What if cultural ecosystem services were relational? A research agenda for nature’s contributions to well-being—and human action

Published Article

Global

Publication date: May 28, 2025

File format: URL

View resource

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are central to relational thinking, yet current research rarely treats them as truly relational. This perspective argues for redefining CES as the work that sustains non‑material relationships between people and nature, rather than simply benefits received. The authors propose a feedback cycle linking nature‑based experiences, interest, capability and relationships, each reinforcing the next. They identify five factors shaping relational CES: ecological attributes of place, senses engaged, attention, human companions and their values, and interactions with specific non‑human beings. By shifting CES from a subfield of economic valuation to a foundation for interdisciplinary inquiry, the authors outline a bold agenda for studying how relationships with nature form, persist and shape well‑being.

Subject Tags

  • Social Sciences
  • Health

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are an epicentre for relational thinking in interdisciplinary environmental science, and yet the study of CES is not truly relational. We ask, what would research on cultural ecosystem services look like if it were truly relational? Even in a purely economic context, a relational understanding of a service must include what is paid or given in return. We contend that (A) a relational understanding of CES requires changing the definition from nature’s non-material benefits for people, to the work done for non-material relationships between people and nature. (B) Relational CES research must represent the relationship between CES and benefits through a feedback cycle by which nature-based experiences ↔ interest ↔ capability and relationships ↔ more experiences. (C) We argue that relational research of CES would require the focused study of how five factors affect CES: (1) biome, ecological integrity, diversity and other ecological and landscape attributes; (2) senses engaged; (3) attention; (4) human companions and their views and values; (5) personal interactions with particular non-human entities. Rather than being an ill-fitting subfield within a hegemonic study of ecosystems’ economic contributions, CES research could be the centre of a bold new agenda for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research.

Citation

Chan, K. M., Gould, R. K., de la Lama, R. L., & Eyster, H. N. (2025). What if cultural ecosystem services were relational? A research agenda for nature's contributions to well-being—And human action. The Routledge handbook of cultural ecosystem services, 442-454. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003414896-40

TNC Authors

  • Harold N. Eyster
    Climate and Land Use Analyst, Colorado
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: harold.eyster@tnc.org