Data for: Co-management of small-scale fisheries and ecosystem services
Description
Appendix A. Complete database of the 53 papers reviewed in this study coded by complete reference, abstract, keywords, web of science categories, subject, objective, method, outcome, biodiversity (if is addressed or not), type of ecosystem services addressed, ecosystem services, type of study (ecological, social or socio-ecological), social capital (if is addressed or not). In the Appendix we also provide the geographic location of the study cases and the references coded according to the number of ecosystem services addressed (60 entries). Appendix B. Sub-sample of papers that were used calculate the ratio response for ecosystem services and biodiversity. This analysis quantified the amount of ecosystem services and biodiversity provided inside TURFs and outside in open access areas (n=13). We included the effect size (lnR) for both samples considering the observed means of ecosystem services provision inside the TURFs and in open access.
Files
Steps to reproduce
We used the ISI Web of Knowledge core collection (http://apps.webofknowledge.com) database (Timespan: 1990-Sep. 2017), and applied four search filters: 1. "territorial*" and "user*" and "right*"or "TURF*"or "MEABR*" or "co-management*" (n=12,424) 2. "*Chile*" (n=111) 3. Excluded reviews, editorial and book chapters type of articles (n=96) 4. Studies excluded because these were out of scope (notdealing with TURFs or our study objectives). We identified 53 English language, peer-reviewed papers published between 1998 and September 2017 for a qualitative analysis. For this analysis we registered the broad themes covered by the papers according to the ISI web categories (biodiversity and conservation, economics, environmental sciences, social sciences and marine biology). We registered the specific location of the studies, calculated the number of studies by administrative region, mapped the study sites and identified the type of ecosystem services addressed. For the identification of marine ecosystem services we defined ecosystem services as the benefits people obtain from coastal social-ecological systems (MA 2005) and identified the category of the ecosystem services addressed in the papers. The four ecosystem services categories that we distinguished are: supporting, provisioning, regulating and cultural services (MA 2005; Sukhdev 2010; Wallace 2007). The first category was defined as the supporting services which refers to the conditions, structure and functioning of coastal social-ecological systems which are required for the provision of ecosystem services. In the supporting category we identified studies dealing with the biodiversity component using species richness and habitat conditions as proxies. Provisioning services are the goods that can be extracted and consumed from marine ecosystems which are often already valued in markets, like food provision, biotic materials, biofuels and water provision (Liquete et al. 2013). Regulating services are the benefits derived from the regulation of ecosystem processes, such as the water purification, coastal protection, weather regulation, biological regulation among others (Liquete et al. 2013). Cultural services are the intangible benefits that emerge from interactions between humans and nature (Chan et al. 2012a) for instance sense of identity, spiritual value, aesthetic value and cognitive development (Liquete et al. 2013).A further description of the categories can be found elsewhere (De Groot et al. 2010; Sukhdev 2010; Wallace 2007). We synthesize the 53 studies according the provision of each one of these four ecosystem services categories in Chilean TURFs.