative impacts on some species and speedup the homogenization of the landscape. These fireswould be a consequence of the increase in scrublandvegetation in the abandoned agricultural fields, theloss of controlled burning practices, the decrease ingrazing, and the decrease in wood and bushcollection by local populations. There would bealmost no local provision of food services. Waterquality would improve because pollution sourcesassociated with agricultural practices and humanoccupation would disappear. Recreational andcultural services would be negatively affected in thisscenario: many of the hunted species associatedwith agricultural landscapes would decrease,cultural tourism associated with this man-made



Table 5. Results of the landscape scoring, presented by decreasing order of preference.

Landscape Positive contributions Negative contributions

Agricultural fields(terraces)

FoodFodder

...

Oak forest Healthy landscapeHigh-quality wood

...

Pine forest Wood ...

Scrubland FodderFiber and wood

...

Eucalyptus forest Wood Absorbs great quantities of water

landscape and its aesthetic value would decline, and,most importantly, this valued cultural landscape,with its associated knowledge, heritage values, andidentity, would be lost. Considering the loss of theseecosystem services and the diminished securityassociated with natural hazards, the human well-being associated with the services provided by thislandscape would be negatively affected.

In the second scenario, the reversal of agriculturalabandonment trends in an environmentally friendlysociety would have positive impacts both on localecosystem services and on human well-being.Depopulation trends would change direction asyoung, resourceful, educated people immigrated tothe area, although that would happen only if Sistelobecame a better place to live, with, e.g., better accessto services, improved working conditions inagriculture based on new technologies and solutionsapplied to the traditional management of thelandscape, and new employment opportunitiesassociated with diversified activities and those withan increased value. Improvements of this typewould also encourage local young people to stay.In this scenario, traditional and innovative forms ofland use would be developed to produce the goodsand services needed to meet the growing demandfor high-quality traditional and organic products andfor the amenities associated with natural, sport, andcultural tourism. Traditional knowledge would berespected and enriched by the knowledge broughtby those young educated people in an interactiveprocess. In an environmentally friendly society,backed by increasing environmental education andawareness, this diversified use of the territory would

be guided by concerns about sustainability, and theunsustainable use of resources would be avoided.In this scenario, biodiversity would be maintainedor even enhanced because of the sustainable,diversified use of territory; water quality would bemaintained or slightly decrease because of humanactivities; and food supply services would increase.Tourism and recreational services associated withhunting and fishing would be maximized tosustainable levels. Cultural services would beenhanced because the resulting landscape wouldreflect traditional knowledge, heritage values, andcultural identity. Material well-being, health, socialwell-being, security, and freedom of choice for localpeople would improve because of both the changesin the local ecosystems and improvements in well-being criteria not directly related to ecosystemservices. These latter improvements are animportant condition for the development of thisscenario. Human well-being would also improve forpeople outside Sistelo who benefit from ecosystemservices from Sistelo, because of improved foodquality, recreation, and enjoyment of aestheticvalues.

DISCUSSION

Human well-being and ecosystem services atthe local level

Although the local criteria for well-being identifiedin this study are context-dependent and exist in aunique combination, they present some commonalities,



Fig. 7. The Millennium Assessment conceptual framework applied to Sistelo.



in terms of both criteria and constituents, to thoseidentified in “Voices of the Poor,” a series thatgathered the views of 60,000 poor men and womenfrom 60 countries (Narayan et al. 2000a,b). Severalof the local criteria for well-being that wereidentified in our study did not depend directly onlocal ecosystem services; these include income fromretirement pensions and nonagricultural work,access to goods and services, home ownership, age,leisure time, the capacity to work, loneliness, and,for the present generation, freedom of choice andaction. However, other criteria were directly relatedto local ecosystem services, such as cattle as a sourceof income and fields for food self-sufficiency. Theseservices have been decreasing in importancebecause of other sources of income, which allowpeople to replace local provisioning services withimported goods. The ability to make thissubstitution is considered a major improvement forthe well-being of the community. The supply offuelwood is valued because, for the great majorityof households, a wood-burning fireplace is the onlyheating system.

