Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES)
In response to the need for incorporating quantified and spatially explicit measures of social values into ecosystem service assessments, the geographic information system (GIS) application, Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES), was developed. SolVES is designed to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services. Social values, the perceived, nonmarket values the public ascribes to ecosystem services, particularly cultural services, such as aesthetics and recreation can be evaluated for various stakeholder groups. These groups are distinguishable by their attitudes and preferences regarding public uses, such as motorized recreation and logging. SolVES derives a quantitative, 10-point, social-values metric, the “value index”, from a combination of spatial and nonspatial responses to public value and preference surveys and calculates metrics characterizing the underlying environment, such as average distance to water and dominant landcover.
A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services
SolVES 4.1 now available! An open-source version developed for QGIS.
- SolVES 4.1 Tool (Includes QGIS plugin, sample data, and installation files for required QGIS and PostgreSQL software)
- User Manual and Tutorial
- Review the README file for instructions on how to use the new installation file and Load Data tool.
- The archived version 3.0 (for ArcGIS 10.0 - 10.5 ONLY) is available upon request by contacting gs-solves_support@usgs.gov.
SolVES 4.1 was developed with Python as an open-source tool for QGIS and PostgreSQL. Like previous versions, SolVES 4.1 is integrated with the Maxent maximum entropy modeling software to generate more complete social-value maps and to produce robust models describing the relationship between social value intensity and explanatory environmental variables. Maxent also more readily permits the transfer of social-value models to physically and socially similar areas where primary survey data are not available. Due to its flexible design, SolVES 4.1 users can define their own social values and public uses, model any number and type of environmental variables, optionally weight mapped survey data, and modify the spatial resolution of analysis. SolVES 4.1 introduces a new tool to automate the process of loading sample and user-supplied data.
SolVES has been applied on nearly every continent in biophysical and social contexts including forest, mountain, coastal, riparian, agricultural, and urban ecosystems. SolVES provides a tool for decision makers and researchers to evaluate the social value of ecosystems and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders regarding the tradeoffs among different ecosystem services.
Getting Started with SolVES 4.1
- SolVES 4.1 requires QGIS 3.10, PostgreSQL 11, and Maxent 3.4.1 software.
- Download and unzip the SolVES 4.1 tool. Refer to the README file and the “Installation” section of the user manual to complete installation of all required components.
- Refer to the “Navigating the User Manual” section of the user manual for instructions on how the user manual can serve as a quick-start tutorial for gaining hands-on experience with SolVES 4.1.
- More detailed information about how SolVES 4.1 works, data requirements, advanced options, and troubleshooting is included in the user manual.
- Journal articles and other SolVES-related publications (see below) describing applications of SolVES and similar methods are available.
- A sample copy of the public value and preference survey described in the User Manual is also available with the SolVES 4.1 tool download.
Although this software program has been used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the accuracy and functioning of the program and related program material nor shall the fact of distribution constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by the USGS in connection therewith.
Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
INFORMATION COLLECTION DISCLAIMER: SolVES is a tool for mapping and analyzing social survey response data. It is not a tool designed for the collection of survey data, nor is any survey attached to SolVES. Any survey or survey response data referred to in the SolVES documentation, sample data, or publications is the work and responsibility of the persons or groups who developed and conducted that survey. Please note that before a Federal agency may collect information or sponsor a collection of information, the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requires approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Any Federal agency or sponsored program interested in developing and conducting a survey for use with SolVES is wholly responsible for submitting an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB.
Related (i.e., non-USGS) Publications Including Independent Applications of SolVES
Alvarado-Aria, N., Moya-Almeida, V., Cabrera-Torres, F., Medina-Enríquez, A. 2023. Evaluation and mapping of the positive and negative values for the urban river ecosystem. One Ecosystem 8: e101122.
Arki, V. 2018. Exploring value-landscape associations in the Tanzanian Southern Highlands. Graduate thesis 209472871. University of Turku, Finland. 91 pp.
Arsland, E.S., Örücü, Ö.K. 2021. MaxEnt modelling of the potential distribution areas of cultural ecosystem services using social media data and GIS. Environment, Development and Sustainability 23, 2655-2667.
