Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Land Use Policy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol

Vulnerability of Rural Communities to Change in an Ecosystem Service T

Provision: Surface water supply. A Case Study in the Northern Andes,
Colombia
Lina Berroueta, Clara Villegas-Palaciob,*, Verónica Boterob
a
Escuela Ambiental, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Antioquia, Colombia
b
Departamento de Geociencias y Medio Ambiente – Facultad de Minas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medellín, Colombia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The understanding of how socio-ecological systems respond to environmental change is an essential issue in land
Socio-ecological system use planning processes. Vulnerability analyses in the context of socio-ecological systems are a useful tool to this
social vulnerability index end. The study of social vulnerability seeks to analyze how the characteristics of beneficiaries of ecosystem
local scale services and their relation to the ecosystems, determine their sensitivity and their capacity to adapt to changes in
adaptive capacity
the provision of said services. In this paper, we evaluate the social vulnerability of rural communities in the face
substitution capacity
dependency
of changes in the levels of the provision of surface water in the Riogrande basin, which is located in the Northern
ecosystem services change Andes in Colombia. Social vulnerability is evaluated based on two components. First, the initial, inherent vul-
nerability, which depends on parameters such as current level and the change in the level of benefits, types of
needs met by the ecosystem service analyzed, and the capacity for substitution. The second component is the
final, inherent vulnerability that considers the beneficiary’s adaptive capacity determined by individual and
institutional characteristics. The information was collected through semi-structured interviews and site-level
surveys, as well as the use of available existing data for the area of study. The results show that beneficiaries of
the ecosystem service which was analyzed have a low vulnerability to changes in the levels of water supply given
their high substitution capacities and medium-high adaptive capacity.

1. Introduction this framework, social vulnerability is determined by the beneficiary’s

Vulnerability assessment in socio-ecological systems is a tool for
identifying the degree to which environmental change affects ecological
functioning and social welfare. This kind of assessment provides valu-
able information for the design and implementation of land-use po-
licies. Social vulnerability is the degree to which the capacity of the social
system to maintain its level of wellbeing is affected by a threat, such as a
change in the level of provision of ecosystem services (Berrouet et al. 2018).
According to Berrouet et al. (2018), the impact of changes in the level
of provision of ecosystem services on each beneficiary, is determined by
his/her dependence on natural capital (via ecosystem services), and a
set of intrinsic (the beneficiary) and extrinsic (biophysical or institu-
tional context) characteristics. From this approach, a threat to the social
system exists when the integrity of the biophysical system changes, and
it cannot maintain a given level of provision of ecosystem services.1 In
dependence on the ecosystem service and their capacity to adapt to the
change. The beneficiary´s dependence is associated with three vari-
ables: (i) the level of benefits they derive from the ecosystem service,
(ii) the type of human needs that are met from these benefits, and (iii)
the possibilities they have to substitute an ecosystem service from other
natural sources (Berrouet et al., 2018a, 2018b; Laterra et al., 2015;
Metzger et al., 2005; Mussetta et al., 2017; Tapia et al., 2017). The
capacity of adaptation is linked to the individual characteristics of the
beneficiary, as well as to the relationships that he/she establishes with
other members of his/her community and institutions (Dumenu and
Obeng, 2016; Gallopín, 2006; IPCC, 2014; Marsiglia, 2017; Smit and
Wandel, 2006).
Although there have been recent and growing developments in the
analysis of socio-ecological vulnerability, there are still challenges that
limit the operationalization of this approach in design and