The diminishing importance of food supply servicescould seem to contradict the results of the agro-ecosystem resources ranking (Table 4), consideringhow often the local residents referred to theseservices and their role as a potential source ofincome. This contradiction is only apparent. Theseservices are still an important complement for locallivelihoods, especially for those living on lowretirement pensions. The ranking results may alsobe a reflection of an emphasis on direct uses ofecosystems, e.g., harvesting food and wood.

Health and a safe environment were also identifiedas local criteria for human well-being. For thisreason, ecosystem services such as the purificationof air and water, although not mentioned as often,were recognized as having great value. Localresidents also cited several cultural services, inparticular, recreation, a sense of place, culturalheritage, social traditions, and aesthetic values.Older people felt, for example, an emotionalrelationship with agro-pastoralism practices. Forthem, these practices also have a recreational value.People linked, at least partially, some criteria ofsocial well-being to agricultural practices that havenow disappeared but that formerly enhanced socialcapital and well-being. Furthermore, the Vez Riveris a very important symbol of cultural and localidentity and figures in traditional songs and folktalesas a river of pure and clear water.

Agriculture is based on the control of speciesdiversity. Therefore, the role that biodiversity playsin more natural ecosystems may not always bevalued by a community that practices agriculture,which may explain why biodiversity was rarelymentioned as a desirable resource. Even so, thespecies list exercise shows that the people of Sistelohave a good knowledge of local species and suggeststhat local biodiversity is important to them. Now,as community well-being becomes more detachedfrom local ecosystem services, some of the moreutilitarian knowledge of biodiversity, such as theidentification of medicinal plants and of the bestplants for pasture, will probably be lost.

Therefore, local people recognize and value a greatvariety of ecosystem services. Furthermore, thereasons why local residents prefer to live in Sistelorather than in more urbanized areas were all relatedto ecosystem services. Similarly, in a surveyconducted at the national level, 42% of respondentsindicated that the countryside is the best place tolive in Portugal. Life in the countryside wasassociated with tranquility, health, and naturalbeauty (Almeida 2000). However, at a nationallevel, as in Sistelo, people continue to leave ruralplaces in search of better material conditions,particularly employment opportunities and improvedaccess to goods and services.

Sistelo’s case provides a good example of thecomplexity of the linkages between ecosystemservices and human well-being. It also shows theimportance of material conditions not directlyassociated with ecosystem services that makepeople leave areas in which they feel that they havea superior quality of life.

Human well-being and ecosystem services inthe context of land abandonment

To develop responses that increase both ecosystemservices and human well-being, it is important tounderstand the linkages among local well-beingcriteria, trends in ecosystem services, and drivers ofchange (Fig. 7).

It is apparent that the downward trends in agro-ecosystem resources are the result of synergisticinteractions among several causes. The decreasingand aging population seems to be the main indirectdriver affecting the ecosystems and livelihoods of



Sistelo. This driver is also affecting othermountainous areas of Portugal (Ferreira et al. 1999).

This study shows that, despite gains in material well-being and freedom of choice due mainly to emigrantremittances and improvements in the pensionsystem, the depopulation of Sistelo has had negativeconsequences for local well-being, particularlysocial well-being. Furthermore, depopulation canalso increase relative underdevelopment. With ashrinking population, the local delivery of publicservices such as schools and health care becomesincreasingly unfeasible, for both economic andpolitical reasons. This diminished access to publicservices along with lack of employmentopportunities causes the continuous emigration ofyoung people, reinforcing the abandonment trendand its social consequences. Negative consequencesfor well-being can also propagate elsewhere, withemigrants increasing population and environmentalpressures in urban areas that are already stressed.

