Species richness alone does not predict cultural ecosystem service value

Area of Science:

• Ecology
• Conservation Biology
• Environmental Social Science

Background:

• Many biodiversity-ecosystem services studies overlook cultural ecosystem services (CES).
• Species richness is often used as a proxy for CES value, assuming more species equate to greater value.
• Wildflower viewing is a significant biodiversity-based CES, particularly in amenity-rich landscapes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate how aesthetic preferences for wildflower communities relate to biodiversity components, including species richness.
• To determine if aesthetic preferences vary across different psychographic groups.
• To compare the effectiveness of species richness versus revealed social preferences in indicating CES value.

Main Methods:

• Surveyed 293 public forest visitors on aesthetic preferences for digitally manipulated wildflower images.
• Manipulated images based on species richness, abundance, evenness, color diversity, and charismatic species presence.
• Compared rankings of actual wildflower communities based on species richness versus revealed preferences.

Main Results:

• Aesthetic preferences were not linked to species richness but increased with flower abundance, species evenness, and color diversity.
• Preferences were consistent across psychographic groups and unaffected by user knowledge or stated value.
• Species richness alone missed 27% of wildflower viewing utility hotspots, despite broadly similar rankings.

Conclusions:

• Species richness is an inadequate proxy for assessing and prioritizing cultural ecosystem services.
• Conservation strategies for CES should integrate social preferences and diverse biodiversity metrics.
• Understanding multiple dimensions of biodiversity is crucial for sustaining CES supply.