Corresponding author.
⁎

E-mail addresses: maria.berrouet@udea.edu.co (L. Berrouet), civilleg@unal.edu.co (C. Villegas-Palacio), vbotero@unal.edu.co (V. Botero).
1
Although the social vulnerability index is based on characteristics of the social system, the level of benefits is indirectly linked to the biophysical limits. As pointed
out by Berrouet et al. (2018), if there is a threat to the biophysical system that is materialized and the ecosystems are pushed beyond their limits, the ecosystem
functions are affected and therefore the provision of ecosystem services with consequences on the level of benefits to the social system.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104737
Received 20 March 2019; Received in revised form 26 April 2020; Accepted 4 May 2020
Available online 15 June 2020
0264-8377/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Berrouet, et al.
Fig. 1. Location of the Riogrande basin, Department of Antioquia, Colombia. The map shows in purple the areas worked on in the social vulnerability assessment.
(Source: Machado et al. 2019)
implementation processes related to land-use policies (Berrouet et al.,
2018a, 2018b; Ciftcioglu, 2017; Johnson et al., 2016; Kumar et al.,
2016; Laterra et al., 2015; Metzger et al., 2006; Mussetta et al., 2017;
Qiu et al., 2015). In the literature, there are multiple methodologies for
vulnerability assessment that attempt to address these conceptual and
methodological challenges. The challenges are mainly associated with
the ambiguity of the concept of vulnerability and the dimensions that
determine it: exposure, sensitivity, and capacity of adaptation (Hinkel,
2011). There are also challenges associated with the difficulty of im-
plementing these analyses at local scales, the scarcity of information,
and those related to the aggregation of variables for the construction of
a vulnerability index and its spatial representation (El-Zein and
Tonmoy, 2017; Tapia et al., 2017).
Recent studies have achieved many milestones in the assessment of
social vulnerability. However, the evaluations of social vulnerability
through indexes are still limited (Below et al., 2012; Ciftcioglu, 2017;
Dumenu and Obeng, 2016; Eakin et al., 2006; Hahn et al., 2009;
Johnson et al., 2016; Kumar et al., 2016; Laterra et al., 2015; Luers
et al., 2003; Metzger et al., 2006; Mussetta et al., 2017; Qiu et al., 2015;
Tapia et al., 2017). This paper contributes to the literature by pre-
senting the evaluation of the vulnerability of a rural community to
changes in the level of provision of one ecosystem service: surface water
supply. We assess social vulnerability based on parameters associated
with dependence on ecosystem services and the capacity of adaptation
at local scales and on a beneficiary level. This paper constitutes an
advance in addressing the aforementioned challenges, especially those
related to evaluating vulnerability at a local scale in contexts of scarce
information. We also propose a vulnerability index that allows for a
quantitative evaluation of vulnerability to make comparisons across
different units of analysis in a study. Comparing vulnerability across
different units of analysis opens up possibilities with regard to de-
signing and implementing targeted policies to enhance weaknesses that
lead to increased vulnerability. The study was carried out with a rural
community located in the Riogrande Basin (henceforth referred to as
RGB) located in the northern Colombian Andes (Antioquia, Colombia).
2. Methods
2.1. Area of study
With an area of 127,896 ha, the Riogrande basin is located in the
municipalities of San Pedro de Los Milagros, Entrerríos, Belmira,
2
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
Donmatias, Santa Rosa de Osos and Yarumal, in the northern subregion
of the Department of Antioquia (Colombia) (Fig. 1).
According to the Basin Management Plan - POMCA (Plan de Manejo
y Ordenamiento de Cuencas Hidrográficas2), the average temperature is
15 °C; with annual rainfall ranging between 2,000 and 2,500 mm. This
region is comprised of areas with very low montane humid forests, low
montane humid forests, very humid montane forests, montane rain-
forests, and pre-montane forests.
Table 1 presents the distribution of land cover vegetation in the
basin.
The basin is a strategic area given that about 30% of inhabitants of
the Metropolitan Area of the Aburrá Valley are supplied with water
from the Rio Grande II reservoir, located in the basin. The reservoir is
also strategic for energy production. The RGB has a total population of
68,056 inhabitants, which equates to approximately 21,267 house-
holds. This community derives its sustenance mainly from activities
such as livestock (fattening process, milk, and meat), agriculture
(avocado, coffee, tamarillo), and to a lesser extent, pig farming, fish
farming and the services sector (agro-industrial and commercial)
(Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and
Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín, 2015; López-Gómez,
2014). In urban areas, the development of agro-industrial services to
support the aforementioned agricultural activities has become a source
of income for these communities (Corporación Autónoma Regional del
Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede
Medellín, 2015).
With regard to governance and governability in the basin, autho-
rities have designed different land-use planning instruments over the
past fifteen years. The governmental planning tools include: the
POMCA, municipal land use plans, the district for the integrated man-
agement of the high Andean páramo forest, the delimitation of páramos,
and the implementation of schemes for payments for ecosystem ser-
vices. The POMCA engages the planning of the use and sustainable use
of renewable natural resources in a basin. The goal of the POMCA is to
achieve or reestablish an equilibrium between the economical use of
such resources and the conservation of the biophysical structure of the
basin and particularly of its hydric resources. The municipal land use
plans are technical and normative long-term planning instruments
2
The POMCA (its acronym in Spanish) is a territorial management instrument
for river basin planning in Colombia.
L. Berrouet, et al.
Table 1
Distribution of land cover in the basin. Source: (Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín,
2015)
Land Cover
Pastures (cleared and managed, mainly focused on milk production)
Forest, páramo, forest plantations and stubble (productive and protective uses)
Transitory crops such as potato (Solanum tuberosum ssp. Andigena) and intensively produced crops such as tamarillo (Cyphomandra betacea Cav.
Sendt), avocado (Persea americana Mill) and coffee (Coffea arábica L.)
Infrastructure, housing, mining, water, and degraded areas
which include a set of actions and policies that regulate the use and
transformation of the urban and rural territory in a municipality. This
plan must incorporate the basin management guidelines established in
the POMCA and economic activities that can be carried out in it. All of
these instruments are command and control as is the case with policy
instruments. Additionally, in the RGB there are two initiatives which
relate closely to Payment for ecosystem services schemes: BanCO2 and
the water fund (Cuenca Verde) which are focused on ecological con-
servation and the restoration of strategic areas for water regulation and
carbon capture ecosystem services. A common characteristic across all
these planning instruments is that they aim at recovering and main-
taining strategic ecosystems for the region, as well as seeking to im-
prove the integrity of the biophysical system (Corporación Autónoma
Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de
Colombia Sede Medellín, 2015).
2.2. Social vulnerability – Methodological framework
In stark contrast with traditional approaches, the conceptual fra-
mework established by Berrouet et al. (2018a), 2018b differentiates
between threats to the social system and threats to the ecological
system. In this approach, social vulnerability is assessed against the
change in the level of provision of the ecosystem service (ΔESPL). The
framework states that social vulnerability should be addressed based on
two components: the initial inherent vulnerability (IIV), and the final
inherent vulnerability (FIV). The first component, IIV, accounts for the
beneficiary’s dependence on the level of provision of the ecosystem
service being assessed. In the IIV, adaptation measures are not being
considered (Lampis, 2013). The IIV is determined by the change in the
beneficiary´s level of benefits ( B) between two periods of time, the
type of need that is satisfied by a given ecosystem service (NC) and the
beneficiary’s capacity of substitution (CS) of the ecosystem service in a
scenario of change (Berrouet et al., 2018a, 2018b, 2019) 3 . The FIV
considers the capacity of adaptation, which is determined by the ben-
eficiary’s intrinsic characteristics (CAB) and extrinsic characteristics
such as the institutional setting in the social system (CAins). The in-
stitutional adaptive capacity refers to the effectiveness of different in-
stitutions in the territory to manage ecosystem services. This category is
characterized by the interactions between the population and the in-
stitutions in place. By institutions, we mean active public and private
organizations in the territory, as well as norms and policies (such as
land-use policies) that influence the behavior of different stakeholders
in the territory. This category influences the adaptive capacity due to
the fact that improved institutional performance leads to more accurate
and efficient responses to changes in the provision of ecosystem ser-
vices. (Adger, 1999; Janssen and Ostrom, 2006). Equation (1) re-
presents the social vulnerability index
3
According to Berrouet et al. (2018), the CS is the capacity of a beneficiary to
substitute the provision of a service to maintain a level of benefits in a situation
of change in the level of provision. This capacity depends on the presence of
natural substitution sources and the possibility that the beneficiary has of ac-
cessing them, using technology or not. At this point, the technological barriers
may condition the capacity of the beneficiary to use these replacement areas.
3
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
Percentage of basin´s area
61.62 %
28.99%
1.54%
7.85%
VSS = FIV = [( B *NC ) CS ] (CAB ) (1)
The index shown in the equation above, includes sensitivity
[( B * NC ) CS ] and capacity of adaptation (CAB ) , which depends on
the beneficiary’s characteristics and the characteristics of the institu-
tional setting in the territory. This approach is in line with the IPCC
proposal (2014) for the assessment of social vulnerability (IPCC, 2014;
Lavell et al., 2012).
2.3. Procedure for the assessment of Vss at the RGB
2.3.1. Identification of Ecosystem Services and Beneficiary’s Profiles
The identification of the ecosystem services (ES) which were studied
and the beneficiaries’ profiles in the area of study, was carried out
through four focus groups that were implemented in the five munici-
palities of the basin4 . According to Berrouet et al. (2019), the bene-
ficiary profile is a grouping of individuals that hold similar socio-
economic characteristics. For the identification of the ES, we carried out
brainstorming focus groups that investigated (i) the relationship of the
beneficiaries with the elements that make up the landscape (i.e. soil,
water, forest, air, páramo), (ii) the contributions of these elements to
their way of life, (iii) the problems associated with these elements, and
the strategies they identified as solutions to said problems5 .
Given the necessity of a co-construction and integration of knowl-
edge from existing actors and conceptual frameworks (Villegas-Palacio
et al. 2016; Rey-Valette et al. 2017), the concept of ES was discussed
and constructed in the focus groups. The ES identified were translated
under the framework of the Common International Classification of
Ecosystem Services (CICES6): (see Version 4) (Haines-Young and
Potschin, 2013). Finally, the beneficiaries selected and ordered the five
most crucial ES for their livelihood (Corporación Autónoma Regional
del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede
Medellín, 2012; Geilfus, 2005; Villegas-Palacio et al., 2016).
In addition to the focus groups, 18 individual surveys were im-
plemented in the municipalities of Donmatias and Santa Rosa de Osos.
Out of the total number of participants, 22% were beneficiaries engaged
in activities such as subsistence agriculture, pig farming, poultry
farming, and farm leasing. The other 22% were focused on dairy
farming in combination with other livestock activities, and the re-
maining 56% were dairy farmers with different levels of production.7
The information gathered was complemented with previous studies
4
Focus groups were conducted with farmers (beneficiaries of the ecosystem
services). They were invited to participate through the social leaders of dif-
ferent community boards in each municipality. in total 55 beneficiaries parti-
cipated in these focus groups: 5 in Santa Rosa de Osos, 19 in San Pedro de los
Milagros-Entrerríos, 8 in Belmira and 23 in Donmatias.
5
The guiding questions and procedures for the identification and prioritiza-
tion of ecosystem services (focus groups) are available upon request.
6
CICES is an international initiative for the development of a common clas-
sification of ecosystem services, understanding the processes and functional
attributes that determine them, CICES facilitates the systematization and
comparison between studies, mapping exercises, valuation and evaluation of
ecosystem services (see Haines-Young and Potschin (2013) and https://cices.
eu/ for more information)
7
The survey is available upon request
L. Berrouet, et al.
carried out in the area concerning the adoption of technologies in
agricultural production by Álvarez (2012) (182 surveys) and Dávila
Betancurth et al. (2015).
Based on the data collected in the focus group and surveys, the main
beneficiary´s profiles in the study area were identified based on so-
cioeconomic characteristics as suggested by Berrouet et al. (2019).
2.3.2. Information gathering for index evaluation
In order to gather the information needed for the analysis and index,
we defined work areas (called core workgroups) that would allow a
representative sample of the beneficiary´s profiles to be obtained in the
entire RGB. For the case study, these core workgroups were defined
based on a combination of four criteria: i) existing information from
previous studies on the biophysical system, ii) areas with forest cover
from 1980 to 2016, iii) areas where primary data collection on social
system was necessary given the limited availability of existing data and
iv) the level of representation of the homogeneous physical zone.
According to Berrouet et al. (2019), this criterion allows for the creation
of groups under homogeneous parameters, in addition to facilitating the
spatial representation of variables and the vulnerability indicator (i.e.,
socioeconomic stratum, economic property value). The homogeneous
physical zone, along with the economic homogeneous zoning in ca-
dastral planning, allowed us to assign an economic valuation to a given
property. A physical homogeneous zone groups farms according to the
characteristics of the physical environment surrounding them (climatic
zone, type of terrain, degree of erosion, productive classification of the
property, access to roads, availability of water, vegetation cover and
dominant use, management or planning figures that affect the prop-
erty). The properties grouped under a specific physical homogeneous
zone have similar physical contexts. In total, 93 homogeneous physical
zones were identified. In this study, ten beneficiary profiles and nine
core workgroups were identified (See Appendix A -A.2)
In the core workgroups, a series of workshops and site surveys (139)
were conducted. Participants in the workshops were selected from a
database of local community leaders (from veredas8). Each of these
leaders was invited to attend the workshop with two or more members
of their community. In order to interview producers in their farms, the
producers (beneficiaries) were selected from the records of the pro-
ductive associations and municipal databases. The information col-
lected was grouped into categories of data. A category of data is a set of
variables or parameters required for the estimation of the partial in-
dicator that is part of the Vss index, as shown in Table 2. For example, in
the case of dependence, determined by the benefits a user derives from
a level of provision of ES, the “productive” category gathers informa-
tion on land size, distribution of land use and main economic activity,
production yields, costs, and income from production. In this vein, the
following categories were derived from the data: the relation of the
beneficiary’s wellbeing with the natural resources (Profile B/RN),
substitution, socioeconomic characteristics, and the beneficiary’s re-
lationship with institutions near him/her; these categories were used to
establish NC, CS, CAB and the CAins, respectively. provides a general
description of the information sources and techniques used in the col-
lection of said information. The methods incorporate methodological
guidelines for work at a local level and with scarce information which
were proposed by Berrouet et al. (2019).
2.3.3. Estimation of Partial Indicators, Inherent Initial (IIV) and Social
System Vulnerability (Vss)
The methodological path for the estimation of the Vss to changes in
the level of provision of ES is shown in Fig. 2. Initially, the Vss is cal-
culated at a beneficiary level according to the scenario of change in the
8
Vereda is a term used in Colombia to define an administrative division of the
territory within the municipalities. Usually, a vereda is located in rural areas
although it can have micro urban centers
4
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
level of provision of ES. Then, an aggregation is made at the level of the
beneficiary’s profile using the arithmetic average of the vulnerability
index for each beneficiary. Finally, through a weighted average of
vulnerability indexes by profile, vulnerability for the core workgroup is
obtained. The weights are given by the proportion in which each profile
is present in each core workgroup.
The following is a detailed description of how the values for each of
the variables that determine social vulnerability at the beneficiary level
are obtained.
2.3.3.1. Change in Benefits Associated with the change in the level of the
provision of ecosystem services ( B ). In order to calculate this change, it
is necessary to initially estimate the level of benefits in the current
condition and consider the change in the level of ES provision. The
former was estimated from the information of the “productive”
category, according to the main economic activity of each beneficiary
as shown in equation (2).
Bi = (NPx i )*(INCPx COSTPx ) (2)
The ($COL/ year) benefits for the reference year (Bi , i= 2015) is
determined by multiplying the value found for the level of production
during that year (NPx i ) and the difference between the unitary price to
producer (INCPx ) and unitary cost of production (COSTPx ) .
As shown in Fig. 2, Bi benefits were estimated for two conditions:
the initial ES provision level (ESPLi) and a final ES provision level
(ESPLf). In the first case, water requirements were established for each
economic activity by consulting either the production yields per cubic
meter of water used (L/ m3, kg/ m3, ton/ m3) or the water consumption
modules (m3 /sec) by type of economic activity in the area of study.
These were established based on a review of technical information and
various available studies, such as the Water Resource Management Plan
(Plan de Ordenamiento del Recurso Hídrico) and the Study of Water De-
mand in the Porce River Basin (Estudio de la Demanda Hídrica en la
Cuenca del Río Porce) (Builes Cedula 2013, Secretaria de Medio
Ambiente de la Alcaldía de Medellín et al., 2013, Corporación
Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Pontificia
Bolivariana 2015). All these values were brought to an annual demand
figure (m3 /year) according to production.
Subsequently, the final benefits (Bf ) were determined with new
conditions for the provision of the ES (ESPLf), for which five scenarios
were considered: two extreme scenarios and three intermediate sce-
narios. The scenarios are as follows: A reduction of 1% and 41% in the
average superficial stream flow rate. The 1% reduction is from a sce-
nario modeled by the water resources research group of the National
University of Colombia (Medellín campus). In this model, different
scenarios of land cover in the RGB show little variation in the average
flow - less than 1%. The 41% reduction is from the model developed by
the National Institute of hydrometeorology. This model covers changes
in the flow rate due to the effect of extreme hydroclimatic variations for
the hydrological subzone of the Porce River (the RGB is a basin within
this subzone). In this scenario, the flow reduction under extremely dry
conditions for this zone is in the range -41 to -50% (Ministerio de
Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible and Instituto de Hidrología,
Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales 2014). The other three hypothe-
tical scenarios of reduction in the level of water supply that were
considered were S3: reduction of 20%, S4: reduction of 60% and S5:
reduction of 80%.
The benefits for both the initial (Bfi ) and the final (Bf ) situations
were standardized. In vulnerability assessment exercises, it is common
to use standardization or order to consider the differences of bene-
ficiaries’ income or access to land (Laterra et al., 2015). In order for the
variable to be included in a non-dimensional way in the calculation of
the index, a standardization was carried out in this study using the
region’s poverty line (PL) as a reference value. According to the defi-
nition of PL, a household of four members is considered poor when its
 Table 2
Information gathering for social vulnerability index Vss estimation in Phase II (Adapted from Berrouet et al. 2019).
Vss Component Partial indexes Technique/Source of information for the estimation of partial indexes and their parameters
L. Berrouet, et al.