Depopulation and abandonment have led tosignificant changes in land use, which are perceivedas having many negative consequences, both forhuman well-being and for ecosystem services. Thisperception was emphasized in the totalabandonment scenario for Sistelo. It has alsoreceived support at the national level in recentreports from the Portuguese Ministry of Agriculture(Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental 2002, 2003)and at the European level in a study showing that,in 15 of 16 rural mountainous areas of Europe,depopulation and agricultural land abandonmenthad negative effects on biodiversity and thelandscape (MacDonald et al. 2000).

For those ecosystem services most dependent onabundant human labor, the decrease in populationand the subsequent abandonment of agriculturalfields imply a decrease in the provision of thoseservices. This is the case with the food provisioningservices and the cultural services of the terracedlandscape in Sistelo. The consequences of thedownward trends in these services for human well-being are difficult to assess because of the increasingdisconnect between human well-being and localecosystem services. The causes for this are twofold.On the one hand, at the local level there has been ageneral improvement in those aspects of humanwell-being that are not strictly dependent onecosystem services. On the other hand, there is aspatial disconnect between the location in which theecosystem services are produced and the location

of the people who benefit from those services. Forinstance, some of the services provided by Sistelo,such as the cultural landscape of socalcos or theregulation of the water quality in the Vez River,benefit people elsewhere.

In addition to the diminished provisioning andcultural services, the abandonment of traditionalagricultural practices can lead to the accumulationof shrub vegetation biomass, which has the potentialto contribute to an increased number of fires(Bernaldez 1991, Moreira et al. 2001b). This isclosely related to the downward trend in the numberof livestock animals, because grazing and thecontrolled burning practices associated with it havebeen for many years controlling fuel accumulationin mountain scrublands and forests. Moreira et al.(2001b) confirm the trend toward increased fireoccurrence in this region, and local residents reportthat these fires are reducing the amount of forestarea. Large-scale fires have negative impacts on thecondition of local ecosystem services such as soilprotection and climate regulation. Considering thattotal land abandonment will result in the neglect andultimate collapse of the terraces on the mountainslopes (Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental 2002,Dunjó et al. 2003), landslides and soil loss willbecome serious problems. These problems alongwith increased fire occurrences will have directnegative impacts on human well-being, inparticular, on environmental security. However, ifa tree cover develops, the risk of these naturalhazards may decrease in the long run (MacDonaldet al. 2000), and ecosystem services such as carbonsequestration are likely to improve. Therefore, atleast in the long term, there might be positiveconsequences of land abandonment for ecosystemservices. However, some positive consequences ofland abandonment could also occur in the short term,such as the improvements in water quality discussedin the total abandonment scenario.

The consequences of land abandonment forbiodiversity are difficult to determine because theimpact varies along temporal and spatial scales(MacDonald et al. 2000, Höchtl et al. 2005). Forinstance, the biodiversity of local flora at the specieslevel can increase in the very early stages (Brown1991), as one study in Sistelo has shown (C.Queiroz, H. M. Pereira, I. Gomes, and L. Vicente,unpublished manuscript), and then decrease fromlower to higher successional stages (Höchtl et al.2005). At the landscape level, a diversity of habitatssuch as those found in low-intensity agriculture



landscapes is usually associated with high speciesdiversity (van der Werff 1983, Fullbright 1996, Kerret al. 2001). In the long run, if forest replacesabandoned fields, the species that are moredependent on the combination of habitats currentlyprovided in the rural countryside will probablydecrease and those associated with forests mayincrease (Parody et al. 2001). In Sistelo, someimportant hunted species associated with farmedenvironments will probably decrease, a trendalready identified in the Parque Nacional da PenedaGerês (Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental 2002).However, there could also be increases in speciesthat have a long history of conflict with the localpopulation, such as carnivorous mammals andreptiles. Land abandonment may also lead to theloss of local crop varieties and autochthonousbreeds, some of which are already endangered(Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental 2002). Theimpacts of these changes on human well-beingmight be felt in different ways by different groupsbecause of the ways in which those groups assignpriorities to the different facets of biodiversity(Vermeulen and Koziell 2002).

