AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (5.4 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

Recreational and aesthetic values of forest landscapes (RAFL): Quantifying management impacts and trade-offs with provisioning and regulatory ecosystem services

Dagm Abatea,b( ), Brigite Botequima,c, Susete Marquesa, Constantino Lagoad, Juan Guerra Hernándeza, Geerten Hengevelde, Marjanke Hoogstra-Kleinf, José G. Borgesa
Forest Research Centre, Associate Laboratory TERRA, School of Agriculture (ISA), University of Lisbon, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017, Lisboa, Portugal
College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of Gondar, P.O. Box 196, Gondar, Ethiopia
CoLAB ForestWISE - Collaborative Laboratory for Integrated Forest & Fire Management, Quinta de Prados, 5001-801, Vila Real, Portugal
School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States
Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), P.O. Box 50, 6700 AB, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Forest and Nature Conservation Policy group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA, Wageningen, the Netherlands

Peer review under the responsibility of Editorial Office of Forest Ecosystems.

Show Author Information

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES), which encompass recreational and aesthetic values, contribute to human well-being and yet are often underrepresented in forest management planning due to challenges in quantifying these services. This study introduces the Recreational and Aesthetic Values of Forested Landscapes (RAFL) index, a novel framework combining six measurable recreational and aesthetic components: Stewardship, Naturalness, Complexity, Visual Scale, Historicity, and Ephemera. The RAFL index was integrated into a Linear Programming (LP) Resource Capability Model (RCM) to assess trade-offs between CES and other ecosystem services, including timber production, wildfire resistance, and biodiversity. The approach was applied in a case study in Northern Portugal, comparing two forest management scenarios: Business as Usual (BAU), dominated by eucalyptus plantations, and an Alternative Scenario (ALT), focused on the conversion to native species: cork oak, chestnut, and pedunculate oak. Results revealed that the ALT scenario consistently achieved higher RAFL values, reflecting its potential to enhance CES, while also supporting higher biodiversity and wildfire resilience compared to the BAU scenario. Results highlighted further that management may maintain steady timber production and wildfire regulatory services while addressing concerns with CES. This study provides a replicable methodology for quantifying CES and integrating them into forest management frameworks, offering actionable insights for decision-makers. The findings highlight the effectiveness of the approach in designing landscape mosaics that provide CES while addressing the need to supply provisioning and regulatory ecosystem services.

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Forest Ecosystems

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Abate D, Botequim B, Marques S, et al. Recreational and aesthetic values of forest landscapes (RAFL): Quantifying management impacts and trade-offs with provisioning and regulatory ecosystem services. Forest Ecosystems, 2025, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fecs.2025.100318

990

Views

47

Downloads

10

Crossref

10

Web of Science

10

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 08 January 2025
Revised: 13 February 2025
Accepted: 15 February 2025
Published: 01 August 2025
© 2025 The Authors.

This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).