The generated information (GI) Already existing information (EI) Unit

worked
Technique Scope Category / Information obtained Description Source

Threat (Tss) Taken as a scenario to evaluate
the parameters of the Vss,
possible scenarios of change
which constitute a threat to the
social system: change in the
level of provision of the service
ecosystem (ΔESPL)
Matrices of the impact
of activities (identified
in phase I) on natural
resources were
employed, as well as
open questions about
knowledge of
processes and
activities in the vereda
and the farm.
Applied by subgroups
(veredas) in the
framework of the
workshops. In the case
of interviews on the
farms, they were carried
out individually. In both
cases, the open
questions were applied
on an individual basis.
The incidence of processes and As a compliment and control I -
activities such as climate change, of the new information that
agrochemical application, logging was gathered (GI) GI,
and burning of forest areas, previous information was
organic waste, other waste, used related to
agriculture – orchards, potato environmental scenarios,
cultivation, livestock, pig farming, evaluations, and
energy generation, mining, characterizations of the area
recreation-tourism, reserves-parks of study.
with forest resources, water
quality, water quantity, soil
stability, and fertility were
assessed from one to five. Where:
−5 Significant-
negative
−3 Moderate -
negative
−1 Low
relevance -
negative
0 No impact

5
1 Low
relevance -
positive
2 Moderate -
positive
3 Significant -
positive
Dependency Changes in Initial A survey was used to I Applied to the Productive Category: As complement and control II Productio-
(Dss) benefits B benefit search for aspects individual surveys of the GI, information was n yields
level Bti related to production carried out in the consulted in secondary (Ton o Kg
framework of the sources of different ha-1 year-
1
workshops and in-situ productive sectors including )
interviews. Property size and distribution of yields and production costs, Costs –
uses, main economic activity, updated up to year 2015. Income ($
yields of production, costs, and ha-1 year-
1)
income by production.
Final - - - We established the yields III Water
benefit and percentage of demand
level Bti + 1 production costs associated (m3 ha-1
with the water demand of year-1 y
the different activities and m3 Ton o
uses Kg-1 year-
1
)
Category of the fulfilled/ An assessment matrix Applied by subgroups Category B/RN: Supplementation and IV Dimensio-
satisfied human need NC of the importance of (veredas) in the Beneficiaries are asked to rank verification of the nless
natural resources (RN) framework of the (from zero (0) to five (5)) the information obtained in the
to components of workshops. Carried out contribution of forest resources, surveys
welfare (B) was used individually in the case water quality, water quantity, soil
of in-situ interviews. stability and fertility to different
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

(continued on next page)

 Table 2 (continued)

Vss Component Partial indexes Technique/Source of information for the estimation of partial indexes and their parameters

The generated information (GI) Already existing information (EI) Unit

L. Berrouet, et al.

worked
Technique Scope Category / Information obtained Description Source

factors of well-being (food, health,

production, Income, relations with
neighbors, and quality of life)
Where:
5 Very
important
and
essential
3
It is
important,
but not
necessary
1
Of little
Important
0 No
importance
Adaptation Substitution capacity CS The study used a Applied individually Substitution category: - - Dimensio-
(Ass). graphical survey with both in the framework Information associated with the nless
scenarios of change in of the workshops and evaluation of alternatives to face
the provision of water the interviews on the changes in the level of water

6
services and
evaluation of possible
action strategies (both
determined in phase I)
farms supply and loss of the productive
capacity of the soil. The proposed
strategies for change in the
provision of water were: (1)
Abandonment of activities and the
property, (2) permanence in the
premises, but with change of
productive activity with a lower
demand, (3) Search of other water
sources in their own premises, (4)
Search of other water sources in
neighboring fields, (5)
construction of wells in their
properties, for the extraction of
groundwater (if they exist). Each
of these strategies was rated from
zero (1) to five (5), Where:
5 It's the best
option, and I
have the
resources to
do it myself
4 It's the best
option, I
have the
resources to
do it, but I
wouldn't –
no need
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

(continued on next page)

 Table 2 (continued)

Vss Component Partial indexes Technique/Source of information for the estimation of partial indexes and their parameters

The generated information (GI) Already existing information (EI) Unit

L. Berrouet, et al.

worked
Technique Scope Category / Information obtained Description Source

3 It is the best
option, but I
need help to
be able to do
2 I don't
consider it a
good option,
I don't like
it, but I
would think
it
1 It's not an
option; I
would never
do this
Additionally, we asked
participants to rate their need or
not to access financial resources,
training, and technologies-
infrastructure to be able to
implement the different solutions.
Adaptative The A survey on the Applied individually, Socio-economic Category: Complementation and - According

7
Capacity benefi- characterization of both in the workshops - Socio-economic characteristics: verification of the to the
CA ciary’s socioeconomic and the interviews on configuration of the household information obtained in the variable
adaptive variables was the farm. (number of members, time surveys, with institutional or
capacity employed lived in the area, place of information from the parameter
CAB origin), ownership of the municipal dependencies. studied
property, other forms of (systematized and analyzed
income (economic activities), in the work of Marsiglia.
access to services, gender, age, 2017)
income level, level of
education, political and
religious affiliation.
- Local knowledge: Knowledge
about the environment,
problems in farms and veredas
(deforestation, burning,
pollution, loss of soil),
knowledge about instruments
for terrotorial planning.
- Access to Programs/
information: Technical
advisory programs, subsidies
(incentives), and financial
support for production,
education or health,
participation in conservation
mechanisms.
- Participation spaces and support
networks: membership of social
organizations, participation in
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

(continued on next page)

 Table 2 (continued)

Vss Component Partial indexes Technique/Source of information for the estimation of partial indexes and their parameters

The generated information (GI) Already existing information (EI) Unit

L. Berrouet, et al.

worked
Technique Scope Category / Information obtained Description Source

environmental groups or
tables of discussion,
formulation and
implementation of watershed
planning instruments,
workshops, or training
programs.
Institution- The study Both the evaluation Category of institutional Supplementation of the
al adaptive implemented a matrix of the B/I relations: information with the
capacity beneficiary (B) – relationship, as well as - Relationship B/I: Qualification municipal dependencies
CAins Institution (I) the questions associated of zero (0) to four (4) by the concerning: efficiency of the
relationship matrix with the programs, were beneficiary of the presence management, distribution of
and individual survey carried out individually, and accompaniment of the the information,
for beneficiaries both in the workshops institution in the Territory, infrastructure (systematized
and in the farm where: and analyzed in the work of
interviews. 4 The Marsiglia. 2017)
permanent
and active
presence of
the
institution
with

8
programs
and
information
3 Occasional
technical
assistance
with
information
or programs
2 Eventual
presence in
the territory
with
program or
information
1 Little
presence or
contact with
the
community
0 Without
accompani-
ment or
institutional
presence in
the
Territory
- Which programs are offered and
by whom: for technical training
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

(continued on next page)

L. Berrouet, et al. Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

Sede Medellín, 2015; Dávila Betancurth et al., 2016; Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, 2016, 2014; Farfán Valencia, 2012; Federación Nacional de Cafeteros, 2017; Fondo Nacional de la Porcicultura,
2016; García, 1997; Gobernación de Antioquia, 2013a, 2013b; G. Gobernación de Antioquia, 2013a, 2013b; Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural and Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, 2013;

(Builes Cedula, 2013; Cisneros Zayas et al., 2015; Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana - UPB, 2015; Fernández, 2013, 2013; González et al., 2010; Secretaria de
(Álvarez, 2012; Arcila Pulgarín et al., 2007; Barrios-Hernández and Olivera-Ángel, 2013; Bohórquez and Neme, 2013; Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de Colombia
annual income is below $COL 10,933,392 (US$3,985.369)
(Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística - DANE 2016).
worked
The change in the benefits (ΔB) in the initial and final situation (ac-
Unit

cording to the evaluated scenario), under this standardization, was

estimated as shown in expressions (3) to (5).

