Preferences for ecosystem services provided by urban forests in South Korea

The existence of tradeoffs and synergies between ecosystem services emphasize the need to understand the preferences of ecosystem service beneficiaries. In this paper, the preferences of ecosystem services provided by different types of urban forests in South Korea are analyzed to provide insights on the improved distribution and supply of ecosystem services. The Delphi technique was utilized to elicit expert opinions on the categorization of ecosystem services provided by urban forests. A choice experiment on 500 Seoul citizens was then conducted to analyze the preferences for 7 types of ecosystem services - food provision, water flow regulation, noise reduction, microclimate regulation & air quality improvement, moderation & prevention of landslides, biodiversity enhancement, recreation, and health services. An AHP analysis was carried out to investigate experts' ranking of the relative importance of these ecosystem services. The results showed that except for microclimate regulation & air quality improvement, Seoul citizens' preferences for different types of urban forests did not differ according to the attribute level of each ecosystem service. There were also no significant differences between the preferences for urban natural parks and urban neighborhood parks, possibly indicating that Seoul citizens perceive them to be similar. Secondly, the results indicate a higher preference for urban forests with certain features, such as a higher proportion of fruit trees and deciduous trees, higher leaf area, denser tree canopy cover, wider distances between trees, and higher levels of species richness. The enhancement of biodiversity was considered the most influential service for Seoul citizens in their choice of urban forests. Seoul citizens were willing to pay 12,176 KRW/year and 21,036 KRW/year to enhance the level of biodiversity from "poor" to "average" and from "average" to "rich," respectively. Finally, preferences and relative importance for almost all ecosystem services were different for citizens and experts. As it is impossible to maximize the provision of all ecosystem services concurrently, policymakers and urban forest managers need to consider citizens' preferences and opinions when designing and managing urban forests in order to increase user satisfaction and welfare.