Baumeister, C.F., Gerstenberg, T., Plieninger, T., Schraml, U. 2020. Exploring cultural ecosystem service hotspots: Linking multiple urban forest features with public participation mapping data. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 48, 126561.
Bogdan, S.M., Stupariu, I., Andra-Topârceanu, A., Năstase, I.I. 2019. Mapping social values for cultural ecosystem services in a mountain landscape in the Romanian Carpathians. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 14 (1), 199-208.
Cai, C., van Riper, C.J., Johnson, D., Stewart, W., Raymond, C.M., Andrade, R., Goodson, D., Keller, R. 2023. Integrating social values with GPS tracks through Denali National Park and Preserve. Applied Geography 155, 102958.
Chen, F., Wu, J., Liu, J., Hu, Y., Chen, X., Lim, P.-E., Abdullah, W.M.A., Sjafrie, N.D.M., Adirianto, B. 2019. Comparison of social-value cognition based on different groups: The case of Pulau Payar in Malaysia and Gili Matra in Indonesia. Ocean & Coastal Management 173, 1-9.
Chen, Y., Ke, X., Min, M., Cheng, P. 2020. Disparity in perceptions of social values for ecosystem services of urban green space: A case study in the East Lake Scenic Area, Wuhan. Frontiers in Public Health 8:370.
Cisneros, E.E., Calderón, L.C. 2021. Dinámicas socioecológicas y valores sociales de servicios ecosistémicos en la cuenca del río Savegre, Costa Rica. Región y Sociedad 33.
Clemente, P., Calvache, M., Antunes, P., Santos, R., Cerdeira, J.O., Martins, M.J. 2019. Combining social media photographs and species distribution models to map cultural ecosystem services: The case of a Natural Park in Portugal. Ecological Indicators 96 (1), 59-68.
Codato, D. 2015. Estudio de la percepción social del territorio y de los servicios ecosistémicos en Alto Mayo, Región San Martín, Perú. Espacio y Desarrollo 27, 17-31.
Codato, D., Pappalardo, S.E., de Marchi, M. 2017. Participatory GIS in mapping ecosystem services: Two case studies from high-biodiversity regions in Italy and Peru. Journal for Geographic Information Science 5 (2), 78-96.
Cole, Z.D. 2012. Mapping Social Values of Ecosystem Services in Sarasota Bay, Florida E-Delphi Application, Typology Development, and Geospatial Modeling. Doctoral dissertation UFE0044488. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 207 pp.
Corbeil, M. 2018. The legacy of the historic canal system in Central New York: Evaluation of cultural ecosystem services in the Lower Mohawk River, NY. Geography and Planning 4, 33 pp.
Cusens, J., Barraclough, A.M.D., Måren, I.E. 2021. Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. People and Nature 00, 1-17.
Cusens, J., Barraclough, A.D., Måren, I.E. 2023. Integration matters: Combining socio-cultural and biophysical methods for mapping ecosystem service bundles. Ambio.
Duan, H., Xu, N. 2022. Assessing social values for ecosystem services in rural areas based on the SolVES model: A case study from Nanjing, China. Forests 13.
Freimund, C.A., Garfin, G.M., Norman, L.M., Fisher, L.A., Buizer, J.L. 2022. Flood resilience in paired US-Mexico border cities: a study of binational risk perceptions. Natural Hazards.
Gao, Y., Liu, K., Ma, Q., Li, Y., Fan, Y., Li, X., Gu, C. 2017. Assessment of the social value of ecosystem services based on the SolVES model and tourist preferences: Taibai Mountain National Forest Park. Chinese Journal of Ecology 12.
Holtslag, M.C.S. 2017. Citizen perception of nature on social media. Thesis report GIRS-2017-36. Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands. 69 pp.
Huang, S., Tian, T., Zhai, L., Deng, L., Che, Y. 2023. Understanding the dynamic changes in wetland cultural ecosystem services: Integrating annual social media data into the SolVES. Applied Geography 156, 102992.
Huo, S., Huang, L., Yan, L. 2018. Valuation of cultural ecosystem services based on SolVES: a case study of the South Ecological Park in Wuyi County, Zhejiang Province. Journal of Ecology 38 (10), 3682-3691.
Johnson, D.N., van Riper, C.J., Chu, M., Winkler-Schor, S. 2019. Comparing the social values of ecosystem services in US and Australian marine protected areas. Ecosystem Services 37, 100919.
Katsuda, K., Saeki, I., Shoyama, K., Kamijo, T. 2022. Local perception of ecosystem services provided by symbolic wild cherry blossoms: toward community-based management of traditional forest landscapes in Japan. Ecosystems and People 18, 275-288.
Lin, Y.-P., Lin, W.-C., Li, H.-Y., Wang, Y.-C., Hsu, C.-C., Lien, W.-Y., Anthony, J., Petway, J.R. 2017. Integrating social values and ecosystem services in systematic conservation planning: A case study in Datuan Watershed. Sustainability 9, 718.
Loerzel, J. 2013. Social valuation of ecosystem services in the Ashepoo, Combahee, and Edisto (ACE) Basin, South Carolina. Graduate thesis ProQuest UMI 1543813. College of Charleston, Charleston, NC. 55 pp.
Loerzel, J., Knapp, L., and Gorstein, M. 2017. Gauging the social values of ecosystem services in the Mission Aransas National Estuarine Research Reserve. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 243. Silver Spring, MD. 79 pp.
Lopez, M.A. 2015. Using social valuation to assess the public attitudes and preferences of the Mission-Aransas National Estuarine Research Reserve, Texas. Graduate thesis 1969.6/669. Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi, TX. 99 pp.
Ma, Q., Chen, Z., Zeng, M. 2021. Research on the social value of urban park ecosystem services based on population characteristics difference. Open Journal of Social Sciences 9, 243-258.
Makovníková, J., Kobza, J., Pálka, B., Mališ, J., Kanianska, R., Kizeková M. 2016. An approach to mapping the potential of cultural agroecosystem services. Soil & Water Research 11, 44-52.
Meng, S., Huang, Q., Zhang, L., He, C., Inostroza, L., Bai, Y., Yin, D. 2020. Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China. Ecosystem Services 45, 101156.
Moody, N.L. 2016. River corridor social value mapping: Using the GIS application SolVES for Idaho's Middle Fork of the Salmon River. Graduate thesis 132849018. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 95 pp.
Pan, J., Ma, Y., Cai, S., Chen, Y., Chen, Y. 2022. Distribution patterns of lake-wetland cultural ecosystem services in highland. Environmental Development, 100754.
Paudyal, K., Baral, H., Keenan, R.J. 2018. Assessing social values of ecosystem services in the Phewa Lake Watershed, Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics 90, 67-81.
Peng, L-P. 2020. Understanding human-nature connections through landscape socialization. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, 7593.
Petway, J.R., Lin, Y.-P., Wunderlich, R.F. 2020. A place-based approach to agricultural nonmaterial intangible cultural ecosystem service values. Sustainability 12 (2), 699.
Qin, K., Li, J., Liu, J., Yan, L., Huang, H. 2019. Setting conservation priorities based on ecosystem services - A case study of the Guanzhong-Tianshui Economic Region. Science of The Total Environment 650 (2), 3062-3074.
Rastandeh, A., Carnes, M., Jarchow, M. 2022. Non-monetary landscape features most desirable across the Upper Missouri River Basin. Land Use Policy 115, 105980.
Richards, D.R., Lavorel, S. 2022. Integrating social media data and machine learning to analyse scenarios of landscape appreciation. Ecosystem Services 55, 101422.
Scholte, S.S.K., Daams, M., Farjon, H., Sijtsma, F.J., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Verburg, P.H. 2018. Mapping recreation as an ecosystem service: Considering scale, interregional differences and the influence of physical attributes. Landscape and Urban Planning 175, 149-160.
Shoyama, K., Yamagata, Y. 2016. Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool. Ecosystem Services 22 (A), 139-149.
Sun, F., Xiang, J., Tao, Y., Tong, C., Che, Y. 2019. Mapping the social values for ecosystem services in urban green spaces: Integrating a visitor-employed photography method into SolVES. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 38, 105-113.
