1. Introduction
Cultural ecosystem services (ES) were defined by Costanza et al. [
1] as the aesthetic, artistic, educational, spiritual, and scientific values of ecosystems. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment [
2] extended this definition to the intangible benefits gained by people from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, recreation, and aesthetic experience [
3,
4]. Recreation as an ES is defined as “the restoration and stimulation of the human body and soul through the study and interaction with living organisms in their natural environment” [
5] or as the “pleasure that humans derive from natural and cultural ecosystems” [
6]. An overview of the benefits of cultural ES is provided in
Table 1.
Each natural or semi-natural ecosystem can provide several cultural ES. From a social and cultural point of view, for example, grasslands (meadows and pastures) help maintain the viability of rural communities as an important source of employment, improving rural tourism and recreation [
7]. They offer suitable conditions for ecotourism and education (nature trails, hiking with expert interpretation of the guide). In the natural as well as in the man-made landscape, rivers and water resources have an important aesthetic value and can be intensively used for recreational purposes [
4]. Mountain ecosystems are of year-round importance for the development of recreation and tourism. The degree of attractiveness of these sites increases with the development of ecotourism, which aims to explore and protect nature [
8]. In addition to its primary production function, the agricultural landscape has become a tourist destination in recent years. It offers opportunities to learn about the historical, cultural, and natural potential of the landscape. An example of the intersection of agriculture and tourism is agro-tourism [
10]. Educational services are already being used by a wide group; in addition to research and pedagogical staff, they are also used by nature conservationists as well as amateurs with an interest in knowing the secrets of the landscape and its components and elements [
15].
In terms of the use of cultural ES, all types of ecosystems and all types of landscapes have a certain value. The most attractive and most sought-after areas within the natural potential of the landscape are natural types of ecosystems (sites of protected areas, NATURA 2000, important habitats, etc.). Cultural and historical landscape elements are also important, such as UNESCO World Natural and Cultural Heritage sites, protected settlements in territorial or landscape units with concentrations of monuments or archaeological finds, traditional forms of landscape management, etc. Ecosystems and landscapes in protected areas demand new multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and inclusive approaches. Interest in culture ES helps promote these areas’ sustainability as “protected area institutions” supporting natural and cultural values [
19]. However, the real use of many cultural ES is often limited by the need to protect nature, biodiversity, and landscape stability and the need to protect natural resources (protection of water management areas, protection of the highest-quality soils, protection of forest ecosystems with special functions, etc.). These factors affect the use of natural capital within cultural ES [
20]. At the EU level, there is a lack of policy support mechanisms regarding cultural ES. Some reasons for this include a lack of shared and distributed competencies between the EU and member states relating to policy sectors dealing with land management [
21] and power asymmetries between economic-oriented policy stakeholders relating to cultural ES [
22]. Harmonizing the promotion of cultural ES with the enormous diversity in a national and regional context would be challenging [
21].
Cultural ecosystem services require a multidisciplinary approach. Nevertheless, it is in industrialized societies that the growing demand for cultural ES is expected [
23]. Most cultural ES are relatively difficult to measure, monitor, model, and evaluate due to their weightlessness and high degree of subjectivity [
24]. Sociocultural methods are most often used for their evaluation, where participatory methods are used, such as workshops with the participation of stakeholders, questionnaires, personnel interviews, etc., in order to discover people’s opinions, requirements, and attitudes in relation to the use of ecosystems [
25]. Contingent assessments, which consist of directly assessing people’s willingness to pay or accept compensation for ES change in a hypothetical market, are increasingly used in the economic evaluation of cultural ES [
26], e.g., a willingness to pay for entrance to protected areas, a willingness to pay for the revitalization of ecosystems and degraded land, etc. Travel cost methods are also used (real consumer costs associated with accommodation, meals, transport, and entrance fees). The simple methods of evaluation include the so-called matrix method [
27] using mapping systems based on the use of GIS (e.g., ESTIMAP method [
28,
29]).
The matrix approach is proving to be one of the appropriate approaches in landscape planning and nature protection at the regional and national level [
30]. It is an open system, based on an expert system for estimating ES potentials and for linking the matrix with geospatial data, which makes it possible to prepare interesting data for the process of planning and sustainable management at the regional and national level. The matrix system for the evaluation and appreciation of the potential of cultural ES represents a suitable basis for their integration into planning the use of natural capital in a sustainable way. The ES matrix approach is a tool for supporting decisions in sustainable resource management and it is highly adaptable to various socio-ecological system settings [
31].
The EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 for EU countries and regions strongly supports the improvement of knowledge and the monitoring of ecosystems and their services within the EU nature restoration targets that should lead to a better balance between nature and economic activities [
32]. There is a research gap in the literature on the sustainable functioning of society in terms of interactions between cultural ES, their potential, and use in regions in the context of maintaining a balance between the use of ecosystem services and maintaining ecosystem health in the context of small regions, and not only in Slovakia.
The aim of the study was to map and evaluate the potential of cultural ES in four pilot regions (NUTS 4, district level) using a modified ES matrix ([
15,
27,
30]; expert estimation of NPPC and NLC), and to evaluate regional differentiations of cultural ES potential and its use with regard to diverse natural-geographical and demographic conditions of regions. This article is organized as follows: methodology and study locations are described in
Section 2; interpretations of results and discussion in
Section 3; and concluding remarks in
Section 4.
3. Results and Discussion
Figure 2 shows the average value of the index score per hectare for individual categories of cultural ES in the model regions. The highest values of indices in all categories are in the Brezno region, which has the largest areas of forest stands and protected areas, which in themselves have the highest values of indices in relation to the examined ES cultural categories, such as recreation and tourism, aesthetic values, regional importance, natural heritage, knowledge base and cultural heritage; it is also a region with the highest altitude and rugged, mostly mountainous terrain. The second highest potential of cultural categories of ES is achieved by the Krupina region, which also has the second highest average altitude. Following are the regions of Piešťany and Michalovce with index scores similar to those of the Krupina region. However, it surpasses both regions in the examined categories of cultural ES, most clearly in the “knowledge base” and “natural heritage.” The measured values for the examined categories of cultural ES indicate the importance of the altitude and area of forest stands in relation to the potential of the area to provide a wide range of cultural ES.
The spatial distribution of the index scores of cultural ES and road infrastructure in the model regions is shown in
Figure 3a–d, from which it is evident that the Brezno region has the largest values of the index score of cultural ES in terms of their overall potential; these areas are in relative proximity to the inhabited localities stretching from the centre of the region from west to east, which indicates their high potential for all activities using the benefits of cultural ES. In the other regions examined, their peripheral parts have the highest potential of cultural ES, which means less availability of activities using cultural ES as well as greater demands on time and travel for them. Functional asymmetry in the regional context of the ES can be the subject of separate research [
38].
The use of the potential of natural capital for recreation and tourism as well as for other cultural ES is influenced by the natural, economic and demographic conditions of the model regions.Similar to Crouzat et al. [
39], our study confirms the significant impact of forests and protected areas based on the value of cultural ES. The highest average score of the index per hectare in the evaluation of individual services is in the Brezno region, where there is also the highest area of ecosystems suitable for recreation and tourism, with high aesthetic value (Low Tatras National Park), knowledge base and natural heritage (
Figure 3a). Wetland habitats are also attractive sites for recreation and tourism, but their contribution to the overall potential of cultural ES is low due to their very low area in the studied regions (in Slovakia, these ecosystems occupy only 0.43% of the area; [
15]; the highest representation of this ecosystem among the evaluated regions is in the Michalovce region).
Cultural ES, especially recreation and tourism, are an important part of the economy and, in addition to their economic importance, they also contribute to improving the quality of life [
40]. As the optimal value of the recreation score for Slovakia, Černecký et al. [
15] stated value 3.13 (in the range of values from 0 to 5), which represents a value of 62.60 when converted to the proposed rating in the range of values from 0 to 100. This value is higher only in the Brezno region, similar to the optimal value for landscape character, aesthetics and spiritual inspiration, where Černecký et al. [
15] state as the optimal value of the score of these categories of cultural ES for the Slovak Republic a value of 3.27, which when recalculated represents a value of 65.4. Müller et al. [
30] state in Northern Germany lower average values of cultural ES than Černecký [
15], namely the average value for the whole group of cultural ES is 43. In the model regions, we obtained higher average values of cultural ES—with 68.61 for the Brezno region, 48.82 for the Michalovce region, 21.40 for the Piešťany region, and 55.98 for the Krupina region.