ˆ ˆB
Source

B = Bi f (3)

Bi 4
B̂i = *
(4)
Already existing information (EI)

PL NMH

Bf 4
B̂f = *
PL NMH (5)

Where B̂i and B̂f are the standardized benefit values in the initial and
Description

final conditions of ESPL, Bi and Bf are the benefit values for the initial
and final conditions, respectively. PL is the poverty line ($COL/ year),
(Álvarez, 2012; Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia and Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín, 2015, 2012; López-Gómez, 2012)

and the ratio 4/ NMH is a correction factor for four household members
(according to the definition of PL), divided by the NMH which is the
number of household members of the beneficiary which was assessed.
Category / Information obtained

Problems and advantages of

institutions in the territory.

2.3.3.2. Satisfied Human Need (NC) Category. Each of the beneficiaries

resources and production,
integral management of

financial strengthening.

rated the contribution of the ecosystem service to different components

Technique/Source of information for the estimation of partial indexes and their parameters

the presence of these

of their wellbeing from 0 to 5. In the case of Type I needs, beneficiaries

rated the contribution of ES to food (F), production (Px,) and health
(H). Type II needs include relationships with neighbors (NR) linked to
harmony and reduction of conflicts in the region, and quality of life
(QL) such as the possibility of enjoyment and good living in their area.
As shown in equation (6), the value of the NC was obtained as the
weighted sum of the ratings given by beneficiaries to the different
components of their wellbeing. In the RGB, a weight of 0.7 was assigned
to Type I human needs related to safety and physiological demands
(Berrouet et al., 2019) and 0.3 to Type II needs. For example, in the case
of water regulation, this ES contributes to flood control (safety) and
water supply for different uses (physiological). Similar weights were
used in the model for the assessment of the socio-ecological
vulnerability proposed by Laterra et al. (2015). Once the value of the
NC was obtained, it was standardized through a ratio of maximum and
Scope

minimum values (European Commission (EC) et al., 2008; Soto and

The generated information (GI)

Schuschny, 2009)

F + Px + H NR + QL
NC = 0.7 + 0.3
(6)
(CORANTIOQUIA and UNAL 2012, 2015, López-Gómez 2012, Álvarez, 2012)

3 2
Ospina Salazar et al., 2003; Perfetti et al., 2012; Tobón Cardona, 1989)
Technique

2.3.3.3. Substitution capacity (CS). This partial indicator was estimated

using two elements: (i) the availability and accessibility of natural
sources that can substitute the original provision of ecosystem services
Medio Ambiente de la Alcaldía de Medellín et al., 2013)

(ASource) and (ii) the presence of technological barriers. For the first
element, the beneficiaries were asked which of the following four
strategies of availability/accessibility to alternative sources were
available to them: (i) surface water availability on her/his property
(SWF), (ii) surface water availability on neighboring sites (SWNF), (iii)
groundwater availability on her/his property (UWF) and (iv)
groundwater availability on neighboring sites (UWNF). For the
Partial indexes

presence of technological barriers, each beneficiary was asked to rank

from one to five how likely they think it would be to implement each of
the previously mentioned strategies (Appendix B).
The capacity of substitution (CS) is estimated, as shown in equation
(7).
Table 2 (continued)

Vss Component

9
Calculated with an exchange rate of $COL 2,743.39 per dollar, corre-
sponding to the average value of the currency for the year 2015 (Banco de la
República de Colombia, 2012). This Poverty Line value corresponds to the re-
ference year 2015.

9
L. Berrouet, et al.
Fig. 2. Procedure for the calculation of the Vss index: Where (i) is the estimation of social vulnerability per beneficiary (Vss/B) versus the change in the level of
provision of the ES (ΔESPL), (ii) is the average social vulnerability per beneficiary profile (Vss/PB), (iii) is the estimation of social vulnerability at the core work level
(Vss/B). (Source: the authors).
n
CS = ASourcen *ATecnon
(7)
i=1
The value of CS for the RGB used values between zero (0) and four
(4), where zero is a beneficiary that has no available substitution source
or even having all sources has technological barriers to its adoption.
Conversely, CS = 4 corresponds to a beneficiary with the availability of
all four sources, and who has no obstacles to the implementation of any
of them. Once the value of CS was obtained, it was standardized
through a ratio of maximum and minimum values (European
Commission (EC) et al., 2008; Soto and Schuschny, 2009)
2.3.3.4. Inherent Initial Vulnerability per Beneficiary (IIVB ) when facing
ΔESPL. In this study, the impact of ΔESPL in ΔB was evaluated
assuming NC and CS as constants. IIVB was estimated based on the
relationship between the partial indexes: ΔB, NC and, CS (Fig. 2 and
equation (1)). IIVB is interpreted as a beneficiary’s intrinsic
vulnerability given his/her levels of dependency and substitution
capacity, without individual or institutional adaptation strategies. In
this sense, high values from the index (IIVB > 0.75), are associated with
beneficiaries whose level of dependency is very high and/or who have a
low capacity of substitution. The combination of the partial indicators
that comprise IIVB allows for the classification of beneficiaries
according to the value obtained as shown in Appendix C – Table C.1
(Berrouet et al. 2019).
2.3.3.5. Beneficiary’s capacity for adaptation (CAB). Marsiglia (2017)
estimated an index of CAB of the beneficiaries of the service using a
principal component analysis. The index is as shown in equation (7).
n
i=1
CPi
ICASE =
ACP
n (7)
Five (n = 5) principal components (CPi ) that include socio-eco-
nomic and institutional variables were identified as follows: CP1:
technology and innovation, the beneficiary’s relationship with the in-
stitution; CP2: distribution of information and institutional efficiency;
CP3: diversification of economic activities (number of economic activ-
ities), community organization, and income level; CP4: access to public
services infrastructures; and CP5: ecological knowledge (Marsiglia,
2017). For the final estimation of CAB in this paper, we modified the
10
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
calculation of the diversification of economic activities and standar-
dized income level (CP3). For the first we used the level of diversifi-
cation of land use (% of the area) and for the second, the variable of
income was standardized with poverty line, which is explained above.
2.3.3.6. Beneficiary’s Final Inherent Vulnerability when facing ΔESPL (Vss/
B). Vss/B was estimated from the relationship between IIVB and CAB (the
adaptive capacity) (Fig. 2) (see Appendix C – Table C.2). Based on Luers
et al. (2003), the Vss/B can be interpreted as the minimum value of the
beneficiary’s vulnerability against the ΔESPL, once the adaptation
measures are undertaken. High values of Vss/B may indicate that the
beneficiary has an intrinsically high vulnerability (IIVB ) and a low
adaptive capacity (CA). Low values of this index are associated with low
intrinsic vulnerabilities and/or the beneficiary’s very high adaptive
capacities (CA).
2.3.4. Aggregating vulnerability indexes
Finally, the indexes obtained (box i in Fig. 2) were analyzed for the
different beneficiary profiles (Vss/PB) (box ii in Fig. 2) and aggregated
for each of the core workgroups (Vss/CW) (box iii in Fig. 2). The first was
estimated as the average of the various Vss/B in each of the profiles as
presented in equation (8), and the latter was calculated as the weighted
average of the Vss/PB. The weight (Wi ) is given by the rate between the
number of sampled beneficiaries in each of the profiles (BPB ) with re-
spect to the number of beneficiaries in the core workgroup (BCW )
(equation 9).
n
V
i = 1 ss / Bi
VSS / PB =
BPB (8)
Where VSS / PB is the social vulnerability per beneficiary profile, Vss / Bi is
social vulnerability per beneficiary and BPB is the total number of
beneficiaries in the beneficiary profile
n
VSS / CW = Wi *VSS / PBi; where Wi = BPB / BCW
i=1 (9)
Vss uses standardized values between -1 and 1. When the values are
close to 1, the beneficiary's final vulnerability Vss/B is higher than the
one of the beneficiaries whose Vss/B approaches -1. The beneficiaries
whose Vss/B is negative, can be thought of as resilient to the level of
L. Berrouet, et al. Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

Table 3
Partial indexes values and the estimation of the initial inherent vulnerability (IIV) and final inherent vulnerability (Vss) for different scenarios of
reduction of the level of water supply (S1: -1%, S3: -20%, S3: -41%, S4 : -60%, S5: -80%) is written for the sample evaluated (n = 139)a (Source:
the authors)

(a) The table presents dimensionless values after the process of calculation and standardization of the variables.
Bi: level benefits for the reference year (2015), NC: human need category, CS: substitution capacity, CAB: beneficiary’s Adaptative capacity
(PB4) Small cattle breeders, (PB5) Medium cattle breeders, (PB6) Big cattle breeders, (PB16) Small farmers of commercial crops, (PB17) Middle
and big monoculture farmers, (PB24) Familiar agriculture in rural area, (PB29) Small and medium cattle breeders, (PB30) Big cattle breeders,
(PB31) Indirect beneficiaries- other activities and (PB32) Indirect beneficiaries – renting

change evaluated. A beneficiary can be resilient because of two situa-
tions: (i) when the IIVB values are very low, explained by low levels of
dependency and/or high substitution capacity or (ii) by a high adaptive
capacity (Appendix C – Table C.2).
3. Results
property, which could be thought of as an advantage for adaptation
processes. However, in most of the beneficiary profiles except medium
to large monoculture producers and small and medium livestock pro-
ducers, the main land use exceeds 70% of the property’s area. This leads
to a lower capacity for the diversification of economic activities.