Tian, T., Sun, L., Peng, S., Sun, F., Che Y. 2021. Understanding the process from perception to cultural ecosystem services assessment by comparing valuation methods. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 57, 126945.
van Riper, C.J. 2014. Valuing the invaluable: An investigation of outdoor recreation behavior, perceived values of ecosystem services, and biophysical conditions on Channel Islands National Park. Doctoral dissertation 1969.1/152838. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. 171 pp.
van Riper, C.J., Foelske, L., Kuwayama, S.D., Keller, R., Johnson, D. 2020. Understanding the role of local knowledge in the spatial dynamics of social values expressed by stakeholders. Applied Geography 123, 102279.
van Riper, C.J., Kyle, G.T. 2014. Capturing multiple values of ecosystem services shaped by environmental worldviews: A spatial analysis. Journal of Environmental Management 145, 374-384.
Wang, Y., Fu, B.T., Lyu, Y.P., Yang, K., Che, Y. 2016. Assessment of the social values of ecosystem services based on SolVES model: A case study of Wusong Paotaiwan Wetland Forest Park, Shanghai. The Journal of Applied Ecology 27 (6), 1767-1774.
Wang, Y., Shi, X., Cheng, K., Zhang, J., Chang, Q. 2022. How do urban park features affect cultural ecosystem services: Quantified evidence for design practices. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 76, 127713.
Yoshimura, N., Hiura, T. 2017. Demand and supply of cultural ecosystem services: Use of geotagged photos to map the aesthetic value of landscapes in Hokkaido. Ecosystem Services 24, 68-78.
You, S., Zheng, Q., Chen, B., Xu, Z., Lin, Y., Gan, M., Zhu, C., Deng, J., Wang, K. 2022. Identifying the spatiotemporal dynamics of forest ecotourism values with remotely sensed images and social media data: A perspective of public preferences. Journal of Cleaner Production 341, 130715.
Zhang, H., Gao, Y., Hua Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, K. 2019. Assessing and mapping recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services in the Qinling Mountains, China. Ecosystem Services 39, 101006.
Zhang, K., Tang, X., Zhao, Y., Huang, B., Huang, L., Liu, M., Luo, E., Li, Y., Jiang, T., Zhang, L., Wang, Y., Wan, J. 2022. Differing perceptions of the youth and the elderly regarding cultural ecosystem services in urban parks: An exploration of the tour experience. Science of the Total Environment 821, 153388.
Zhang, W., Yu, Y., Wu, X., Pereira, P., Borja, M.E.L. 2020. Integrating preferences and social values for ecosystem services in local ecological management: A framework applied in Xiaojiang Basin Yunnan province, China. Land Use Policy 91, 104339.
Zhang, Z., Zhang, H., Feng, J., Wang, Y., Liu, K. 2021. Evaluation of social values for ecosystem services in urban riverfront space based on the SolVES model: A case study of the Fenghe River, Xi’an, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 2765.
Zhao, Q., Chen, Y., Gone, K.P., Wells, E., Margeson, K., Sherren, K. 2023. Modelling cultural ecosystem services in agricultural dykelands and tidal wetlands to inform coastal infrastructure decisions: A social media data approach. Marine Policy 150, 105533.
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Liu, J., Cuan, Y., Zhang, C. 2019. Integrating supply and demand in cultural ecosystem services assessment: a case study of Cuihua Mountain (China). Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26, 6065-6076.
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Cuan, Y., Zhou, Z. 2020. The evolution response of ecosystem cultural services under different scenarios based on system dynamics. Remote Sensing 12 (3), 418.
Zhao, Y., You, W., Lin, X., He, D. 2023. Assessing the supply and demand linkage of cultural ecosystem services in a typical county-level city with protected areas in China. Ecological Indicators 147, 109992.
Zhou, L., Guan, D., Huang, X., Yuan, X., Zhang, M. 2020 Evaluation of the cultural ecosystem services of wetland park. Ecological Indicators 114, 106286.