Land abandonment in Sistelo will lead in the longrun to the disappearance of the rural community andits associated knowledge and cultural heritage andto decreases in the variety of the local habitats. Withthis in mind, preservation of landscape diversitymay be an important goal for cultural andenvironmental reasons. Considering the landscapepreferences of the Sistelo people, the cultivatedlandscape has value both from a subsistence and acultural point of view. Scrubland growth in the fieldshas a negative social connotation. Most peoplemention the importance of keeping fields clean evenif they do not use them for crops or pasture anylonger. This is consistent with the findings of a studyconducted in Val Grande National Park (Höchtl etal. 2005) and with those of other studies (Hunziker1995) reporting that, when agricultural fields arecolonized by scrubland species, the local peopleoften feel that they are losing their cultural heritage.Oak forest and cultivated fields were the preferredlandscape, which means that later successionalstages of land abandonment may also be valued.Nevertheless, local people value their landscapediversity, and, when asked, about half of theparticipants indicated more than one preferredlandscape. The landscape of the socalcos is alsorecognized by outsiders as having a unique culturaland aesthetic value.

Different people can have different perceptionsabout landscape change based on their ownpreferences. Visitors may experience a positivefeeling of naturalness associated with landabandonment and ecological succession but mayregret the loss of the cultural landscape (Hunziker1995, Höchtl et al. 2005).

Considering the consequences associated withcurrent abandonment trends, the European Unionand the national government implemented severalmeasures to encourage agricultural practices andanimal husbandry (ARDAL 2002). Nevertheless,although there has been a recent increase in thenumber of bovines, these incentives do not seem tobe enough to boost agricultural activities and keeppeople in mountainous rural areas. The reality is thatthe mountain areas of Portugal “ ... have always beenamong the least developed areas of the country”(Ferreira et al. 1999). Limitations to improvementsin agricultural productivity because of the physicalcharacteristics of mountainous regions arenegatively reinforced by socioeconomic disadvantages,both in terms of access to key infrastructures andservices and the lack of alternatives to agriculturefor making a living. Today, one of the maincontraints to improving agriculture productivity inmountainous areas seems to be the difficultiesrelated to mechanization. In fact, there are few fieldsin Sistelo that are large and accessible enough forthe use of machines.

In addition to the terrain constraints limiting theimprovement of agro-pastoralism practices, peoplestated that a lack of incentives to produce wasanother impediment to reviving agriculture. Withthe globalization of markets, people have access toproducts from other countries and other regions ofPortugal, and the high production costs of localproducts prevent them from obtaining a competitiveposition in the market. This also explains why mostof the young people who still live in Sistelo workin outside structures such as factories or othercompanies in the nearest village. For those youngpeople, agriculture is very hard work for which thereturn does not justify the effort.

Land abandonment and demographic trends inmountainous areas of Portugal and other regions ofEurope are serious problems that must bemonitored. Depending on the cultural andenvironmental goals, there are two possiblestrategies for dealing with these problems. One,which combines cultural and environmental goals,



is illustrated in the “inversion of trends scenario”for Sistelo and would require approaches designedto prevent abandonment and promote anenvironmentally friendly use of the land. The otherstrategy would emphasize the restoration of nativeforest but would require management measures toavoid the natural hazards illustrated in the currenttrends scenario. This strategy should be designed toachieve desired goals for ecosystem services andshould be complemented by measures to help thepopulation cope with isolation and ageing, forinstance, by making access to health services easier.Each of these two strategies poses specificchallenges and should be assessed in the larger-scalecontexts of the mountainous regions of Portugal andMediterranean Europe.