An important role for the provision of the ES, such as aesthetic values, cultural heritage, natural heritage as well as the knowledge base, is played by protected areas, which are declared for the preservation of specific natural and semi-natural ecosystems in the landscape. Mederly et al. [
41,
42] confirm this statement with a positive correlation, i.e., the higher the degree of protection of the territory, the higher the landscape’s capacity to provide cultural ES. Although these cultural ES are not directly tradable, people use them for free and they are indirectly beneficial for recreational and tourism facilities.
According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report [
43], exploiting the potential of ecosystem cultural services may increase due to increased populations, greater leisure opportunities as well as infrastructure development. Both the Brezno and Krupina regions have a predominantly rural character, which is a prerequisite for the development of rural tourism [
44], which, together with agro-tourism, is becoming a relatively new form of tourism in Slovakia; for example, Parente and Bovolenta [
45] state that in England, 23% of farmers do business not only in food production but also in agro-tourism. In the Brezno region with a higher proportion of protected ecosystems, it is possible to increase the attractiveness of tourism in the form of ecotourism based on sustainable use of natural potential [
46], which is primarily focused on experiences and study of nature, which is ethically driven towards a low impact on nature, zero consumption, and which is locally oriented [
4].
The geographical assessment of the potential of cultural ES in the examined regions formed the basis for their monetary appreciation. The value of 1 was assigned an amount of EUR 36.294, based on prices of the potential of individual cultural services for ecosystems; monetary values of individual cultural ES were subsequently calculated according to the matrix of indices (
Table 4). The average value of the potential of cultural ES in euros per hectare in the model regions as well as the total monetary value of individual cultural services of natural capital are shown in
Figure 4 and
Figure 5. The highest value of individual categories of cultural ES per hectare is achieved by the Brezno region (on average over 2490 euros per hectare), which also has a significantly higher total value of the potential of individual cultural ES (on average more than 263,052,868 euros) compared to the other regions examined. The total value of the potential of cultural ES of the natural capital in the model regions decreases in the following order: the Brezno region (1,578,317,208 EUR) > Michalovce region (804,943,092 EUR) > Krupina region (577,752,194 EUR) > Piešťany region (340,640,262 EUR).
The total economic potential for the provision of ES for recreation and tourism in the Slovak Republic is estimated at EUR 11,346,479,255 11 per year, but due to the degradation of Slovak ecosystems it loses a potential EUR 1.3 billion annually [
15]. According to Černecký et al. [
15], forest and aquatic ecosystems have the highest value, which was reflected in the total value of cultural services of natural capital in the monitored regions; the highest area was in the Brezno region (especially forest ecosystem and protected areas) and in the Michalovce region (especially aquatic ecosystem).
Comparison of model regions using average values in EUR per hectare using cluster analysis (
Figure 6) showed the most significant regional differences between pairs of regions, namely Brezno and Krupina (rural regions at an altitude of mainly above 300 m above sea level) and Michalovce and Piešťany (regions in the area with a warm climate at an altitude of up to 300 m above sea level). The resulting values of the interconnection of the area distribution of the total capacity scores of cultural ES with the cartographic layer of altitude are given in
Table 5. The total values of cultural ES (scoring per hectare) at an altitude of up to 300 m above sea level in the monitored regions range from 313 (Michalovce region) to 340 (Krupina region), at an altitude above 300 m above sea level from 370 (Krupina region) to 445 (Piešťany region). The impact of altitude on the value of cultural ES is obvious regardless of the geographical location of the monitored region.
Similar results are shown in
Figure 7 and
Figure 8 showing the visual similarity of the Brezno-Krupina and Michalovce-Piešťany regions using scoring per hectare of individual cultural ES and economic indicators such as the number of visitors, number of overnight stays and number of accommodation facilities (
Figure 7, first SunRay plot) and only using scoring per hectare of individual cultural ES (
Figure 8, second SunRay plot).
Recreation and tourism are the most tradable items from the group of cultural ES.
Figure 9 shows the monetary contribution of individual ecosystems to the value of recreation and tourism within the cultural ES in the model regions. In the Brezno region, where there is a higher representation of ecosystems with a higher potential for recreation and tourism, the conditions for recreation and tourism are more advantageous compared to other regions. An important factor of success in the sustainable use of the potential of cultural ES is to build the trust of local entrepreneurs, landowners, and local governments in relation to the qualitative change of growth parameters of the economy as recreational services are the most promising area of the Slovak services [
47], while it is appropriate to support regional potential by qualified landscaping [
4], or compensatory measures to mitigate the negative effects on the natural values of ecosystems.
After a monetary expression of the value of the potential of individual cultural ES in the examined regions, we found out whether the most economically valued potential for recreational services and tourism is actually used in the regions where the best conditions are available. We compared the potential of natural capital for recreation and tourism with the number of accommodation facilities (
Figure 10), the number of visitors, and the number of overnight stays (
Figure 11) in 2016.
The Brezno region has a greater potential for cultural ES for recreation and tourism (in monetary units) than the statistically reported number of visitors and overnight stays. Compared to the Brezno region, facilities focused on recreation and tourism in the Michalovce region have a lower number of visitors and overnight stays; the Michalovce region has a significantly lower recreation potential, which, together with low socio-economic performance, places it among the lagging regions of the Slovak Republic [
48]. The Krupina region uses the recreational potential in proportion to the number of visitors and overnight stays. The Piešťany region had significantly higher capacities for the development of recreation and tourism to its recreation potential; this disproportion arose due to the long-term development of spa tourism, which was not included among the ecosystems. From the data in
Table 6, we can read that the number of accommodation facilities in 2016 decreased compared to the average for the previous decade in all regions with the exception of the Krupina region. The Brezno region with the greatest potential of individual cultural ES recorded an increase in visitors and the number of overnight stays compared to average values, but far below the values of the Piešťany region, where the spa tourism tradition played a more important role than the researched potential of cultural ES.
In all regions, there has been a decrease in population over the last decade (Piešťany −0.8%, Krupina −3.9%, Brezno −5.2%, Michalovce −0.2%); the highest decline was in the Brezno region, where the local population could be employed in the recreational sector; this creates space for the use of untapped natural potential in mountain areas suitable for recreation in order to prevent rural depopulation [
49]. Negatives resulting from demographic development do not fundamentally concern the Piešťany region with an international spa clientele, which creates preconditions for the development of this segment of tourism and recreation. Another factor in the insufficient use of the recreational potential of the Brezno region may be the insufficient infrastructure and availability of sites suitable for recreation (similar results in mountain areas were shown in a study by Schirpke et al. [
50]), which should be improved by the completion of the R1 expressway and the Brezno bypass. The best preconditions for infrastructure are in the Piešťany region, due to its location in relative proximity to the most developed regions of the Slovak Republic [
51]. In any case, sustainable forms of recreational services in relation to the preservation and enhancement of ecosystems in the regions represent a challenge for land management [
52].
4. Conclusions
Our study provides an alternative view of the method of evaluation and assessment of the recreational potential of cultural ecosystem services in small pilot regions of the Slovak Republic. We can assume that in the near future the interest in evaluating the recreational potential of the ES in the regions of the Slovak Republic will increase due to the ambitions of the EU in the field of circular economy, recreation, tourism, and leisure activities. Our study helps to fulfill the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 (and the updated National Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 as a key document in the field of biodiversity protection in the Slovak Republic) where assessment and mapping of the value of different ES become the most important targets. It is difficult to clearly determine the optimal value of the natural potential of cultural ES as it is a specific area for each country or region, its conditions, infrastructure, customs, etc. Therefore, evaluation and assessment of cultural ES is valuable for national accounting improvement. Case studies in model regions are the first step to the subsequent ES evaluation at the national level. The European Union is supporting these actions through the European Environmental Agency. Recent EU policies are also supporting sustainable management strategies aimed at the conservation and maintenance of European landscapes [
53]; however, within EU policies, cultural heritage and recreation receive little attention [
54].
We used a modified matrix approach as one of the suitable methods usable in landscape planning and nature protection at the regional and national levels [
30]. It is an open expert system, based on the estimation of the potentials of ES. The connection of the matrix with geospatial data makes it possible to prepare materials usable in the process of planning and sustainable management at different spatial levels in connection with maintaining a balance between the use of ES and maintaining their health. The matrix system for the evaluation and assessment of the potential of cultural ES is the basis for their integration into the planning of sustainable use of natural capital. This type of matrix is constantly evolving due to professional discussion, new knowledge, or criticism in order to better integrate the matrix approach within the applied ES evaluation [
30]. Matrix assessment of cultural ES can be used alone or incorporated into other analyses, such as cost-benefit analysis, economic impact analysis, and other causal modeling techniques that provide a higher level of context needed for integrated decision-making [
55]. The use of higher spatial resolution data helped us to reduce data uncertainties, so in this respect the refinement of the LPIS data sets were more reliable than the CLC data set. The categorization of the forests according to the characteristics of its basic mission and the fulfillment of its functions (which also limits the potential of their cultural ES), enabled us to specify the assessment of natural capital at the regional level. The results of this study show that expert-based methods combined with geospatial local data on ecosystem distribution can be a feasible and effective method for a local assessment of the capacity of a landscape potential to provide a cultural ES, and could be tested in other countries. The results can provide feedback to guide the zonal design and management of large-scale ecological restoration.