In response to the need for incorporating quantified and spatially explicit measures of social values into ecosystem service assessments, the geographic information system (GIS) application, Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES), was developed. SolVES is designed to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services. Social values, the perceived, nonmarket values the public ascribes to ecosystem services, particularly cultural services, such as aesthetics and recreation can be evaluated for various stakeholder groups. These groups are distinguishable by their attitudes and preferences regarding public uses, such as motorized recreation and logging. SolVES derives a quantitative, 10-point, social-values metric, the “value index”, from a combination of spatial and nonspatial responses to public value and preference surveys and calculates metrics characterizing the underlying environment, such as average distance to water and dominant landcover.
A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services
SolVES 4.1 now available! An open-source version developed for QGIS.
- SolVES 4.1 Tool (Includes QGIS plugin, sample data, and installation files for required QGIS and PostgreSQL software)
- User Manual and Tutorial
- Review the README file for instructions on how to use the new installation file and Load Data tool.
- The archived version 3.0 (for ArcGIS 10.0 - 10.5 ONLY) is available upon request by contacting gs-solves_support@usgs.gov.
SolVES 4.1 was developed with Python as an open-source tool for QGIS and PostgreSQL. Like previous versions, SolVES 4.1 is integrated with the Maxent maximum entropy modeling software to generate more complete social-value maps and to produce robust models describing the relationship between social value intensity and explanatory environmental variables. Maxent also more readily permits the transfer of social-value models to physically and socially similar areas where primary survey data are not available. Due to its flexible design, SolVES 4.1 users can define their own social values and public uses, model any number and type of environmental variables, optionally weight mapped survey data, and modify the spatial resolution of analysis. SolVES 4.1 introduces a new tool to automate the process of loading sample and user-supplied data.
SolVES has been applied on nearly every continent in biophysical and social contexts including forest, mountain, coastal, riparian, agricultural, and urban ecosystems. SolVES provides a tool for decision makers and researchers to evaluate the social value of ecosystems and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders regarding the tradeoffs among different ecosystem services.
Getting Started with SolVES 4.1
- SolVES 4.1 requires QGIS 3.10, PostgreSQL 11, and Maxent 3.4.1 software.
- Download and unzip the SolVES 4.1 tool. Refer to the README file and the “Installation” section of the user manual to complete installation of all required components.
- Refer to the “Navigating the User Manual” section of the user manual for instructions on how the user manual can serve as a quick-start tutorial for gaining hands-on experience with SolVES 4.1.
- More detailed information about how SolVES 4.1 works, data requirements, advanced options, and troubleshooting is included in the user manual.
- Journal articles and other SolVES-related publications (see below) describing applications of SolVES and similar methods are available.
- A sample copy of the public value and preference survey described in the User Manual is also available with the SolVES 4.1 tool download.
Although this software program has been used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the accuracy and functioning of the program and related program material nor shall the fact of distribution constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by the USGS in connection therewith.
Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
INFORMATION COLLECTION DISCLAIMER: SolVES is a tool for mapping and analyzing social survey response data. It is not a tool designed for the collection of survey data, nor is any survey attached to SolVES. Any survey or survey response data referred to in the SolVES documentation, sample data, or publications is the work and responsibility of the persons or groups who developed and conducted that survey. Please note that before a Federal agency may collect information or sponsor a collection of information, the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requires approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Any Federal agency or sponsored program interested in developing and conducting a survey for use with SolVES is wholly responsible for submitting an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB.
Related (i.e., non-USGS) Publications Including Independent Applications of SolVES
Alvarado-Aria, N., Moya-Almeida, V., Cabrera-Torres, F., Medina-Enríquez, A. 2023. Evaluation and mapping of the positive and negative values for the urban river ecosystem. One Ecosystem 8: e101122.
Arki, V. 2018. Exploring value-landscape associations in the Tanzanian Southern Highlands. Graduate thesis 209472871. University of Turku, Finland. 91 pp.
Arsland, E.S., Örücü, Ö.K. 2021. MaxEnt modelling of the potential distribution areas of cultural ecosystem services using social media data and GIS. Environment, Development and Sustainability 23, 2655-2667.
