Mapping for Mapping’s Sake? Ecosystems Services Maps and the Modes of (Ir)relevance of Ecological Knowledge for Nature Conservation

Abstract In the face of enduring environmental decline, ecologists are continuously exploring new ways to improve the relevance of their research and address nature conservation issues. Hoping for more relevant solutions than former species-centered conservation, some ecologists have mapped ecosystems and the services they deliver to human societies. Maps offer crucial, but understudied, relevance-making tools. By proposing a relational conceptualisation of relevance, I demonstrate that maps can make issues simultaneously relevant and irrelevant for conservation. In two mapping projects conducted at the European Union level by the Working Group Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services and at the French regional scale by the Laboratoire d’Écologie Alpine, I investigate how the (ir)relevance of ecosystem services maps is enacted through different modes. I successively show that: ecologists employed maps to re-orient their research toward social issues, but were constrained by the available quantified data (mode A); they used maps to implement a biopolitical approach and decide which ecosystems to protect, yet grappled with the imprecision of maps (mode B); and they engaged stakeholders in map development, but had to make excessive adjustments to align with their demands (mode C). I conclude by arguing that ecosystem services maps exemplify an automation of relevance, where relevance is more conditioned by technical feasibility than by the conceptualisation of solutions to conservation issues. Ultimately, the article contributes to the relevance scholarship by advancing the concept of irrelevance, operationalising the study of modes of relevance, and demonstrating that relevance is an inherently relational process.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Minerva
Published
2024-12-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09552-0
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.85
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mapping for Mapping’s Sake? Ecosystems Services Maps and the Modes of (Ir)relevance of Ecological Knowledge for Nature Conservation

Lucas Brunet
3 citations
Minerva
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
0.85
article

Mapping for Mapping’s Sake? Ecosystems Services Maps and the Modes of (Ir)relevance of Ecological Knowledge for Nature Conservation

Lucas Brunet
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract In the face of enduring environmental decline, ecologists are continuously exploring new ways to improve the relevance of their research and address nature conservation issues. Hoping for more relevant solutions than former species-centered conservation, some ecologists have mapped ecosystems and the services they deliver to human societies. Maps offer crucial, but understudied, relevance-making tools. By proposing a relational conceptualisation of relevance, I demonstrate that maps can make issues simultaneously relevant and irrelevant for conservation. In two mapping projects conducted at the European Union level by the Working Group Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services and at the French regional scale by the Laboratoire d’Écologie Alpine, I investigate how the (ir)relevance of ecosystem services maps is enacted through different modes. I successively show that: ecologists employed maps to re-orient their research toward social issues, but were constrained by the available quantified data (mode A); they used maps to implement a biopolitical approach and decide which ecosystems to protect, yet grappled with the imprecision of maps (mode B); and they engaged stakeholders in map development, but had to make excessive adjustments to align with their demands (mode C). I conclude by arguing that ecosystem services maps exemplify an automation of relevance, where relevance is more conditioned by technical feasibility than by the conceptualisation of solutions to conservation issues. Ultimately, the article contributes to the relevance scholarship by advancing the concept of irrelevance, operationalising the study of modes of relevance, and demonstrating that relevance is an inherently relational process.

MinervaVol. 63(2)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Technical University of Munich (DE)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
0.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Mapping for Mapping’s Sake? Ecosystems Services Maps and the Modes of (Ir)relevance of Ecological Knowledge for Nature Conservation — Lucas Brunet · Minerva (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS