Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy: An analysis of environmental laws in the province of Buenos Aires (Argentina)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.26.36.2.0.2559Keywords:
environmental legislation, environmental governance, Buenos Aires regulations, natural resourcesAbstract
1. In the current context of socio-environmental crisis, ecosystem services (ES) have become a key conceptual framework for linking nature conservation with human well-being. However, their incorporation into public policies has not always been explicit or equitable.
2. This article aimed to analyze environmental public policies —specifically, environmental laws— of the province of Buenos Aires, using the theoretical framework of ES and considering the involvement of social actors in their development and implementation. To this end, a conceptual content analysis was conducted on 62 provincial environmental laws, identifying 41 keywords related to ES and classifying them according to the categories proposed by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. In addition, the proponents and beneficiaries of each law were identified to understand who promotes these policies and who they are intended to benefit.
3. The results show a partial and predominantly implicit incorporation of the ES concept, with a strong presence of terms related to provisioning services (e.g., water) and regulating services (e.g., conservation), and limited mention of cultural and supporting services.
4. Most laws were promoted by the provincial government, with little direct participation from local actors in their formulation.
5. These findings reveal a normative logic focused on essential natural resources, responding more to socioeconomic priorities than to a comprehensive ecosystem-based vision.
6. Implications. The limited visibility of the ES concept and the narrow inclusion of stakeholders in its formulation highlight the need to advance towards sustainable and legitimate environmental public policies that guarantee citizen participation and conceptual clarity.
References
Acuña, C. 2014. El estado en acción. Fortalezas y debilidades de las políticas sociales en la argentina Siglo XXI editores.
Aizcorbe, M., M. S. Fernández Bouzo, A. Gil, and R. Ricco. 2007. Las organizaciones territoriales en el sur del Área Metropolitana de Buenos Aires: construcción social y política del conflicto ambiental. IV Jornadas de Jóvenes Investigadores. Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires.
Andonova, L. B. 2010. Public policy in a changing climate: Globalization and environmental governance. MIT Press.
Andrade, A., and R. Vides. 2011. Enfoque ecosistémico y políticas públicas: aportes para la conservación de la biodiversidad y la adaptación al cambio climático en Latinoamérica. Instituto Interamericano para la Investigación del Cambio Global.
Bachmann, P. 2006. La participación ciudadana y el manejo integrado: un análisis eco-social de la cuenca del río Aysén (XI región, Chile). Seminario de título carrera de Biología Ambiental, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile.
Bardin, L. 2011. Análisis de contenido (3ª ed.). Madrid: Akal.
Benetti, S., and J. Langemeyer. 2021. Ecosystem services and justice of protected areas: the case of Circeo National Park, Italy. Ecosystems and People 17(1):411-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2021.1946155.
Bertonatti, C., and J. Corcuera. 2000. Situación ambiental argentina 2000. Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina.
Bezerra, M. O., D. Vollmer, N. Acero, M. C. Marques, D. Restrepo, E. Mendoza, B. Coutinho, I. Encomenderos, et al. 2022. Operationalizing integrated water resource management in Latin America: insights from application of the Freshwater Health Index. Environmental Management 69(4):815-834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01446-1.
Blattert, C., K. Eyvindson, M. Hartikainen, D. Burgas, M. Potterf, J. Lukkarinen, T. Snall, A. Toraño-Caicoya, and M. Mönkkönen. 2022. Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning. Forest Policy and Economics 136:102689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102689.
Bouwma, I., C. Schleyer, E. Primmer, K. J. Winkler, P. Berry, J. Young, E. Carmen, J. Spulerová, et al. 2018. Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies. Ecosystem Services 29:213-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.014.
Brañes Ballesteros, R. 1991. Aspectos institucionales y jurídicos del medio ambiente, incluida la participación de las organizaciones no gubernamentales en la gestión ambiental. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Washington, DC. Pp. 132.
Brauman, K. A., G. C. Daily, T. K. E. Duarte, and H. A. Mooney. 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 32(1):67-98. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.031306.102758.
Brown, T. C., J. C. Bergstrom, and J. B. Loomis. 2007. Defining, valuing, and providing ecosystem goods and services. Natural Resources Journal 329-376.
Brunet, L., J. Tuomisaari, S. Lavorel, E. Crouzat, E. Bierry, T. Peltola, and I. Arpin. 2018. Actionable knowledge for land use planning: Making ecosystem services operational. Land Use Policy 72:27-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.036.
Bryant, R., and S. Bailey. 1997. Third world political ecology: an introduction. Routledge.0
Cafferatta, N. 2020. Derecho ambiental y federalismo en Argentina: desafíos de la articulación interjurisdiccional. Revista de Derecho Ambiental 61:45-63. https://doi.org/10.46735/raap.n110.1289.
Capaldo, G., and C. M. Minaverry. 2016. El aporte fundamental de la trilogía del derecho-jurisprudencia-política ambiental. Protección de los servicios ecosistémicos en Argentina. Observatorio Medioambiental 19:213-230. https://doi.org/10.5209/OBMD.54170.
Caro-Caro, C. I., and M. A. Torres-Mora. 2015. Servicios ecosistémicos como soporte para la gestión de sistemas socioecológicos: aplicación en agroecosistemas. Orinoquia 19(2):237-252. https://doi.org/10.22579/20112629.338.
Chan, K. M., A. D. Guerry, P. Balvanera, S. Klain, T. Satterfield, X. Basurto, and N. Hannahs. 2012. Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience 62(8):744-756. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.8.7.
Chaudhary, S., A. McGregor, D. Houston, and N. Chettri. 2015. The evolution of ecosystem services: a time series and discourse-centered analysis. Environmental Science and. Policy 54:25-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.025.
Civeira, G., and F. Rositano. 2020. Evaluación ambiental en áreas urbanas y periurbanas de la Región Metropolitana de Buenos Aires: ¿cuál es la relación entre servicios de los ecosistemas e indicadores demográficos? Cuaderno Urbano 28(28):181-198. https://doi.org/10.30972/crn.28284330.
Costanza, R., R. De Groot, L. Braat, I. Kubiszewski, L. Fioramonti, P. Sutton, S. Farber, and M. Grasso. 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services 28:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008.
Costanza, R., R. de Groot, P. Sutton, S. van der Ploeg, S. J. Anderson, I. Kubiszewski, S. Farber, and R. K. Turner. 2014. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26:152-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002.
Daily, G. C., S. Polasky, J. Goldstein, P. M. Kareiva, H. A. Mooney, L. Pejchar, T. H. Ricketts, J. Salzman, and R. Shallenberger. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7(1):21-28. https://doi.org/10.1890/080025.
Daniel, T. C., A. Muhar, A. Arnberger, O. Aznar, J. W. Boyd, K. M. Chan, R. Costanza, T. Elmqvist, et al. 2012. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. PNAS 109(23):8812-8819. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114773109.
De Groot, R., R. Alkemade, L. Braat, L. Hein, and L. Willemen. 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity 7(3):260-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006.
Delgado, L. E., P. L. Bachmann, and B. Oñate. 2007. Gobernanza ambiental: una estrategia orientada al desarrollo sustentable local a través de la participación ciudadana. Revista Ambiente y Desarrollo 23(3):68-73.
Dick, J., F. Turkelboom, H. Woods, I. Iniesta-Arandia, E. Primmer, S. R. Saarela, P. Bezák, P. Mederly, M. Leone, et al. 2018. Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies. Ecosystem Services 29:552-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015.
Esain, J. 2004. Federalismo ambiental en la Argentina: un análisis de la Ley General del Ambiente. Revista Jurídica de la Universidad de Palermo 5(1):95-118.
Esaín, J. A. 2017. El estado ambiental de derecho en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación. Revista digital de la Asociación Argentina de Derecho Constitucional 213:13-63.
Etchegaray, D. M., and C. M. Minaverry. 2022. Análisis comparativo del marco jurídico forestal y de los servicios ecosistémicos en Argentina, Colombia y Perú. Revista Especializada en Investigación Jurídica 10(1):1-25. https://doi.org/10.20983/reij.2022.1.4.
Figueroa, L. M. 2022. Implementación de políticas ambientales nacionales en ámbitos provinciales. El caso de la Ley de Bosques en Argentina (2008-2019). Tesis de Doctorado, Universidad Nacional de San Martín.
Flores Aguilar, A., M. Aguilar Robledo, H. Reyes Hernández, and M. G. Guzmán Chávez. 2018. Gobernanza ambiental y pagos por servicios ambientales en América Latina. Sociedad y ambiente (16):7-31. https://doi.org/10.31840/sya.v0i16.1811.
Fraser, E., A. Gougill, W. Mabee, M. Reed, and P. McApline. 2006. Bottom up and top down: analysis of participatory process for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management 78:114-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009.
Gabay, M. 2018. Apuntes sobre el sistema normativo ambiental argentino. Pp. 57-101 en R. A. Gutiérrez (comp.). Construir el ambiente: Sociedad, Estado y políticas ambientales en Argentina. Editorial Teseo.
Galafassi, G., and L. Zarrilli. 2002. Ambiente y sociedad en el partido de Quilmes (Argentina): Diagnóstico ambiental participativo y conflicto ambiental. Luna Azul 14: 41-55. URL: tinyurl.com/46mut9k3.
Gómez-Baggethun, E., E. Corbera, and V. Reyes-García. 2013. Traditional ecological knowledge and global environmental change: Research findings and policy implications. Ecological Economics 98:16-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.014.
Graneheim, U. H., and B. Lundman. 2004. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 24(2):105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.
Grindle, M. S. 2007. Going Local: Decentralization, Democratization, and the Promise of Good Governance. Princeton University Press.
Günther, M. G., and R. A. Gutiérrez. 2017. La política del ambiente en América Latina: una aproximación desde el cambio ambiental global. La política del ambiente en América Latina 1-278. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvtxw2j4.
Gutiérrez, R. A. 2023. La política del ambiente en América Latina: actores, coaliciones y conflictos distributivos. Pp. 177-198 en H.-J. Burchardt, C. Gárgano and L. Christel (coords.). ¿De la sustentabilidad al desarrollo? Entre el extractivismo verde y la transformación socioambien0074al. Editorial CLACSO.
Hsieh, H. F., and S. E. Shannon. 2005. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9):1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687.
Kabisch, N. 2015. Ecosystem service implementation and governance challenges in urban green space planning - The case of Berlin, Germany. Land Use Policy 42:557-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.09.005.
Krippendorff, K. 2004. Measuring the reliability of qualitative text analysis data. Quality and Quantity 38:787-800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-004-8107-7.
Krippendorff, K. 2018. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, Canadá. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878781.
Laterra, P., B. Martín López, M. E. Mastrangelo, and L. A. Garibaldi. 2017. Servicios ecosistémicos en Latinoamérica: de la investigación a la acción. Ecología Austral 27(1-bis):094-098. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.1.611.
Leff, E. 2013. Racionalidad ambiental: la reapropiación social de la naturaleza. Siglo XXI Editores México.
Lemos, M. C., and A. Agrawal. 2006. Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 31:297-325. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042605.135621.
Mace, G. M. 2014. Whose conservation? Science 345:1558-1560. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254704.
Maczka, K., P. Matczak, A. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, M. Rechciński, A. Olszańska, J. Cent, and M. Grodzińska-Jurczak. 2016. Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy - A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland. Ecological Economics 128:169-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.04.023.
Maes, J., A. Teller, M. Erhard, C. Liquete, L. Braat, P. Berry, B. Egoh, P. Puydarrieux, C. Fiorina, and F. Santos-Martín. 2013. Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services-An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Ecosystem Services 17:14-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.023.
Matzdorf, B., and C. Meyer. 2014. The relevance of the ecosystem services framework for developed countries’ environmental policies: A comparative case study of the US and EU. Land Use Policy 38:509-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.011.
Mauerhofer, V. 2018. The law, ecosystem services and ecosystem functions: An in-depth overview of coverage and interrelation. Ecosystem Services 29:190-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.011.
MEA. 2005. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being. Washington, DC.
Minaverry, C. 2016. Consideraciones sobre la regulación jurídica ambiental de los servicios ecosistémicos en Argentina. Estudios Sociales 26:43-66.
Miller, T. R., and E. N. Broadbent. 2019. Balancing Conservation and Development: The Need for Integrated Approaches. Conservation Biology 33(1):14-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13176.
Minaverry, C. M. 2020. El reconocimiento de los servicios ecosistémicos culturales en el ámbito científico del Derecho Ambiental y de las Ciencias Sociales. Aplicación de sus contribuciones al caso de la protección jurídica de los bosques nativos en Norpatagonia argentina y chilena. Lex 18(25):109-137. https://doi.org/10.21503/lex.v18i25.2099.
Minaverry, C. M., and G. Capaldo. 2016. El aporte fundamental de la trilogía del derecho-jurisprudencia-política ambiental. Protección de los servicios ecosistémicos en Argentina. Observatorio Medioambiental 19:213-230. https://doi.org/10.5209/OBMD.54170.
Minaverry, C., and V. Cáceres. 2016. La problemática del arsénico en el servicio de agua en la provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Análisis de casos jurisprudenciales. Revista internacional de contaminación ambiental 32(1):69-76. https://doi.org/10.20937/RICA.46846.
Naredo, J. M. 2006. Raíces económicas del deterioro ecológico y social: más allá de los dogmas. Siglo XXI editores.
Nonna, S. 2017. La protección del ambiente: esquema constitucional y de presupuestos mínimos en
Argentina. Anales de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales.
Ostrom, E. 2011. Background on the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework. Policy Studies Journal 39(1):7-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00394.x.
Oszlak, O. 2011. El rol del Estado: micro, meso, macro. VI Congreso de Administración Pública. Asociación Argentina de Estudios de Administración Pública y la Asociación de Administradores Gubernamentales.
Oszlak, O., and G. O´Donnel. 2007. Estado y políticas estatales en América Latina: hacia una estrategia de investigación. Pp. 31 en A. H. Acuña (comp.). Lecturas sobre el Estado y las políticas públicas: Retomando el debate de ayer para fortalecer el actual. Proyecto de Modernización del Estado. Jefatura de Gabinete de Ministros de la Nación.
Pagiola, S., H. Carrascosa von Glehn, and D. Taffarello. 2013. Brazil's experience with payments for environmental services. Payments for Environmental Services (PES) learning paper no. 2013-1. World Bank, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/17854.
Palomo, I., B. Martín-López, C. López-Santiago, and C. Montes. 2011. Participatory scenario planning for protected areas management under the ecosystem services framework: the Doñana social-ecological system in Southwestern Spain. Ecology and Society 16(1):23. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03862-160123.
Peixoto Batista, J., J. Godfrid, and H. Stevenson. 2019. La difusión del concepto de servicios ecosistémicos en la Argentina. Alcances y resistencias. Revista SAAP 13(2):319-346. https://doi.org/10.46468/rsaap.13.2.A4.
Pérez Cubero, M. E. 2019. La participación ciudadana de los movimientos socioambientales en América Latina. Revista Colombiana de Sociología 42(1):135-156.
Piccinini, D. E. 2018. Las tensiones en la gestión de las áreas naturales protegidas y su relación con el desarrollo rural en Argentina. I Jornadas Platenses de Geografía.
Piwowarczyk, J., J. Kronenberg, and M. A. Dereniowska. 2013. Marine ecosystem services in urban areas: Do the strategic documents of Polish coastal municipalities reflect their importance? Landscape and Urban Planning 109(1):85-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.009.
Porcelli, A. M. 2018. Fuentes del derecho internacional privado en el sistema jurídico argentino: jerarquía normativa y su interpretación jurisprudencial. Estudios Socio-Jurídicos 21(1):15-59. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/sociojuridicos/a.6949.
Potts, T., D. Burdon, E. Jackson, J. Atkins, J. Saunders, E. Hastings, and O. Langmead. 2014. Do marine protected areas deliver flows of ecosystem services to support human welfare? Marine Policy 44:139-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.011.
Pu, X., W. Ding, W. Ye, X. Nan, and R. Lu. 2023. Ecosystem service research in protected areas: A systematic review of the literature on current practices and future prospects. Ecological Indicators 154:110817. https://doi.org10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110817.
Rositano, F., and G. Civeira. 2023. Servicios de los ecosistemas en áreas urbanas y periurbanas: Su reconocimiento por distintos actores sociales. Cuaderno Urbano 34:31-44. https://doi.org/10.30972/crn.34346553.
Sánchez, A. 2017. Federalismo Ambiental en Argentina: Un análisis de las Leyes de Presupuestos Mínimos de Protección Ambiental. Universidad de San Andrés.
Smith, H. F., and C. A. Sullivan. 2014. Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions. Ecological Economics 98:72-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.008.
Spangenberg, J. H., C. von Haaren, and J. Settele. 2014. The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy. Ecological Economics 104:22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.025.
Stevenson, H., J. P. Batista, and J. Godfrid. 2022. Valuing nature in Argentina: Transforming or accommodating the status quo? Environmental Science and Policy 131:84-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.01.002.
Svampa, M. 2021. Debates latinoamericanos: indianismo, desarrollo, dependencia y populismo. Editorial Edhasa.
Svampa, M. 2022. Dilemas de la transición ecosocial desde América Latina. Documentos de trabajo (Fundación Carolina): Segunda época (12)1. https://doi.org/10.33960/issn-e.1885-9119.DTFO02.
Van Wensem, J., P. Calow, A. Dollacker, L. Maltby, L. Olander, M. Tuvendal, and G. Van Houtven. 2016. Identifying and assessing the application of ecosystem services approaches in environmental policies and decision-making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1836.
Vargas, C. S. 2012. La definición de política pública. Bien Común 18:47-52.
West, P., J. Igoe, and D. Brockington. 2006. Parks and Peoples: the Social Impact of Protected Areas. Annual Review of Anthropology. 35:251-277. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123308.
Winkel, G., and M. Sotirov. 2016. Whose integration is this? European forest policy between the gospel of coordination, institutional competition, and a new spirit of integration. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 34(3):496-514. https://doi.org/10.1068/c1356j.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Florencia Rositano, Alejandra Duarte Vera; Gabriela Civeira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