Baumeister, C.F., Gerstenberg, T., Plieninger, T., Schraml, U. 2020. Exploring cultural ecosystem service hotspots: Linking multiple urban forest features with public participation mapping data. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 48, 126561.
Bogdan, S.M., Stupariu, I., Andra-Topârceanu, A., Năstase, I.I. 2019. Mapping social values for cultural ecosystem services in a mountain landscape in the Romanian Carpathians. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 14 (1), 199-208.
Cai, C., van Riper, C.J., Johnson, D., Stewart, W., Raymond, C.M., Andrade, R., Goodson, D., Keller, R. 2023. Integrating social values with GPS tracks through Denali National Park and Preserve. Applied Geography 155, 102958.
Chen, F., Wu, J., Liu, J., Hu, Y., Chen, X., Lim, P.-E., Abdullah, W.M.A., Sjafrie, N.D.M., Adirianto, B. 2019. Comparison of social-value cognition based on different groups: The case of Pulau Payar in Malaysia and Gili Matra in Indonesia. Ocean & Coastal Management 173, 1-9.
Chen, Y., Ke, X., Min, M., Cheng, P. 2020. Disparity in perceptions of social values for ecosystem services of urban green space: A case study in the East Lake Scenic Area, Wuhan. Frontiers in Public Health 8:370.
Cisneros, E.E., Calderón, L.C. 2021. Dinámicas socioecológicas y valores sociales de servicios ecosistémicos en la cuenca del río Savegre, Costa Rica. Región y Sociedad 33.
Clemente, P., Calvache, M., Antunes, P., Santos, R., Cerdeira, J.O., Martins, M.J. 2019. Combining social media photographs and species distribution models to map cultural ecosystem services: The case of a Natural Park in Portugal. Ecological Indicators 96 (1), 59-68.
Codato, D. 2015. Estudio de la percepción social del territorio y de los servicios ecosistémicos en Alto Mayo, Región San Martín, Perú. Espacio y Desarrollo 27, 17-31.
Codato, D., Pappalardo, S.E., de Marchi, M. 2017. Participatory GIS in mapping ecosystem services: Two case studies from high-biodiversity regions in Italy and Peru. Journal for Geographic Information Science 5 (2), 78-96.
Cole, Z.D. 2012. Mapping Social Values of Ecosystem Services in Sarasota Bay, Florida E-Delphi Application, Typology Development, and Geospatial Modeling. Doctoral dissertation UFE0044488. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 207 pp.
Corbeil, M. 2018. The legacy of the historic canal system in Central New York: Evaluation of cultural ecosystem services in the Lower Mohawk River, NY. Geography and Planning 4, 33 pp.
Cusens, J., Barraclough, A.M.D., Måren, I.E. 2021. Participatory mapping reveals biocultural and nature values in the shared landscape of a Nordic UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. People and Nature 00, 1-17.
Cusens, J., Barraclough, A.D., Måren, I.E. 2023. Integration matters: Combining socio-cultural and biophysical methods for mapping ecosystem service bundles. Ambio.
Duan, H., Xu, N. 2022. Assessing social values for ecosystem services in rural areas based on the SolVES model: A case study from Nanjing, China. Forests 13.
Freimund, C.A., Garfin, G.M., Norman, L.M., Fisher, L.A., Buizer, J.L. 2022. Flood resilience in paired US-Mexico border cities: a study of binational risk perceptions. Natural Hazards.
Gao, Y., Liu, K., Ma, Q., Li, Y., Fan, Y., Li, X., Gu, C. 2017. Assessment of the social value of ecosystem services based on the SolVES model and tourist preferences: Taibai Mountain National Forest Park. Chinese Journal of Ecology 12.
Holtslag, M.C.S. 2017. Citizen perception of nature on social media. Thesis report GIRS-2017-36. Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands. 69 pp.
Huang, S., Tian, T., Zhai, L., Deng, L., Che, Y. 2023. Understanding the dynamic changes in wetland cultural ecosystem services: Integrating annual social media data into the SolVES. Applied Geography 156, 102992.