3.2. Estimation of Partial Indexes, Inherent Initial (IIV) and Final

3.1. Ecosystem Services and Beneficiary Profiles
Vulnerability (FIV)
Participants in the focus group identified a total of 25 ecosystem
3.2.1. Beneficiary´s Inherent Initial Vulnerability to ΔESPL (IIVB )
services (ES). In general, a higher proportion of participants identified
Between 80% and 90% of the beneficiaries are 0.01 to 6.80 times
and prioritized ecosystem services (Belmira: 31.25%, Donmatías:
above the poverty line, according to their annual income. The bene-
68.75%, Entrerríos y San ¨Pedro de Los Milagros: 66.67%, Santa Rosa
ficiaries who are closest to the poverty line in order are: (i) small cattle
de Osos: 61.54%), such as water for human and animal consumption
breeders, (ii) medium and large scaled cattle farmers who come from
(Appendix D-D.1). This identification is linked with the activities and
outside the region, (iii) family agriculture in a rural area, (iv) indirect
beneficiary profiles identified in the study area (Appendix D-D.2).
beneficiaries- other activities and (v) medium cattle breeders. This is
However, in the case of the Belmira municipality, 43.75% of partici-
consistent with their income and production level. Two beneficiaries
pants identified and prioritized regulation services and cultural services
from the large-scale cattle breeders and two from the Indirect bene-
(25%) (such as knowledge and eco-tourism). This is explained by the
ficiaries exceeded the reference value by more than 40 times.10
fact that the Páramo ecosystem is located in this municipality, and that
With regard to NC and CS present in beneficiary profiles, all profiles
most of its area is part of the Integrated Management District, which is a
gave a high rating to the contribution of the water supply to their
legal instrument for the protection and conservation of strategic regions
wellbeing. Middle and large monoculture farmers, small and medium
in the country. The municipalities with direct contact with the reservoir
cattle breeders and big cattle breeders gave the highest ratings to this
area, Donmatías (6.25%), Entrerríos y San Pedro de Los Milagros
relationship (NC ≥ 4.5). As mentioned previously, the maximum value
(6.67%) and Santa Rosa de Osos (7.69%), production of electric energy
of this index is 4 (1 in standardized value). The different profiles gen-
with hydropower plants was also identified.
erally have medium to low substitution capacities (Table 3). The
As explained in the previous section, ten beneficiary profiles were
highest capacities within the sample are found in medium cattle bree-
identified (see description of profiles in Appendix B - B.1). The domi-
ders, big cattle breeders, small farmers of commercial crops, and small
nant beneficiary profile in the sample throughout all municipalities was
cattle breeders. These profiles present fewer barriers when adopting
the profile associated with small livestock producers (code PB4,
technologies which allow them to replace the ES if necessary to main-
42.45%), followed by medium livestock producers (code PB5; 10.07%)
tain their benefit level. This is because either they have their own
and large livestock producers (code PB6 9.35%). 11.51% of all the
Indirect beneficiaries of other activities such as land leasing, potato
cultivation, and dairy farming (code PB31), were in the municipalities 10
These differences in income are consistent with the Gini coefficient of
of Santa Rosa de Osos, Donmatías and Belmira. Beneficiary profiles are 0.521 for the department of Antioquia in 2015 (Departamento Administrativo
generally characterized by having three or more land uses for their Nacional de Estadística, 2016).

11
L. Berrouet, et al. Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

Fig. 3. Behavior of the Vss index for the

scenarios of change in the level of
provision of the ES: (A) Analysis per
Beneficiary´s Profile and (B) Analysis
per Core Work. (PB4) Small cattle
breeders, (PB5) Medium cattle bree-
ders, (PB6) Big cattle breeders, (PB16)
Small farmers of commercial crops,
(PB17) Middle and big monoculture
farmers, (PB24) Familiar agriculture in
rural area, (PB29) Small and medium
cattle breeders, (PB30) Big cattle bree-
ders, (PB31) Indirect beneficiaries-
other activities and (PB32) Indirect
beneficiaries – renting, (CW0)
Neighborhoods located in urban areas,
(CW1) Labores (BEL), (CW2) Yuyal
(BEL), (CW3) Aragón (SRO), (CW4)
Ríogrande (SRO), (CW5) Caney (SRO),
(CW6) San Pedro de Los Milagros,
(CW7) Entrerríos, (CW8) Bellavista
(DM), (CW9) Las Ánimas (DM).
(Source: the authors).

resources (financial and/or technical) to implement the substitution
strategies, or because they could even implement them with external
resources through access to loans.
The lowest CS is seen in middle and big monoculture farmers
(Table 3). This beneficiary profile has certain barriers when it comes to
adopting technologies. This profile mainly carries out activities related
to potato cultivation, an activity that is characterized by an intensive
use in periods of two to three years of production. When the activity
begins to decrease in its profitability or in the face of extreme events
(i.e., reduction of the amount of water), the activity is usually aban-
doned. This explains why even if they have the resources that would
allow them to implement the strategies proposed, they opt for
abandoning the activity.
In the scenario with a 1% reduction in the flow rate, the changes in
the level of benefits are found to be very low; even the reductions in
income are less than 1% for all beneficiaries. Likewise, Vss / PB presents
negative values (less than zero) for the majority (75,54%) of the ben-
eficiaries interviewed. These results are congruent due to the fact that
ΔESPL in this scenario does not modify the income (benefits) with re-
spect to the reference year. Another reason these results are consistent
with the studies premises is the presence of a medium-high (0.50 to
0.75, standardized value) to high (standardized values, greater than
0.75) value for CS. According to the value of Vss / PB , obtained in this
exercise, it could be classified in a group called F, in which

12
L. Berrouet, et al. Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737

Table 4
Analysis per Core Work (CW) of the Final Inherent Vulnerability (VSS / CW ) for the Scenarios of Change in Water Service Provisioning. (Source: the authors)

Core work description Final Inherent Vulnerability per Core Work (Vss/CW) per scenario (S)

ID Name Number of beneficiaries per core work group S1:-1% S3:-20% S2:-41% S4:-60% S5:-80%
(nCW)

CW0 Neighborhoods located in urban areas 3 −0.526 −0.512 −0.460 −0.473 −0.481
CW1 Labores (Belmira) 18 −0.400 −0.289 −0.253 −0.251 −0.252
CW2 Yuyal (Belmira) 19 −0.527 −0.453 −0.371 −0.370 −0.373
CW3 Aragón (Santa Rosa de Osos) 13 −0.444 −0.482 −0.330 −0.291 −0.286
CW4 Río grande (Santa Rosa de Osos) 6 −0.579 −0.452 −0.197 −0.190 −0.186
CW5 Caney (Santa Rosa de Osos) 31 −0.442 −0.504 −0.433 −0.473 −0.440
CW6 San Pedro de los Milagros 12 −0.319 −0.289 0.023 0.032 0.037
CW7 Entrerríos 15 −0.504 −0.332 −0.356 −0.347 −0.351
CW8 Bellavista (Donmatias) 6 −0.372 −0.466 −0.385 −0.387 −0.391
CW9 Las Ánimas (Donmatias) 16 −0.570 −0.471 −0.406 −0.402 −0.401

CW0: Corresponds to beneficiaries who attended the workshops, but whose place of residence is in urban neighborhoods, so they are entitled to a different type of
homogeneous physical zoning, based on urban criteria not used in this exercise.

