Spatial quantification and economic valuation of recreational ecosystem services in Iran’s Zagros Mountains: A sub-watershed analysis using the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3846/enviro.2026.2264Abstract
Recreational Ecosystem Services (RES) deliver critical non-material benefits, yet their spatially explicit valuation remains underexplored in the data-limited, mountainous landscapes of the Middle East. This study addresses this gap by presenting the first sub-watershed-level quantification and economic valuation of RES across the 20 hydrological sub-units of Chaharmahal-Bakhtiari Province, Iran a core part of the biodiverse central Zagros Mountains. We operationalize the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) framework by integrating biophysical supply indicators (naturalness, protected area status, and hydrological attraction) with accessibility metrics (distance to settlements and roads) to derive a continuous Recreational Supply Index (RSI). Economic valuation was conducted via benefit transfer, using an inflation-adjusted (2011→2024, CPI-based) willingness-to-pay value from Zagros forests). The total annual RES value for the province is estimated at IRR 113.86 trillion (≈ USD 268 million at the 2024 official market exchange rate of IRR 425,000/USD), with a mean per-hectare value of IRR 69.39 million. Hotspots (sub-watersheds 5, 6, and 20) coincide with intact Quercus brantii forests and moderate-to-high remoteness, whereas eastern sub-watersheds show degraded recreational capacity due to agricultural expansion and urban encroachment. Our findings demonstrate that conserving Zagros woodlands concurrently sustains biodiversity, hydrological function, and cultural services providing a robust, transferable methodology for ecosystem accounting and spatial planning in socio-ecologically comparable regions.
Keywords:
cultural ecosystem services, recreational, economic valuation, ROS-benefit transferHow to Cite
Adhikary, M., Ghosh, D., Mandal, B., & Das, S. (2025). Estimating and mapping the value of cultural ecosystem services in an urban landscape context. Applied Geography, 177, Article 103556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2025.103556.
Baró, F., Palomo, I., Zulian, G., Vizcaino, P., Haase, D., & Gómez-Baggethun, E. (2016). Mapping ecosystem service capacity, flow and demand for landscape and urban planning: A case study in the Barcelona metropolitan region. Land Use Policy, 57, 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.006
Brander, L. (2013). Guidance manual on value transfer methods for ecosystem services. UNEP. https://gwp.org/globalassets/global/toolbox/references/guidance-manual-on-value-transfer-methods-for-ecosystem-services-unep-2013.pdf
Cheng, X., Van Damme, S., Li, L., & Uyttenhove, P. (2019). Evaluation of cultural ecosystem services: A review of methods. Ecosystem Services, 37, Article 100925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100925
Clark, R. N., & Stankey, G. H. (1979). The recreation opportunity spectrum: A framework for planning, management, and research (General Technical Report PNW-98). Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. https://www.umt.edu/media/leopold/pubs/58.pdf
Früh-Müller, A., Hotes, S., Breuer, L., Wolters, V., & Koellner, T. (2016). Regional patterns of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes. Land, 5(2), Article 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/land5020017
García-Nieto, A. P., Geijzendorffer, I. R., Baró, F., Roche, P. K., Bondeau, A., & Cramer, W. (2018). Impacts of urbanization around Mediterranean cities: Changes in ecosystem service supply. Ecological Indicators, 91, 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.03.082
González-García, A., Palomo, I., González, J. A., López, C. A., & Montes, C. (2020). Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning. Land Use Policy, 94, Article 104493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104493
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., & Brown, T. (1989). Environmental preference: A comparison of four domains of predictors. Environment and Behavior, 21(5), 509–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916589215001
Khosravi Mashizi, A., & Sharafatmandrad, M. (2023). Cultural services in arid landscapes. A comparative study based on people’s perception, southeast of Iran. Arid Land Research and Management, 37(4), 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1080/15324982.2023.2213671
Li, J., Yang, Z., Guo, J., Zhou, J., Wang, J., & He, K. (2025). Seasonal variation of cultural ecosystem services in urban blue-green spaces based on the SoLVES model and social media data. Ecological Indicators, 181, Article 114393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.114393
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state and trends. Island Press.
Mohammadyari, F., Zarandian, A., Mirsanjari, M. M., Suziedelyte Visockiene, J., & Tumeliene, E. (2023a). Modelling impact of urban expansion on ecosystem services: A scenario-based approach in a mixed natural/urbanised landscape. Land, 12(2), Article 291. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020291
Mohammadyari, F., Tavakoli, M., Zarandian, A., & Abdollahi, S. (2023b). Optimization land use based on multi-scenario simulation of ecosystem service for sustainable landscape planning in a mixed urban-Forest watershed. Ecological Modelling, 483, Article 110440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110440
Moradi, M., Sadrolashrafi, S., Moghadasi, R., & Yazdani, S. (2011). Estimation of recreational value of Yasuj Forest Park using conditional valuation method. Agricultural Economics Research, 4(4), 173–191.
Small, N., Munday, M., & Durance, I. (2017). The challenge of valuing ecosystem services that have no material benefits. Global Environmental Change, 44, 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.03.005
Sun, X., Crittenden, J. C., Li, F., Lu, Z., & Dou, X. (2018). Urban expansion simulation and the spatio-temporal changes of ecosystem services, a case study in Atlanta Metropolitan area, USA. Science of the Total Environment, 622, 974–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.062
Sun, X., & Li, F. (2017). Spatiotemporal assessment and trade-offs of multiple ecosystem services based on land use changes in Zengcheng, China. Science of the Total Environment, 609, 1569–1581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.221
Sun, Y., Liu, D., & Wang, P. (2022). Urban simulation incorporating coordination relationships of multiple ecosystem services. Sustainable Cities and Society, 76, Article 103432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103432
Vallecillo, S., La Notte, A., Zulian, G., Ferrini, S., & Maes, J. (2019). Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people. Ecological Modelling, 392, 196–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.09.023
Yang, L., & Cao, K. (2022). Spatial matching and correlation between recreation service supply and demand in the Ili River Valley, China. Applied Geography, 148, Article 102805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2022.102805
Downloads
Published
Conference Event
Section
Copyright
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
Nordic Geodetic Commission
International Federation of Surveyors
European Sustainable Energy Innovation Alliance
New European Bauhaus Academy
The Lithuanian Roads Association
Lithuanian Water Suppliers Association
Bentley
AB "Kauno tiltai"
UAB "Kerista"
UAB "Danfoss"
UAB "EMP recycling"
UAB "ACO Lietuva"
UAB "Arginta"
UAB "Skadec LT"
UAB "GPS partneris"
UAB "Hnit-Baltic"
AB "Eurovia Lietuva"
VšĮ "RV Agentūra"
UAB "GeoNovus"