Huo, S., Huang, L., Yan, L. 2018. Valuation of cultural ecosystem services based on SolVES: a case study of the South Ecological Park in Wuyi County, Zhejiang Province. Journal of Ecology 38 (10), 3682-3691.
Johnson, D.N., van Riper, C.J., Chu, M., Winkler-Schor, S. 2019. Comparing the social values of ecosystem services in US and Australian marine protected areas. Ecosystem Services 37, 100919.
Katsuda, K., Saeki, I., Shoyama, K., Kamijo, T. 2022. Local perception of ecosystem services provided by symbolic wild cherry blossoms: toward community-based management of traditional forest landscapes in Japan. Ecosystems and People 18, 275-288.
Lin, Y.-P., Lin, W.-C., Li, H.-Y., Wang, Y.-C., Hsu, C.-C., Lien, W.-Y., Anthony, J., Petway, J.R. 2017. Integrating social values and ecosystem services in systematic conservation planning: A case study in Datuan Watershed. Sustainability 9, 718.
Loerzel, J. 2013. Social valuation of ecosystem services in the Ashepoo, Combahee, and Edisto (ACE) Basin, South Carolina. Graduate thesis ProQuest UMI 1543813. College of Charleston, Charleston, NC. 55 pp.
Loerzel, J., Knapp, L., and Gorstein, M. 2017. Gauging the social values of ecosystem services in the Mission Aransas National Estuarine Research Reserve. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 243. Silver Spring, MD. 79 pp.
Lopez, M.A. 2015. Using social valuation to assess the public attitudes and preferences of the Mission-Aransas National Estuarine Research Reserve, Texas. Graduate thesis 1969.6/669. Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi, TX. 99 pp.
Ma, Q., Chen, Z., Zeng, M. 2021. Research on the social value of urban park ecosystem services based on population characteristics difference. Open Journal of Social Sciences 9, 243-258.
Makovníková, J., Kobza, J., Pálka, B., Mališ, J., Kanianska, R., Kizeková M. 2016. An approach to mapping the potential of cultural agroecosystem services. Soil & Water Research 11, 44-52.
Meng, S., Huang, Q., Zhang, L., He, C., Inostroza, L., Bai, Y., Yin, D. 2020. Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China. Ecosystem Services 45, 101156.
Moody, N.L. 2016. River corridor social value mapping: Using the GIS application SolVES for Idaho's Middle Fork of the Salmon River. Graduate thesis 132849018. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 95 pp.
Pan, J., Ma, Y., Cai, S., Chen, Y., Chen, Y. 2022. Distribution patterns of lake-wetland cultural ecosystem services in highland. Environmental Development, 100754.
Paudyal, K., Baral, H., Keenan, R.J. 2018. Assessing social values of ecosystem services in the Phewa Lake Watershed, Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics 90, 67-81.
Peng, L-P. 2020. Understanding human-nature connections through landscape socialization. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, 7593.
Petway, J.R., Lin, Y.-P., Wunderlich, R.F. 2020. A place-based approach to agricultural nonmaterial intangible cultural ecosystem service values. Sustainability 12 (2), 699.
Qin, K., Li, J., Liu, J., Yan, L., Huang, H. 2019. Setting conservation priorities based on ecosystem services - A case study of the Guanzhong-Tianshui Economic Region. Science of The Total Environment 650 (2), 3062-3074.
Rastandeh, A., Carnes, M., Jarchow, M. 2022. Non-monetary landscape features most desirable across the Upper Missouri River Basin. Land Use Policy 115, 105980.
Richards, D.R., Lavorel, S. 2022. Integrating social media data and machine learning to analyse scenarios of landscape appreciation. Ecosystem Services 55, 101422.
Scholte, S.S.K., Daams, M., Farjon, H., Sijtsma, F.J., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Verburg, P.H. 2018. Mapping recreation as an ecosystem service: Considering scale, interregional differences and the influence of physical attributes. Landscape and Urban Planning 175, 149-160.
Shoyama, K., Yamagata, Y. 2016. Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool. Ecosystem Services 22 (A), 139-149.