vulnerabilities are less than zero (see Appendix C for each group’s de-
scription).
When the scenario with a 41% to 50% reduction in the average flow
rate was analyzed, we found that three beneficiaries belonging to the
small cattle breeders and big cattle breeders’ profiles, move to the high
and medium-high IIVB category. This is mainly explained by their low
or absent substitution capacity. 56.83% of the beneficiaries remain in
group D, associated with low IIVB due to the high substitution capacity
of the beneficiaries. Lastly, 23.74% were classified in group E, which
even in this scenario show negative vulnerabilities, determined par-
tially by low changes in their benefits, and mainly by a high substitu-
tion capacity.
The other three hypothetical scenarios of reduction in the level of
water supply were also analyzed (S3: -20%, S4: -60% and S5: -80%). In
the previous scenarios, the incidence of these changes in the level of
benefits was evaluated, and the other partial indexes remained con-
stant. In these three hypothetical scenarios, just as for the S2 (-41%)
scenario, an increase in the value of the IIV was observed, moving from
values lower than zero (IIV < 0) in S1 to values very close or greater
than zero for S3, S4, and S5, as shown in Table 3. This table (gray
squares) shows that the values of IIV for small cattle breeders (PB4),
medium cattle breeders (PB5) and big cattle breeders (PB6) in S4 are
0.201; 0.155 and 0.235, respectively. In scenario S5, these values are
0.226; 0.164 and 0.239, respectively for the same profiles. Under these
two scenarios, these beneficiary profiles would be in a category of low
vulnerability.
In these hypothetical scenarios, 58.99% (S3: -20%); 10.07% (S4:
-60%) and 2.16% (S5: -80%) of the individuals remain in group F of IIV
(IIV < 0, while 2.88% (in S3) and 2.16% (in S4 and S5) moved to high
IIV categories for the evaluated change scenarios (groups A and B).
Finally, 33.81%; 71.22% and 76.26% of the individuals are classified in
the E group of IIV (for S3, S4, and S5, respectively) which shows an
increase of individuals in this low category of IIV in the S1 scenario, of
which 24.46% were classified in group E.
3.2.2. Adaptive Capacity (CAB)
The trend of the CAB is very consistent, with no marked differences
between the profiles (Table 3). According to Marsiglia (2017), this
index shows an average beneficiary’s capacity of adaptation to changes
in the levels of the provision of the ES. This is explained by the
homogeneity of the institutional variables at a municipal level. Big
cattle breeders and indirect beneficiaries - other activities, have the
lowest values for CAB. This is explained by the very low rating that the
beneficiaries gave to their relationship with the institutions present in
the area. Additionally, these profiles have a weak potential for di-
versification with regard to the use of their land, which limits their
possibility to adapt to the changes in the ecosystem services
Additionally, this adaptive capacity is highly determined by the
institutional component (CAins). This, in terms of risk management,
implies that individuals will depend on institutions and their support
networks for the implementation of strategies that allow them to adapt
to the consequences of the changes in the provision of the ecosystem
service (reduction of water resources, in this study) and/or improve
their adaptive capacity by reducing vulnerability. In this vein, institu-
tional efficiency and the reduction of asymmetries in terms of access to
training, programs, or strategies are relevant aspects for the strength-
ening of said capacity for adaptation.
Two particular cases which exemplify this phenomenon are small
cattle breeders and small farmers of commercial crops. In the case of
small cattle breeders, the influence of institutional and individual
characteristics is very similar (CAins=0.51 y CAB=0.49). This is con-
sistent with the aspects of participation and association of this type of
producer (such as their communal action groups and their relationship
with milk production cooperatives - Colanta and the Cooperativa
Lechera de Antioquia) which allow them to complement their capacities
for adaptation. These types of producers are characterized by their
more active presence in collective spaces and in those established by
governmental bodies. In stark contrast, the capacity of adaptation of
small farmers of commercial crops is mainly determined by their
characteristics (CAins=0.36 and CAind=0.64). This may be due to the
lack of representation of this economic activity throughout most of the
RGB.
3.2.3. Beneficiary’s Final Inherent Vulnerability to ΔESPL (Vss/B)
As shown in Table 3 for all scenarios (S1 and S5), the average
(Vss / PB ) for all beneficiary profiles is less than zero. This vulnerability is
classified in Group H (Berrouet et al., 2019)(Appendix C-C.1 and Ap-
pendix C-C.2), where the IIV is very low or even lower than zero and/or
the beneficiary has a high adaptive capacity. Around 88% of the ben-
eficiaries of the sample are in this group. In all scenarios, the change in
benefits is not high and the beneficiaries may have even substituted
sources of ES to maintain benefits. This is consistent with the dynamics
that we identified in the territory. For instance, for the months of
January-March (a very dry season, especially from 2015 to 2016), the
beneficiaries reported a reduction in water flows, but these decreases
did not affect the level of their benefits due to the availability of other
water sources (spring waters or the use of water from streams) or using
fodder to feed livestock and maintain the production.
This value of Vss / PB indicates that beneficiary profiles are able to
maintain their level of well-being in the scenarios of changes in the
surface water supply. It is important to highlight that these scenarios
did not contemplate variations in substitution capacity (CS) and
adaptive capacity (CA). For instance, in scenarios S3 and S4, reductions
in water flow would be accompanied by a reduction in the capacity of