Responses to this article can be read online at:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art14/responses/

Acknowledgments:

The authors are grateful to the people of Sistelo, inparticular those who took part in this research study.We would like to thank Inês Gomes for her help withthe field work and Tiago Domingos and othermembers of the Portugal Millennium Assessmentteam for enlightening discussions.

LITERATURE CITED

Almeida, J. F. 2000. Os portugueses e o ambiente:inquérito nacional âs representações e práticas dosportugueses sobre o ambiente. Celta Editora,Lisbon, Portugal.

Associação Regional de Desenvolvimento do AltoLima (ARDAL). 2002. Núcleo rural de Sistelo;candidatura ao Programa Operacional Regional,Medida Agricultura e Desenvolvimento Rural,Acção 7: valorização do ambiente e patrimóniorural. ARDAL, Arcos de Valdevez, Portugal.

Baudry, J. 1991. Ecological consequences ofgrazing extensification and land abandonment: roleof interactions between environment, society andtechniques. Options Méditerranéennes—Série

Séminaires 15:13-19.

Bernaldez, F. G. 1991. Ecological consequences ofthe abandonment of traditional land use systems incentral Spain. Options Méditerranéennes—SérieSéminaires 15:23-29.

Bignal, E., and D. McCracken. 1996. Low-intensity farming systems in the conservation of thecountryside. Journal of Applied Ecology 33(6):413-424.

Brown, V. 1991. Early successional changes afterland abandonment: the need for research. OptionsMéditerranéennes—Série Séminaires 15:97-101.

Burel, F., and J. Baudry. 1995. Speciesbiodiversity in changing agricultural landscapes: acase study in the Pays d'Auge, France. AgricultureEcosystems and Environment 55(3):193-200.

Caldas, J. 1982. Pequenas explorações agrícolasfamiliares no concelho de Arcos de Valdevez:hipóteses para um estudo. Terras de Val de Vez 2 (Separatum).

Chambers, R. 1992. Rural appraisal: rapid,relaxed, and participatory. Institute of DevelopmentStudies Discussion Paper Number 31. Institute ofDevelopment Studies, Brighton, UK.

Chambers, R. 2003. Whose reality counts? Puttingthe first last. ITDG Publishing, London, UK.

Correia, T. 1993. Land abandonment: changes inthe land use patterns around the Mediterraneanbasin. Cahiers Options Méditerranéennes 1:97-112.

Daily, G. C. 1997. Nature's services: societaldependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press,Washington, D.C., USA.

Deutsch, L., C. Folke, and K. Skanberg. 2003.The critical natural capital of ecosystemperformance as insurance for human well-being.Ecological Economics 44:205-217.

Dunjó, G., G. Pardini, and M. Gispert. 2003.Land use change effects on abandoned terraced soilsin a Mediterranean catchment, NE Spain. Catena 52:23-37.

Farina, A. 1991. Recent changes of the mosaicpatterns in a montane landscape, (north Italy) and


http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art14/responses/


consequences on vertebrate fauna. OptionsMéditerranéennes—Série Séminaires 15:121-134.

Farina, A. 1997. Landscape structure and breedingbird distribution in a sub-Mediterranean agro-ecosystem. Landscape Ecology 12(6):365-378.

Ferreira, J., M. Roca, and E. Ventura. 1999.Prospects for sustainable development in mountainareas in Portugal: conceptual and policy-relatedissues. Pages 163-173 in I. Bowler, C. Bryant, andA. Firmino, editors. Progress in research onsustainable rural systems. International GeographicalCommision on “Sustainability of Rural System”Série Estudos Number 2. Centro de Estudos deGeografia e Planeamento Regional, Universidadede Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Folke, C., C. Fabricius, L. Schultz,, G. Cundill,C. Queiroz, Y. Gokhale, A. Marin, E. Camac, S.Chandola, M. Tawfic, B. Talukdar, A. Argumedo,and F. Torres. 2005. Communities, ecosystems andlivelihoods. In D. Capistrano and C. Samper,editors. Sub-global assessments of the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment. Island Press, Washington,D.C., USA, in press.

