Modelling of cultural ecosystem services through social media photos: The case of Eskişehir

Abstract

Natural and cultural landscapes contain many ecosystems that produce natural and cultural values in different geographies of the earth. Recently, ecosystem services have been handled by researchers from different disciplines, which generally could be explained as benefits from ecosystems. The mapping of these benefits and services produced by numerous ecosystems around the world provides an opportunity to express not only ecosystem potential and environmental factors associated with it, but also it is a very effective way of spatial expression of ecosystem services. In this research, social media photographs were used to model the spatial distribution of cultural ecosystem services. In the study carried out in Eskişehir province, geographically marked photographs tagged with the name Eskişehir in Flickr application on social media were evaluated and associated with environmental variables. ArcGIS as software based on geographical information system and MaxEnt is based on maximum entropy were integrated to each other for modelling cultural ecosystem services. According to this; land cover and land use are associated with roads, streams, cultural and natural landscape characteristics and have been modelled by combining landscape potential and user preferences (cultural ecosystem service potential). The statistical findings of the study receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and Jackknife graphs prove the reliability of the model. As a result; it is thought that the data obtained from this study may help to model future scenarios based on cultural ecosystem services and to make decisions about planning and management of tourism or protected areas.

Keywords

• Cultural ecosystem services,Eskişehir,Maximum entropy,Social media

Kültürel ekosistem hizmetlerinin sosyal medya fotoğrafları kullanılarak modellenmesi: Eskişehir örneği

Abstract

Yeryüzünün farklı coğrafyalarında yer alan peyzajlar bünyesinde doğal ve kültürel değerler üreten çok sayıda ekosistemi barındırırlar. Dünya üzerindeki sayısız ekosistemin ürettiği fayda ve hizmetlerin haritalanması ekosistem hizmetlerinin mekânsal ifadesinde çok etkili bir yol olması sebebiyle, hem ekosistem potansiyeli hem de söz konusu potansiyelle ilişkili çevresel faktörlerin ifade edilmesine olanak tanımaktadır. Bu araştırmada kültürel ekosistem hizmetlerinin mekânsal dağılımının modellenmesi amacıyla sosyal medya fotoğraflarından yararlanılmıştır. Eskişehir ili örneğinde gerçekleştirilen çalışmada sosyal medyada Flickr uygulamasında Eskişehir adı ile coğrafi olarak işaretlenmiş fotoğraflar değerlendirmeye alınarak çevresel değişkenler ile ilişkilendirilmiştir. Araştırmada coğrafi bilgi sistemlerine dayanan ArcGIS ve Maksimum Entropi ile tür dağılımları modellemek için kullanılan MaxEnt yazılımı entegre şekilde kullanılmıştır. Buna göre; arazi örtüsü ve arazi kullanımı, mevcut yollar, akarsular, kültürel ve doğal peyzaj özellikleri ile ilişkilendirilmiş ve peyzajda var olan potansiyel ile kullanıcı tercihleri (kültürel ekosistem hizmet potansiyeli) birleştirilerek modellenmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda elde edilen alıcı işletim karakteristiği (ROC; receiver operating characteristic) eğrileri ve Jackknife grafikleri modelin güvenilirliğini kanıtlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda kültürel ekosistem hizmetleri açısından değerli alanların Eskişehir kent merkezinde yoğunlaştığı görülmektedir. Bu çalışmadan elde edilen bulguların kültürel ekosistem hizmetlerine dayalı gelecek senaryolarının modellenmesine, turizm ya da korunan alanların planlanması ve yönetimi konularında karar vermede yardımcı olabileceği düşünülmektedir. 

Keywords

• Kültürel ekosistem hizmetleri,Eskişehir,Maksimum entropi,Sosyal medya

References

1. Beier, C.M., Patterson, T.M., Chapin, F.S., 2008. Ecosystem services and emergent vulnerability in managed ecosystems: A geospatial decision-support tool. Ecosystems 11, 923-938.
2. Brown, G.G., Fagerholm, N., 2015. Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services : A review and evaluation. Ecosystem Services 13, 119-133.
3. Bunse, L., Rendon, O., Luque, S., 2015. What can deliberative approaches bring to the monetary valuation of ecosystem services? A literature review. Ecosystem Services, 14, 88-97.
4. Chan, K.M., Shaw, M.R., Cameron, D.R., Underwood, E.C., Daily, G. C., 2006. Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS biology, 4, e379.
5. Clemente, L.L.C., County, M.D., 2019. State-Dependent subnetworks of parvalbumin expressing interneurons in Neocortex. Cell Reports, 2282–2288.
6. Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253.
7. Daily, G.C., 1997. Nature’s services. Vol. 19971, Island Press, Washington, DC.
8. Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Mooney, H.A., Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T.H., Salzman, J., Shallenberger, R., 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7, 21-28.

9. De Groot, R.S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., Willemen, L., 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological complexity, 7, 260-272.
10. Donaire, J.A., Camprubí, R., Galí, N., 2014. Tourist clusters from Flickr travel photography. Tourism Management Perspectives, 11, 26–33.
11. Dou, Y., Zhen, L., Yu, X., Bakker, M., Carsjens, G.-J., Xue, Z., 2019. Assessing the influences of ecological restoration on perceptions of cultural ecosystem services by residents of agricultural landscapes of western China. Science of the Total Environment 646, 685-695.
12. Ehrlich, P.R., Mooney, H.A., 1983. Extinction, substitution, and ecosystem services. BioScience 33, 248-254.
13. Elith, J., Kearney, M., Phillips, S., 2010. The art of modelling range‐shifting species. British Ecological Society 1, 330-342.
14. Fagerholm, N., Oteros-Rozas, E., Raymond, C.M., Torralba, M., Moreno, G., Plieninger, T., 2016. Assessing linkages between ecosystem services, land-use and well-being in an agroforestry landscape using public participation GIS. Applied Geography, 74, 30-46.
15. Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., 2008. Ecosystem services: Classification for valuation. Biological conservation, 141, 1167-1169.
16. Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., Morling, P., 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological economics, 68, 643-653.
17. Guo, F., Yu, J., Jung, H.J., Abruzzi, K.C., Luo, W., Griffith, L.C., Rosbash, M., 2016. Circadian neuron feedback controls the Drosophila sleep–activity profile. Nature, 536, 292–297.
18. Kang, P., Chen, W., Hou, Y., Li, Y., 2018. Linking ecosystem services and ecosystem health to ecological risk assessment: A case study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration. Science of The Total Environment, 636, 1442-1454.
19. Koçak, N.G., 2012. Bireylerin sosyal medya kullanım davranışlarının ve motivasyonlarının kullanımlar ve doyumlar yaklaşımı bağlamında incelenmesi: Eskişehir'de bir uygulama. Doktora Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Eskişehir.
20. Lele, S., Springate-Baginski, O., Lakerveld, R.P., Deb, D., Dash, P., 2013. Ecosystem services: Origins, contributions, pitfalls, and alternatives. Conservation and Society, 11, 343-358.
21. Li, B., Shi, X., Wang, J., Yan, Q., Liu, C., 2018. Tectonic environments and local geologic controls of potential hydrothermal fields along the Southern Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Journal of Marine Systems, 12-14.
22. MEA, 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington DC: Island Press.
23. Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., Fagerholm, N., Bieling, C., Plieninger, T., 2018. Using social media photos to explore the relation between cultural ecosystem services and landscape features across five European sites. Ecological Indicators, 94, 74-86. Richards, D.R., Tunçer, B., 2018. Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs. Ecosystem Services, 318-325.
24. Richmond, A., Kaufmann, R.K., Myneni, R.B., 2007. Valuing ecosystem services: A shadow price for net primary production. Ecological Economics, 64, 454-462.
25. Spyrou, E., Mylonas, P., 2016. A survey on Flickr multimedia research challenges. Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations, 51, 71-79.
26. Swets, J.A., 1988. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science, 240, 1285-1293.
27. Tenerellia, P., Demšar, U., Luque, S., 2016. Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services:A geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecological Indicators, 64, 237-248.
28. Tokgöz, G., Say, N., 2018. Kentsel ekosistem hizmetlerinin haritalanması için kullanılan göstergeler, yöntemler ve geliştirilen araçlar. Artıbilim: Adana Bilim ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 1, 1-8.
29. TUİK, 2020. Adrese dayalı nüfus kayıt sistemi verileri. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Ankara, http://tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1059, Erişim:01.02.2020.
30. Turner, R., Daily, G., 2008. The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 39, 25-35.
31. Van Jaarsveld, A., Biggs, R., Scholes, R., Bohensky, E., Reyers, B., Lynam, T., Musvoto, C., Fabricius, C., 2005. Measuring conditions and trends in ecosystem services at multiple scales: The Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SA f MA) experience. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360, 425-441.
32. Van Laere, O., Schockaert, S., Dhoedt, B., 2013. Georeferencing Flickr resources based on textual meta-data. Information Sciences, 238, 52-74.
33. Wilson, C. L., Matthews, W., 1970. Man's Impact on the Global Environment: Report of the Study of Critical Environmental Problems. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA.
34. 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.
35. Zander, K. K., Straton, A., 2010. An economic assessment of the value of tropical river ecosystem services: Heterogeneous preferences among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians. Ecological Economics, 69, 2417-2426.
36. Zha, X., Yang, H., Yan, Y., Liu, K., Huang, C., 2018. Exploring the effect of social media information quality, source credibility and reputation on informational fit-to-task: Moderating role of focused immersion. Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 227-237.