The results in the small pilot regions of the Slovak Republic indicated that the terrain fragmentation in combination with a higher altitude and a larger area of forests and protected areas may represent significant factors influencing the potential of the area to provide various benefits resulting from cultural ES. The relationship that the greater the monetary potential of cultural ES represented in the region, the more intensively it is used (e.g., in the form of a larger number of visitors or overnight stays) has not been shown. Possible causes may be the negative demographic trend in the studied regions as well as insufficiently built transport infrastructure, which, on the one hand, causes isolation of valuable areas and, on the other hand, saves the country’s natural potential to provide cultural ES in the future. This fact in the researched regions of Slovakia raises the question of sustainable management of the country, i.e., how to make more sustainable use of natural potential in relation to the health of ecosystems. This applies in particular to entrepreneurship in the field of recreation and tourism in forests and protected areas, which in combination with forestry is a topical issue due to the ongoing intensive political discussion in the Slovak Republic related to the zoning of national parks, which in our case concerns the Brezno region.
Using the untapped potential of the area to provide cultural ES also highly depends on local management of stakeholders. An understanding of the potential of cultural ES of individual ecosystems can be used to create space that warrants public attention and minimizes conflicts about the future of landscape protection [
56]; it could also be an influential motivator for local land management alternative solutions, which are often more important than traditional production drivers [
57]. Sustainable management and protection of ecosystems is a basic precondition for maintaining the capacity of cultural ES. Our results can be used as a basis for the subsequent management of natural capital for key stakeholders in the regions based on how they can guide the development of the region in a sustainable manner. Such designed case studies could provide useful information about the value of natural capital in European countries and its importance for human well-being. Not only European countries solve problems with deforestation, increased use of chemicals, habitat fragmentation, climate changes, etc., which negatively impact on landscape capacity to provide ES. This leads to the degradation of landscape values and its highly uncertain future [
58]. Therefore, it is appropriate to evaluate different types of ES in different world areas to pay more attention to practical sustainable land management (e.g., agronomy, organic fertilization, minimum soil disturbance, water management, agro-forestry; [
59]), where possible win-win scenarios between production, regulatory and cultural ES can be expected [
60]. Diverse views among landowners in Europe also suggest the need for different strategies and perspectives to support cultural ES [
21].
The potential of cultural ES is positively influenced by financial investments in the construction of a suitable infrastructure, as well as compensatory measures to mitigate the negative effects of human activities on the natural value of ecosystems; these aspects, together with actions targeting reduction in outmigration of young people, should be mainstreamed within a place based on regional strategies in areas with high as well as low natural potential of cultural ES. The potential of cultural ES is negatively affected by intensive consumption of natural resources, waste production, an increase in tourist traffic, and an increase in the intensity of the use of available tourist infrastructure [
61].
The limitations of this type of research are in expert estimation in determining the matrix values [
30] of the potential of individual cultural ES, which also influence their monetary expressions. The matrix approach applications include a range of uncertainties, e.g., due to ecosystem and landscape dynamics (e.g., climate), modeling methodologies (e.g., input data), valuation methodologies (e.g., subjectivity of valuation or political circumstances), limited regional knowledge, technical problems, scaling mismatches, and others [
62]. Focusing on a specific regional environment makes it difficult to generalize the results. Despite these limitations, applications of the matrix approach are beneficial as a tool for sustainable land management, which can be further developed, especially to facilitate the practical use of the ES concept [
30]. Our findings provide such results for the evaluation of cultural ES, respecting the specific regional environment and data availability.
Future research could focus on estimating the extent of structural change in regional economies in terms of the long-term sustainable functioning of cultural ES, including the impact on employment, disposable income, energy sector, or food security, including forecasts and alternative scenarios. Such designed research supports interdisciplinary views on the long-term sustainable flow of benefits from cultural ES. Deeper insights into stakeholders’ preferences could also be beneficial to find a balance between different types of individual cultural ES. The quality, regular collection, and availability of data will be very important for future research in the assessment of culture ES in relation to nature capital.