**6. Conclusions**

The range, intensity, and selection priorities of CES used are among the most important parameters for the use of services. The mentioned parameters demonstrate the territorial distribution of services, supply (potential), current volume, quality, and possible threats to the quality of services and the possibilities of providing services in the future.

Thus, seeking to understand the coherence between human and ecosystems, ensuring the social and economic well-being of present and future generations in the context of CES, the research was carried out on the possibilities of adapting human activities to CES in the specific area, in the coastal-rural area, Nemunas Delta and Curonian Lagoon, Lithuania. The research revealed the past and the current situation of CES potential and showed the possible CES potential future development directions.

For this purpose, the empirical study involved representatives of different (public and private) sectors and stakeholders. In order to evaluate the existing problems and future potential of CES, the research was carried out in local tourism cultural centers and elderships with four group respondents: tourists, farmers, entrepreneurs, eldership employees. Due to the large number of CES services, only eight concrete services were selected for the study, such as: provision of recreation and recreation in nature, cultural heritage, aesthetic significance, religious significance, striving to preserve existing natural values, nature and ecological tourism, sightseeing tours, nature observation, cognition service, providing recreational fishing opportunities, providing material for research and cognition. These services were selected on the basis of the existing and potential natural, traditional, and heritage resources of the area, seeking to preserve and enhance them, making them accessible and attractive for visitors.

The research showed that, based on the opinion of the eldership employees, the strongest future intensity is seen almost on all suggested types of supply services (except the provision of recreational fishing opportunities and religious significance). The organization of activities could include eldership communities and villagers who provide a range of services (e.g., stories about the village, its history, objects visited or observed (e.g., baker, beekeeper, a naturalist with his or her activities or monitored activities), folklore ensemble with the customs of that region; accompanying visitors or hikers to their chosen object). It is recommended to use certain incentives (depending on the funding requirements and funding period). Creation of a cultural and cognitive path (so far not at the international but at the local level), enabling and empowering (Rusne, Dreverna ˙

Kintai, Saugai, Usenai, Juknaiˇ ˙ ciai elderships) cultural, educational, heritage and tourism cooperation is recommended as one of the program proposals.

Based on the opinion of tourists, the strongest future intensity was found on five suggested types of supply services (except the provision of recreational fishing opportunities, provision of material for research and cognition, and religious significance). The provision of outdoor recreation services in the analyzed area could have a high potential for use if the use was stimulated by infrastructural means, combined with other CES, although today too little attention is paid to the development of nature tourism services (focused on active and cognitive spending). The high interest of tourists learning about wildlife, biodiversity, and natural landscapes demonstrates good potential for more intensive use of these CES in the future, especially if (thanks to the study) the infrastructure of the study area for sustainable nature and eco-tourism, excursions, and wildlife observation is improved.

Based on the opinion of farmers and entrepreneurs, the strongest future intensity is seen only in two suggested types of supply services (provision of nature and ecological tourism, cognitive excursions, wildlife, observation, cognition service, and provision of recreation and nature recreation). Thus, farmers could provide specialized services in their farms by offering agritourism products such as cow milking, berry picking, weeding, and other rural works. Therefore, for farmers living in the researched areas, it is worth considering that they could have financial income from both the farm and natural resources (milk, butter, cheese, mushrooms, berries, fish sales, and outdoor entertainment, etc.). Residents who have retired from intensive agricultural production activities need certain action programs that would bring additional income by combining the existing infrastructure, cultural heritage, experiences, history, etc.

Hence, to conclude this article, Kieslich and Salles [64]'s ideas come in useful: according to them, further research is expected to contribute to the identification of opportunities to enhance dialogue and collaboration among scientists, decision-makers, and practitioners, notably through science-policy interfaces.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, L.M. and R.P.; methodology, L.M. and R.P.; data curation, L.M. and R.P.; writing—original draft preparation, L.M. and R.P.; writing—review and editing, L.M. and R.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** MDPI Research Data Policies.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest the results.