Fullbright, T. E. 1996. Viewpoint: a theoreticalbasis for planning woody plant control to maintainspecies diversity. Journal of Range Management 49(6):554-559.

Graça, L. 1996. Regadios tradicionais nasmontanhas do norte de Portugal (Serra da Peneda—um caso exemplar). P. Arroyo Agudo and F. J.Martínez Gil, editors. El agua a debate desde launiversidad; hacia una nueva cultura del agua. Institución Fernando el Católico, Zaragoza, Spain.[online] URL:http://www.us.es/ciberico/archivos_acrobat/zaraponen7/archer.pdf.

Grootaert, C., and T. Bastelaer. 2001.Understanding and measuring social capital: asynthesis of findings and recommendations from theSocial Capital Initiative. Social Capital InitiativeWorking Paper Number 24. World Bank,Washington, D.C., USA.

Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental. 2002. Planozonal agro-ambiental do Parque Nacional da PenedaGerês; Plano de Desenvolvimento Rural de PortugalContinental. [online] URL:http://www.min-agricultura.pt/oportal/extcnt/docs/

FOLDER/PROT_TEMAS/F_AMBIENTE/MADRPCNT_GTAA/PZ_Peneda_Gerez.pdf.

Grupo de Trabalho Agro-Ambiental. 2003. Oabandono da actividade agrícola. Ministério daAgricultura, Desenvolvimento Rural e Pescas,Lisbon, Portugal.

Höchtl, F., S. Lehringer, and W. Konold. 2005.“Wilderness”: what it means when it becomes areality—a case study from the southwestern Alps.Landscape and Urban Planning 70:85-95.

Hunziker, M. 1995. The spontaneous reafforestationin abandoned agricultural lands: perception andaesthetical assessment by locals and tourists.Landscape and Urban Planning 31:399-410.

Instituto Geográfico Português (IGP). 1990.Carta de ocupação do Solo—COS'90. IGP, Lisbon,Portugal.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). 1964. Xrecenseamento geral da população. INE, Lisbon,Portugal.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). 1989.Recenseamento geral da agricultura. INE, Lisbon,Portugal.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). 1999.Recenseamento geral da agricultura. INE, Lisbon,Portugal.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). 2001. XIVrecenseamento geral da população. INE, Lisbon,Portugal.

Kerr, J. T., T. Southwood, and J. Cihlar. 2001.Remotely sensed habitat diversity predicts butterflyspecies richness and community similarity inCanada. Proceedings of the National Academy ofScience 98:11365-11370.

MacDonald, D., J. Crabtree, G. Wiesinger, T.Dax, N. Stamou, P. Fleury, J. Lazpita, and A.Gibon. 2000. Agricultural abandonment inmountain areas of Europe: environmentalconsequences and policy response. Journal ofEnvironmental Management 59(1):47-69.

McMichael, T., B. Scholes, M. Hefny, E. Pereira,C. Palm, and S. Foale. 2005. Linking ecosystemservices and human well-being in subglobal


http://www.us.es/ciberico/archivos_acrobat/zaraponen7/archer.pdf

http://www.min-agricultura.pt/oportal/extcnt/docs/ FOLDER/PROT_TEMAS/F_AMBIENTE/MADRPCNT_GTAA/PZ_Peneda_Gerez.pdf


assessments. In D. Capistrano and C. Samper,editors. Sub-global assessments of the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment. Island Press, Washington,D.C., USA, in press.

Medeiros, I. 1984. Estruturas pastoris epovoamento na Serra da Peneda. Centro de EstudosGeográficos, Lisbon, Portugal.