13
L. Berrouet, et al.
substitution leading to an increase in the IIV and therefore the Vss.
The classification of beneficiaries into groups, according to the
value of Vss (Berrouet et al., 2019), showed that in scenario 1 (S1: -1%),
100% of the beneficiaries were classified in the Group H, that is to say,
Vss < 0. This is because the changes in the benefits in S1 are very low
and consequently the IIV values were less than zero and/or the users
presented high values in thier adaptive capacity. In scenario 2 (S2),
associated with a 41% reduction, 5.8% of the beneficiaries fall into
group G, 2.16% into groups F and E, and 0.72% fall into groups C and
D. The remaining 89.49% stay in group G. The hypothetical scenarios
(S3, S4, and S5) show a similar behavior to that of S2. However, it is
important to highligh that in S5, 2.16% are in Group B and 1.41% in
Group C, indicating a Medium-High Vss. In general, groups F and G are
associated with a low Vss and are characterized by low values of IIV or
high values of adaptive capacity, respectively. Vulnerability groups D
and E are characterized by a medium to medium-low Vss, determined
mainly by medium values of IIV and / or of the adaptive capacity. Fi-
nally, group B and C values are associated with medium to high values
of IIV and low levels of adaptive capacity.
As shown in Fig. 3 (part A), in scenario 1 (S1) the medium cattle
breeders (PB5) have the highest value for this index and the indirect
beneficiaries - other activities (PB31) the lowest. In the first case, these
beneficiaries have a greater potential for diversification (more uses in
their farms - less than 90% of their main economic activity), linking
their dairy activity with other uses such as essential food crops or crops
for local trade such as avocado and tamarillo. In the case of the Indirect
beneficiaries – other activities, the primary use of water is for human
consumption and domestic activities. This beneficiary’s primary water
source is the rural municipality aqueduct, with little or no access to
alternative sources.
In scenario 2 (S2), when the reduction in the average flow rate is
close to (41%), once again the PB5 presents values that show a higher
capacity to respond to the scenarios of change. The presence of this new
provision value leads to benefits not being affected. Conversely, the
small cattle breeder and big cattle breeder profiles, which have the
lowest average values, begin to see an affectation of their wellbeing in
this new scenario even when the maximum values of Vss are observed.
In these two profiles, positive values of vulnerability were obtained
(although low). Scenarios S3; S4 and S5 show behaviors similar to that
of S2 (Fig. 3). For all beneficiary profiles, due to the fact that there is a
more significant restriction in the provision of the service (water
supply), the level of benefits that are at risk increases.
Table 4 presents an analysis of the Vss for the core workgroup (CW).
As the table shows, the core workgroups show very similar values in S1,
which is explained by the fact that the institutional component of the
capacity to adapt is similar for the municipalities in the area in terms of
management capacities, equity, and efficiency concerning support for
the beneficiaries.
According to the definition proposed by Ifejika Speranza et al.
(2014), resilience in social-ecological contexts can be understood as the
value (threshold, limit) of a change in level ecosystem services for
which the social system is capable of maintaining its level of benefits. In
this sense, negative vulnerabilities (Vss < 0) can be understood as re-
silience. However, if Vss > 0, this indicates that the change in the level
of provision exceeds this limit and the beneficiary suffers an impact in
his/her level of well-being and loses the ability to maintain the current
level of benefits. In the case of scenarios 2 to 5, the core of San Pedro de
Los Milagros shows a variation in the resilience trend (Fig. 3). Although
the value of Vss in these scenarios is classified within the range of what
we consider low vulnerability, when comparing these values with that
was obtained for scenario 1 (all less than zero), this result suggests that
there is a modification in the wellbeing of beneficiaries, and/or a de-
crease in their ability to maintain their level of benefits in the scenarios
evaluated. In the Caney and Las Ánimas core workgroups, in addition to
the institutional efficiency of these municipalities, the beneficiaries of
these two CWs showed higher levels of diversification in the use of their
14
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
land. Although the main economic activity is livestock farming, it is
combined with other activities such as avocado cultivation, pig
farming, poultry farming, coffee farming, income for recreation, and
work in different fields (private and public). This allows the bene-
ficiaries to have a higher capacity to establish adaptation measures
when faced with the different scenarios.
4. Discussion
Traditionally, when calculating vulnerability, aspects such as the
level of income and education determine parameters for assessing social
vulnerability (Laterra et al., 2015; Mussetta et al., 2017). For example,
individuals with higher levels of income and/or education have a
higher capacity to establish measures to adapt to changes that affect
them. Previous literature has shown that this is not linear, and that the
variables that determine the vulnerability of a system will depend on
the type of threat it faces (Lampis, 2013; Luers et al., 2003). The results
of the research also show that the identification of differences between
the beneficiary’s vulnerability, beneficiary profiles, and physical zones
allows researchers to design particular intervention methods in terms of
socio-ecological risk management. These methods are based on vari-
ables that better explain the relationship between the beneficiary and
the natural resource at hand (Below et al., 2012; El-Zein and Tonmoy,
2017; Tapia et al., 2017). In this particular case study, both small- and
large-scale milk producers are less resilient to the proposed scenarios of
change. In both cases, this is explained by their capacity to adapt. In the
case of the small-scale producers, their low income limits their ability to
establish a method for adaptation. In the case of the large-scale pro-
ducers, the low diversification of their economic activities (dominant
land use higher than 90%) limits their ability to implement adaptive
measures (Ciftcioglu, 2017; Hahn et al., 2009). In terms of manage-
ment, both profiles require different intervention strategies. In the
former case, the strategy would be to improve the institutional capacity
to provide solutions and support, while in the latter case, it would be to
consider managing the property with a greater level of diversification
productive activities (i.e., agroforestry).
It is important to highlight that in this exercise, partial CS and CAB,
indexes were assumed as constants with the scenarios of change. It is
also important to consider additional situations that involve more de-
tailed information. For example, pressures and changes in the avail-
ability of substitution sources, which may have an impact on higher
levels of IIVB in beneficiaries. It is also important to include a gov-
ernance analyses that allows researchers to establish trends in the re-
lationship between beneficiaries and between them and the institutions
that surround them (Gunderson et al., 2016). This would allow for a
more precise assessment of the impact of these institutional aspects on
the processes of social system adaptation. Studies on the probability of
change of ecosystems that could provide substitute ES, as well as re-
search on trajectories of the socio-ecological systems, are needed to
improve the index we have presented in this study.
In this study, the index was applied to the change in the provision of
a single ES (i.e., change in the quantity of water), but changes in other
ES were not evaluated (i.e., change in water quality with production
and health impacts, soil as support - fertility - for livestock production).
Each of these would imply establishing a relationship between the level
of provision of the ES and its impact on the level of benefits obtained (as
was done in the case of the quantity of water) which exceeded the scope
and possibilities of this sutdy. However, having Vss indexes for the
different ES (prioritized in a given region) would allow a distinction to
be made in terms of which aspects of the relationship between social
systems and natural capital are most compromised by change in eco-
logical integrity. Understanding this phenomenon would enable de-
signing actions with a greater level of impact on the mitigation or re-
duction of vulnerability. This would also allow the aggregation of Vss
(i.e. by beneficiary profiles and/or zones) for changes in the provision
of multiple ES (Raudsepp-Hearne et al., 2010), which may provide
L. Berrouet, et al.
relevant information for the design of socio-ecological risk management
strategies. This is because a zone or profile with high Vss in the various
ES change scenarios analyzed, should be prioritized with regard to
being intervened with socio-ecological risk management processes.
The index is applicable to decision-making spaces such as the
POMCA - a planning and management instrument for river basins in
Colombia. The reason for this is that it analyses and evaluates the threat
or risk posed by extreme events that imply changes in the water supply
(quantity and quality) and would allow decision makers to consolidate
their management strategies. Although this input is technically and
operationally well defined, and even incorporates information on the
demand for water resources, both the structure of the plan and these
analyses do not include an SES approach, which means that zoning and
prioritization have higher physical weight. The use of this vulnerability
index would provide information about crucial aspects for the design of
adaptation and mitigation strategies such as
(i) identification and establishment of management programs (con-
servation and/or compatible uses) of areas with potential for
substitution in the face of changes in water supply,
(ii) strengthening of social capacities to improve the response to dif-
ferent change scenarios that address differences in beneficiary’s
profiles, and
(iii) assessment of the need for institutional capacity building to ad-
dress change scenarios.
5. Conclusions
The Results presented in this research project show the impact of
the interventions such as infrastructure projects and policies on the
dynamics of the socio-ecological systems and on the importance as-
signed to different ES. For the municipalities in the jurisdiction of the
RGB, since the 1960s, Colanta (One of the leading dairy cooperatives in
the area) has had an impact on the prevalence of livestock (dairy
farming) in the area. Milk farming is an activity that has attracted new
dairy factories and the consolidation of services for the agro-industrial
sector in urban areas. This economic activity is highly dependent on
water resources and that explains the fact that most of the beneficiaries
prioritize water-related ecosystem services as the most important ES for
them. In the Belmira Municipality, the higher priority given to reg-
ulating ES and the identification of cultural ES can be explained by the
impact of the programs for the conservation of the páramo ecosystem
and the high Andean páramo forest. These programs have allowed the
beneficiaries to participate in different activities in which information
about regulating ES has been delivered educationally. Additionally, this
municipality is home to the Páramo Santa Inés, which is a reference
point for tourism in the region. Finally, in Municipalities of Don Matías,
Entrerrios, San Pedro and Santa Rosa de Osos, the identification of the
power generation ES is linked to the construction and operation of the
Rio Grande II reservoir near these municipalities since the 1980s.
The framework proposed by Berrouet et al. (2018a), 2018b, allows
incorporating variables or parameters that determine social vulner-
ability in the face of processes of change in the level of provision of
ecosystem services. In this paper, the conceptual framework was made
operational, and some of the challenges highlighted in previous articles
by the authors were addressed - mainly concerning the information
limitations of working at the local level and the inclusion of different
beneficiaries with different uses and needs for the same ES. By fol-
lowing the methodological route proposed by the authors, information
was obtained from the different beneficiaries on their level of benefits
and the relationship between wellbeing associated with the ES which
was evaluated (i.e., water supply for different consumptive uses). Fur-
thermore, aspects related to the possibility of supplementing the cur-
rent level of provision of the ES with substitute sources were also in-
cluded in the analysis.
In terms of the operability of this index, we recognize that it
15
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
requires a significant amount of information, which may be one of the
main limitations in its application for decision making. Although the
analysis in this study was based on participatory methods, they do re-
quire economic and technical resources that may also restrict their use.
Additionally, it is important to highlight questions might arise re-
garding the quality of the information provided by the beneficiaries,
which may be incomplete, under or overestimating production levels
and cost values, which are important for the estimation of these partial
indexes. In this vein, it is necessary to corroborate these data points
with other available data. In this regard, the identification of the social-
ecological vulnerability at the regional level is highly recommended.
This can be done with less detailed information and then, in areas
where high vulnerabilities are evident, the calculation can be refined
with the index used in this paper. This method would obtain more
detailed information on the social vulnerability at a household level of
any given area. This allows for a more effective observation and ana-
lysis of the determining aspects of the vulnerability, which in turn leads
to establishing more effective and differentiated management mea-
sures.
Funding
This work was supported by (i) “Programa de investigación en la
gestión del riesgo asociado con cambio climático y ambiental en
cuencas hidrográficas’’, Convocatoria 543–2011 Colciencias and (ii)