Sun, F., Xiang, J., Tao, Y., Tong, C., Che, Y. 2019. Mapping the social values for ecosystem services in urban green spaces: Integrating a visitor-employed photography method into SolVES. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 38, 105-113.
Tian, T., Sun, L., Peng, S., Sun, F., Che Y. 2021. Understanding the process from perception to cultural ecosystem services assessment by comparing valuation methods. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 57, 126945.
van Riper, C.J. 2014. Valuing the invaluable: An investigation of outdoor recreation behavior, perceived values of ecosystem services, and biophysical conditions on Channel Islands National Park. Doctoral dissertation 1969.1/152838. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. 171 pp.
van Riper, C.J., Foelske, L., Kuwayama, S.D., Keller, R., Johnson, D. 2020. Understanding the role of local knowledge in the spatial dynamics of social values expressed by stakeholders. Applied Geography 123, 102279.
van Riper, C.J., Kyle, G.T. 2014. Capturing multiple values of ecosystem services shaped by environmental worldviews: A spatial analysis. Journal of Environmental Management 145, 374-384.
Wang, Y., Fu, B.T., Lyu, Y.P., Yang, K., Che, Y. 2016. Assessment of the social values of ecosystem services based on SolVES model: A case study of Wusong Paotaiwan Wetland Forest Park, Shanghai. The Journal of Applied Ecology 27 (6), 1767-1774.
Wang, Y., Shi, X., Cheng, K., Zhang, J., Chang, Q. 2022. How do urban park features affect cultural ecosystem services: Quantified evidence for design practices. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 76, 127713.
Yoshimura, N., Hiura, T. 2017. Demand and supply of cultural ecosystem services: Use of geotagged photos to map the aesthetic value of landscapes in Hokkaido. Ecosystem Services 24, 68-78.
You, S., Zheng, Q., Chen, B., Xu, Z., Lin, Y., Gan, M., Zhu, C., Deng, J., Wang, K. 2022. Identifying the spatiotemporal dynamics of forest ecotourism values with remotely sensed images and social media data: A perspective of public preferences. Journal of Cleaner Production 341, 130715.
Zhang, H., Gao, Y., Hua Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, K. 2019. Assessing and mapping recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services in the Qinling Mountains, China. Ecosystem Services 39, 101006.
Zhang, K., Tang, X., Zhao, Y., Huang, B., Huang, L., Liu, M., Luo, E., Li, Y., Jiang, T., Zhang, L., Wang, Y., Wan, J. 2022. Differing perceptions of the youth and the elderly regarding cultural ecosystem services in urban parks: An exploration of the tour experience. Science of the Total Environment 821, 153388.
Zhang, W., Yu, Y., Wu, X., Pereira, P., Borja, M.E.L. 2020. Integrating preferences and social values for ecosystem services in local ecological management: A framework applied in Xiaojiang Basin Yunnan province, China. Land Use Policy 91, 104339.
Zhang, Z., Zhang, H., Feng, J., Wang, Y., Liu, K. 2021. Evaluation of social values for ecosystem services in urban riverfront space based on the SolVES model: A case study of the Fenghe River, Xi’an, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 2765.
Zhao, Q., Chen, Y., Gone, K.P., Wells, E., Margeson, K., Sherren, K. 2023. Modelling cultural ecosystem services in agricultural dykelands and tidal wetlands to inform coastal infrastructure decisions: A social media data approach. Marine Policy 150, 105533.
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Liu, J., Cuan, Y., Zhang, C. 2019. Integrating supply and demand in cultural ecosystem services assessment: a case study of Cuihua Mountain (China). Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26, 6065-6076.
Zhao, Q., Li, J., Cuan, Y., Zhou, Z. 2020. The evolution response of ecosystem cultural services under different scenarios based on system dynamics. Remote Sensing 12 (3), 418.
Zhao, Y., You, W., Lin, X., He, D. 2023. Assessing the supply and demand linkage of cultural ecosystem services in a typical county-level city with protected areas in China. Ecological Indicators 147, 109992.
Zhou, L., Guan, D., Huang, X., Yuan, X., Zhang, M. 2020 Evaluation of the cultural ecosystem services of wetland park. Ecological Indicators 114, 106286.