Shifting from techno-economic to socio-ecological priorities: Incorporating landscape preferences and ecosystem services into the siting of renewable energy infrastructure.

This study examines the siting scenarios for renewable energy installations (REI) in a mountainous region of Europe (Switzerland), incorporating the external costs of ecosystem services and, innovatively, social preferences. This approach challenges the prevalent techno-economic siting paradigm, which often overlooks these externalities. To minimize the external costs of the scenarios while maximizing energy yield, Marxan, an optimization software, was employed. The energy target for all scenarios is set at 25 TWh/a, stemming from the energy gap anticipated due to the phase-out of Swiss nuclear reactors by 2050. This target is met using renewable energy infrastructure such as wind, roof-mounted photovoltaic, and ground-mounted photovoltaic systems. By integrating social preferences into the optimization, this study showcases a promising implementation that transcends the software's intended applications. It complements techno-economic approaches and offers alternative decision-making avenues. The conventional "roof first" strategy proved ineffective in preventing extensive land use for the development of new renewable energy infrastructure. Strategies incorporating ground-mounted photovoltaic infrastructure were more spatially, ecologically, and socially efficient than those without. The strategy optimized for energy yield exhibited the highest spatial efficiency but incurred significant ecosystem service costs and, surprisingly, had low social costs. In contrast, the strategy prioritizing ecosystem services was the most efficient in terms of ecosystem service costs but had elevated social costs and was spatially less efficient than other strategies. The strategy optimized for social preferences incurred the lowest social costs and excelled in spatial efficiency and ecosystem service costs. Notably, this strategy employed a limited number of planning units linked to both high ecosystem service and social costs. The findings underscore that incorporating social preferences significantly enhances the evaluation of siting options. This inclusion allows for the social acceptance of investments to be factored into costs, facilitating more informed and inclusive decisions.

Impacts of rising COVID-19 incidence and changed working conditions on forest visits in early 2020 of the pandemic: Evidence from Switzerland.

The COVID-19 pandemic forced many nations to implement a certain degree of lockdown measures to contain the spread of the virus. It has been reported that recreational visits to forests and green spaces increased in response to the lockdown. In this study, we investigated the effect of the policy-induced changes in working conditions during the lockdown period, as well as the effect of COVID-19 infection rates, on forest visits throughout Switzerland early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We analyzed data from an online panel survey first conducted one week before the government imposed the lockdown in Switzerland and repeated two weeks after the lockdown began. We use a modeling approach to assess the impact of the home-office and short-time working situation on forest visitation frequency, as well as their effects on the length of visits to the forest. For those who visited the forest both before and during the lockdown, the frequency of forest visits increased during the early lockdown phase considered here, while the duration of visits decreased. According to our model, the opportunity to work from home was a significant driver of the increased frequency of forest visits by this visitor group, while COVID-19 infection rates had no effect on their forest visits.

Do Protected Areas Contribute to Health and Well-Being? A Cross-Cultural Comparison.

Due to their valuable landscape and natural characteristics, protected areas (PAs) distinguish themselves from other green spaces. Studies that survey individuals on the perceived capacity of PAs to provide health benefits are very limited. However, the importance of PAs for societal health could emphasize the necessity to preserve them. In addition, studies of cross-country comparisons of nature-based activities show strong cultural differences with regard to the importance of wild nature and landscape preferences. Cross-country comparisons of the perception of PAs as a resource for personal well-being and health are lacking. An extensive survey with face-to-face questionnaires was conducted in PAs in Poland, Austria, and Italy with an overall sample size of 1390 people. It examined both emotional and physical personal well-being in the context of a stay in a PA. In general, the results showed that between the three countries, different perceptions of the capacity of PAs to contribute to personal health and well-being exist. Both diverse emotional and physical benefits were associated with a stay in a PA. Moreover, respondents from the three countries assessed the perceived capacity of a PA to reduce negative physical symptoms, such as muscular pain or tension, and negative emotional symptoms, such as depression or stress.