Social and cultural practices for ecosystem and health

One health approach brings together environment, human and animal health as interdependent determinants of health, including the social and economic conditions. This chapter provides insights on how social and economic factors can influence health through cultural habits, lifestyles, conditioned access to health care, to green spaces, to healthy food, exposure to pollution and to poor sanitation conditions. The challenge of managing socio-economic factors influencing health is addressed focusing in the need to provide for reliable information to the public and adequate public policies. • Previous chapter in book • Next chapter in book

Author links open overlay panel Xianwen Chen a , Sjerp de Vries b , Timo Assmuth c 1 , Jan Dick l 1 , Tia Hermans b 1 , Ole Hertel d 1 , Anne Jensen e 1 , Laurence Jones f 1 , Sigrun Kabisch g 1 , Timo Lanki h i 1 , Irina Lehmann j 1 , Lindsay Maskell k 1 , Lisa Norton k 1 , Stefan Reis l m 1 Show more Urbanization is a global trend, and consequently the quality of urban environments is increasingly important for human health and wellbeing. Urban life-style is typically associated with low physical activity and sometimes with high mental stress, both contributing to an increasing burden of diseases. Nature-based solutions that make effective use of ecosystem services, particularly of cultural ecosystem services (CES), can provide vital building blocks to address these challenges. This paper argues that, the salutogenic, i.e. health-promoting effects of CES have so far not been adequately recognised and deserve more explicit attention in order to enhance decision making around health and wellbeing in urban areas. However, a number of research challenges will need to be addressed to reveal the mechanisms, which underpin delivery of urban CES. These include: causal chains of supply and demand, equity, and equality of public health benefits promoted. Methodological challenges in quantifying these are discussed. The paper is highly relevant for policy makers within and beyond Europe, and also serves as a review for current researchers and as a roadmap to future short- and long-...

Abstract A focus on ecosystem services (ES) is seen as a means for improving decisionmaking. In the research to date, the valuation of the material contributions of ecosystems to human well-being has been emphasized, with less attention to important cultural ES and nonmaterial values. This gap persists because there is no commonly accepted framework for eliciting less tangible values, characterizing their changes, and including them alongside other services in decisionmaking. Here, we develop such a framework for ES research and practice, addressing three challenges: (1) Nonmaterial values are ill suited to characterization using monetary methods; (2) it is difficult to unequivocally link particular changes in socioecological systems to particular changes in cultural benefits; and (3) cultural benefits are associated with many services, not just cultural ES. There is no magic bullet, but our framework may facilitate fuller and more socially acceptable integrations of ES information into planning and management. In response to increasing pressures on ecosystems and the need for a sustained flow of benefits to human societies ( ecosystem services (ES) concept has been advanced and widely adopted as a framework for identifying and weighting the social and ecological values at stake in comprehensive management schemes ( ES are broadly defined as the conditions and processes through which ecosystems sustain and enrich human life ( The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) define...

Education, wealth, and government can value environmental decisions, but cultural values can influence just as much. There are many challenges our world face – and cultural industries have reflected on the issues while encouraging others to act now. There is no doubt that cultural adaptions can influence policy preferences and worldview. A culture can be defined as a group of individuals who share beliefs and values, though it can also refer to the new technological developments or religion – as well. Current cultural advances in society such as technology can cause resource repletion, which is another negative impact on the environment. The most sever include deforestation, mining for fossil fuels, contamination, and overconsumption. So yes – technology can have downsides, but they can also inform and connect protestors in the environmental movement. Protests can be found easier than ever, and media coverage can inform people all around the globe. In terms of religion and culture, there are many beliefs such as that humans should be conscious of their impact on the environment, including how they treat biodiversity resources – whether it is living or nonliving. This could influence the way policies are created and elevate our ecosystem. Photo by Karolina Grabowska on Photo by Rachel Claire on Sorry this was a short introduction – but fear not, there is more to come! In the meanwhile, stay green! -Gen Green