Michaelidou, M., D. Decker, and J. Lassoie. 2002.The interdependence of ecosystem and communityviability: a theoretical framework to guide researchand application. Society and Natural Resources 15:599-616.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2003.Ecosystems and human well-being; a framework forassessment. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.

Moreira, F., P. Ferreira, F. Regoand, and S.Bunting. 2001a. Landscape changes and breedingbird assemblages in northwestern Portugal: the roleof fire. Landscape Ecology 16(2):175-187.

Moreira, F., F. Rego, and P. Ferreira. 2001b. Temporal (1958–1995) pattern of change in acultural landscape of northwestern Portugal:implications for fire occurrence. LandscapeEcology 16:557-567.

Narayan, D. 1996. Toward participatory research. World Bank Technical Paper Number 307. WorldBank, Washington, D.C., USA.

Narayan, D. 1999. Bonds and bridges: socialcapital and poverty. Policy Research WorkingPaper Number 2167. Poverty Reduction andEconomic Management Network, World Bank,Washington, D.C., USA.

Narayan, D., R. Patel, K.. Schafft, A.Rademacher, and S. Koch-Shulte. 2000a. Voicesof the poor: can anyone hear us? Oxford UniversityPress, New York, New York, USA.

Narayan, D., R. Chambers, M. Shah, and P.Petesch. 2000b. Voices of the poor: crying out forchange. Oxford University Press, New York, NewYork, USA.

Norton, A., B. Bird, K. Brock, M. Kakande, andC. Turk. 2001. A rough guide to PPAs:participatory povery assessment; an introduction totheory and practice. Overseas Development

Institute, London, UK.

Parody, J. M., F. J. Cuthbert, and E. Decker. 2001.The effect of 50 years of landscape change onspecies richness and community composition.Global Ecology and Biogeography 10(3):305-313.

Pereira, E. 2001. Implicações da evolução doconceito de pobreza para a luta contra a pobreza:uma reflexão. In J. Ferreira, J. Pereirinha, J. Silva,and F. Mendes, editors. O modelo latino deprotecção social: reflexões sobre o estado-providência em Portugal, Espanha e Brasil. lnstituto Superior de Economia e Gestão, Lisbon,Portugal.

Pereira, H. M., T. Domingos, and L. Vicente. 2003. Report on the user needs and responseoptions. Portuguese Sub-Global Assessment of theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment. [online] URL:http://www.ecossistemas.org.

Rey, J. 2000: Território e povoamento. Pages 22-39in L. Graça and H. dos Santos, editors. Cadernos damontanha: peneda 1. Direcção Regional deAgricultura de entre Douro e Minho, Braga,Portugal.

Rietbergen-McCracken, J., and D. Narayan. 1998. Participation and social assessment: toolsand techniques. International Bank for Reconstructionand Development/World Bank, Washington, D.C.,USA.

Salzman, J., B. H. Thompson, and G. C. Daily.2001. Protecting ecosystem services: science,economics, and policy. Stanford EnvironmentalLaw Journal 20:309-332.

Sen, A. 1999. Desenvolvimento como liberdade. Companhia das Letras, São Paulo, Brazil.

Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis Programme(SEAGA). 2001. Field level handbook. FAO,Rome, Italy.

Sustainable Agriculture and Rural LivelihoodsProgramme. 1988–2001. Participatory learningand action. International Institute for Environmentand Development, London, UK.

Van der Werff, H. 1983. Species number, area andhabitat diversity in the Galapagos Islands. Vegetatio 54:167-175.


http://www.ecossistemas.org


Vermeulen, S., and I. Koziell. 2002. Integratingglobal and local values: a review of biodiversityassessment. Natural Resource Issues Paper Number3. International Institute for Environment andDevelopment, London, UK.

Wainger, L. A., and E. W. Price. 2004. Evaluatingquality of life, economic vulnerabilities, and driversof ecosystem change. Environmental Monitoringand Assessment 94(1/3):69-84.


artigo ecology and sociedade

Technology