“808-2018 Proyectos de ciencia, tecnología e innovación y su
contribución a los retos de país”- Colciencias.
Author statement
All authors equally contributed to all stages of the research and
manuscript preparation
Acknowledgments
We are thankful to researchers from TRASSE funded by ANR-17-
CE32-0012 for valuable comments and suggestions.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the
online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.
104737.
References
Adger, W.N., 1999. Social Vulnerability to Climate Change and Extremes in Coastal
Vietnam. World Development 27, 249–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X
(98)00136-3.
Álvarez, C., 2012. Programa de gestión ambiental a partir de un índice de sostenibilidad
de prácticas agrícolas y pecuarias en una microcuenca de montaña media (Tesis de
Maestría en Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo). Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede
Medellín.
Arcila Pulgarín, J., Farfán Valencia, F., Moreno, A., Salazar, L., Hincapie, E., 2007.
Capitulo 3: Factores que determinan la productividad del cafetal. Sistemas de
Producción de Café En Colombia.
Banco de la República de Colombia, 2012. Tasa de cambio del peso colombiano (TRM)
[WWW Document]. Banco Repúb. Banco Cent. Colomb. URL http://www.banrep.
gov.co/es/trm (accessed 4.15.18).
Barrios-Hernández, D., Olivera-Ángel, M., 2013. Análisis de la competitividad del sector
lechero: caso aplicado al norte de Antioquia. Colombia. Rev. Innovar J. Rev. Cienc.
Adm. Soc. 23, 33–41.
Below, T.B., Mutabazi, K.D., Kirschke, D., Franke, C., Sieber, S., Siebert, R., Tscherning,
K., 2012. Can farmers’ adaptation to climate change be explained by socio-economic
household-level variables? Glob. Environ. Change 22, 223–235. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.11.012.
Berrouet, L., Villegas-Palacio, C., Botero, V., 2019. A social vulnerability index to changes
in ecosystem services provision at local scale: A methodological approach. Environ.
Sci. Policy 93, 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.12.011.
Berrouet, L.M., Machado, J., Villegas-Palacio, C., 2018a. Vulnerability of socio—-
ecological systems: A conceptual Framework. Ecol. Indic. 84, 632–647. https://doi.
L. Berrouet, et al.
org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.07.051.
Berrouet, L.M., Villegas-Palacio, C., Botero, V., 2018b. A social vulnerability indicator to
changes in Ecosystem Services provision level at local scale: A methodological ap-
proach (Revise and rebsumit). .
Bohórquez, J., Neme, D., 2013. Diseño de una estructura de costos para pequeños avi-
cultores productores de huevo de la región oriente de Cundinamarca (Master Thesis).
EAFIT.
Builes Cedula, E.D., 2013. Cuantificación y análisis de sostenibilidad ambiental de la
huella hídrica agrícola y pecuaria de la cuenca del río Porce (Master Thesis).
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medellin, Medellín, Colombia.
Ciftcioglu, G.C., 2017. Assessment of the resilience of socio-ecological production land-
scapes and seascapes: A case study from Lefke Region of North Cyprus. Ecol. Indic.
73, 128–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.036.
Cisneros Zayas, E., González Robaina, F., Martínez Varona, R., López Seijas, T., García, R.,
Reynaldo, Á., 2015. Respuesta productiva del cafeto al manejo del riego 24. Función
agua-rendimiento. Rev. Cienc. Téc. Agropecu, pp. 5–11.
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia, (CORANTIOQUIA),
Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín, (UNAL), 2015. Actualización y
ajuste Plan de Ordenación y Manejo de la Cuenca de los Ríos Grande y Chico.
Municipios de Belmira, San Pedro de los Milagros, Entrerríos, Santa Rosa de Osos,
Donmatías y Yarumal. (No. Convenio Interadministrativo No. 967 de 2013).
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia y Universidad Nacional de
Colombia Sede Medellín.
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia, -CORANTIOQUIA, Universidad
Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín, -UNAL, 2012. Valoración Económica, ecológica
y socio-cultural de bienes y servicios en la Cuenca del Río Grande: Aproximación
conceptual y metodológica (No. Contrato 8811). Corporación Autónoma Regional del
Centro de Antioquia - CORANTIOQUIA.
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Centro de Antioquia, -CORANTIOQUIA, Universidad
Pontificia Bolivariana - UPB, 2015. Plan de ordenamiento del recurso hidríco para el
Río Grande y sus principales tributarios (Técnico No. Convenio Interadministrativo
1506-147). Medellín, Antioquia, Colombia.
Dávila Betancurth, J.C., et al., 2016. Variables Explicativas de la Vulnerabilidad Biofísica
y Socioeconómica al Cambio Climático en Agroecosistemas de la Cuenca del Río
Grande Antioquia (Master Thesis). Universidad Nacional de Colombia-Sede
Medellín.
Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, D., 2016. Pobreza Monetaria 2015:
Antioquia. (Boletín Técnico No. DIE-020-PD-01-r7_v2). Departamento Administrativo
Nacional de Estadística, Bogotá, Colombia.
Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, D, 2014. Geo3CNA [WWW
Document]. Geoportal 3er Censo Nac. Agropecu. URL https://geoportal.dane.gov.
co/geocna/index.html# (accessed 12.16.16). .
Dumenu, W.K., Obeng, E.A., 2016. Climate change and rural communities in Ghana:
Social vulnerability, impacts, adaptations and policy implications. Environ. Sci.
Policy 55 (Part 1), 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.10.010.
Eakin, H., Webhe, M., Ávila, C., Torres, G.S., Bojórquez-Tapia, L.A., 2006. A comparison
of the social vulnerability of grain farmers in Mexico and Argentina. Assess. Impacts
Adapt. Clim. Change AIACC Work. Pap. 29, 1–50.
El-Zein, A., Tonmoy, F.N., 2017. Nonlinearity, fuzziness and incommensurability in in-
dicator-based assessments of vulnerability to climate change: A new mathematical
framework. Ecol. Indic. 82, 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.06.034.
European Commission (EC), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,
SourceOECD (Online service) (Eds.), 2008. Handbook on constructing composite
indicators: methodology and user guide. OECD, Paris.
Farfán Valencia, F., 2012. Árboles con potencial para ser incorporados en sistemas
agroforestales con café.
Federación Nacional de Cafeteros, 2017. Tabla de precio interno de referencia para la
compra de caé pergamino seco por carga de 125Kg.
Fernández, M.E., 2013. Efectos del cambio climático en la producción y rendimiento de
cultivos por sectores (No. Contrato de Cooperación Técnica CO-T1150). Fondo
Financiero de Proyectos de Desarrollo – FONADE e Instituto de Hidrología,
Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales – IDEAM.
Fondo Nacional de la Porcicultura, 2016. Informe de precios porcinos reportados por
fuera de feria de ganados. Precios pagados al porcicultor. Ronda 16: del 16 al 22 de
abril de 2016. Estadísticas Económicas Semanales.
Gallopín, G.C., 2006. Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity.
Glob. Environ. Change, Resilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptation: A Cross-Cutting
Theme of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental
ChangeResilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptation: A Cross-Cutting Theme of the
International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change 16.
pp. 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.004.
García, A.O., 1997. Diagnostico Técnico de la Producción Lechera en Algunas
Explotaciones del Altiplano Norte de Antioquia. Rev. Fac. Nac. Agron. 50, 79–96.
Geilfus, F., 2005. 80 herramientas para el desarrollo participativo. IICA.
Gobernación de Antioquia, 2013a. Áreas sembradas, cosechadas, rendimiento y volumen
de Producción de algunos cultivos permanentes en Antioquia 2013. [WWW
Document]. URL http://www.antioquia.gov.co/planeacion/ANUARIO%202013/es-
CO/capitulos/produccion/agropecuario/cp-9-1-3.html (accessed 4.3.17). .
Gobernación de Antioquia, G., 2013b. Anuario Estadístico de Antioquia [WWW
Document]. Gob. Antioquia Piensa En Gd. URL http://www.antioquia.gov.co/index.
php/estadisticas-e-indicadores (accessed 12.19.16). .
González, M.C., Saldarriaga, G., de, J., Jaramillo, O., 2010. Estimación de la demanda de
agua: Conceptualización y dimensionamiento de la demanda hídrica sectorial.
Gunderson, L.H., Cosens, B., Garmestani, A.S., 2016. Adaptive governance of riverine and
wetland ecosystem goods and services. J. Environ. Manage., Adaptive Management
for Ecosystem Services 183 (Part 2), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.
16
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
2016.05.024.
Hahn, M.B., Riederer, A.M., Foster, S.O., 2009. The Livelihood Vulnerability Index: A
pragmatic approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change—A case
study in Mozambique. Glob. Environ. Change 19, 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gloenvcha.2008.11.002.
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., 2013. Common International Classification of Ecosystem
Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4.
Hinkel, J., 2011. Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity: Towards a clarification
of the science–policy interface. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 198–208. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.08.002.
Ifejika Speranza, C., Wiesmann, U., Rist, S., 2014. An indicator framework for assessing
livelihood resilience in the context of social–ecological dynamics. Glob. Environ.
Change 28, 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.06.005.
IPCC, 2014. In: Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Dokken, D.J., Mach, K.J., Mastrandrea, M.D.,
Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C., Girma, B., Kissel,
E.S., Levy, A.N., MacCracken, S., Mastrandrea, P.R., White, L.L. (Eds.), Climate
Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral
Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E., 2006. Resilience, vulnerability, and adaptation: A cross-cutting
theme of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental
Change. Glob. Environ. Change 16, 237–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.
2006.04.003.
Johnson, J.E., Welch, D.J., Maynard, J.A., Bell, J.D., Pecl, G., Robins, J., Saunders, T.,
2016. Assessing and reducing vulnerability to climate change: Moving from theory to
practical decision-support. Mar. Policy 74, 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2016.09.024.
Kumar, P., Geneletti, D., Nagendra, H., 2016. Spatial assessment of climate change vul-
nerability at city scale: A study in Bangalore. India. Land Use Policy 58, 514–532.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.08.018.
Lampis, A., 2013. Vulnerabilidad y adaptación al cambio climático: debates acerca del
concepto de vulnerabilidad y su medición. Cuad. Geogr. Rev. Colomb. Geogr. 22,
17–33.
Laterra, P., Barral, P., Carmona, A., Nahuelhual, L., 2015. Protocolo colaborativo de
evaluación y mapeo de servicios ecosistémicos y vulnerabilidad socio-ecológica para
el ordenamiento territorial. Documento introductorio. Versión 2.0, 1st ed.
Publicación Técnica. INTA Ediciones, Argentina.
Lavell, A., Oppenheimer, M., Diop, C., Hess, J., Lempert, R., Li, J., Muir-Wood, R.,
Myeong, S., Moser, S., Takeuchi, K., Cardona, O.-D., Hallegatte, S., Lemos, M., Little,
C., Lotsch, A., Weber, E., 2012. Climate Change: New Dimensions in Disaster Risk,
Exposure, Vulnerability, and Resilience. In: Field, C.B., Barros, V., Stocker, T.F.,
Dahe, Q. (Eds.), Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance
Climate Change Adaptation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 25–64.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139177245.004.
López-Gómez, C., 2014. Perfil de beneficiarios, servicios ecosistémicos en la Cuenca del
río Grande y Chico. departamento de Antioquia, Colombia. Working paper.
López-Gómez, C., 2012. Cartografía social: instrumento de gestión social e indicador
ambiental (Tesis de Maestría en Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo). Universidad Nacional
de Colombia, Sede Medellin, Medellín.
Luers, A.L., Lobell, D.B., Sklar, L.S., Addams, C.L., Matson, P.A., 2003. A method for
quantifying vulnerability, applied to the agricultural system of the Yaqui Valley.
Mexico. Glob. Environ. Change 13, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-
3780(03)00054-2.
Machado, J., Villegas-Palacio, C., Loaiza, J.C., Castañeda, D.A., 2019. Soil natural capital
vulnerability to environmental change. A regional scale approach for tropical soils in
the Colombian Andes. Ecol. Indic. 96, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.
2018.08.060.
Marsiglia, S., 2017. Capacidad adaptativa de los sistemas sociales ante la perdida o de-
terioro de los servicios ecosistémicos (Master Thesis). Universidad Nacional de
Colombia-Sede Medellín.
Metzger, M.J., Leemans, R., Schröter, D., 2005. A multidisciplinary multi-scale framework
for assessing vulnerabilities to global change. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation
7, 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2005.06.011.
Metzger, M.J., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Acosta-Michlik, L., Leemans, R., Schröter, D., 2006.
The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land use change. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
114, 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.025.
Ministerio de Agricultura y. Desarrollo Rural, Departamento Administrativo Nacional de
Estadística, D, 2013. Levante y ceba de cerdos: etapas de una industria en continuo
crecimiento. Bol. Mens. Insumos Factores Asoc. Prod. Agropecu, pp. 60.
Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible - MADS, Instituto de Hidrología,
Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales - IDEAM, 2014. Estudio Nacional del Agua
2014 (Técnico). Colombia.
Mussetta, P., Barrientos, M.J., Acevedo, E., Turbay, S., Ocampo, O., 2017. Vulnerabilidad
al cambio climático: Dificultades en el uso de indicadores en dos cuencas de
Colombia y Argentina. Empiria Rev. Metodol. Cienc. Soc. 0, 119–147. https://doi.
org/10.5944/empiria.36.2017.17862.
Ospina Salazar, O., Duque Orrego, H., Farfán Valencia, F., 2003. Análisis económico de la
producción de fincas cafeteras convencionales y orgánicas en transición, en el de-
partamento de Caldas. Cenicafé 54, 197–207.
Perfetti, J.J., Escobar, D., Castro, F., Cuervo, B., Rodríguez, M., Vargas, J.I., Matínez
Bustos, S., Cortés Acosta, S., 2012. Costos de Producción de Doce Productos
Agropecuarios. Fedesarrollo.
Qiu, B., Li, H., Zhou, M., Zhang, L., 2015. Vulnerability of ecosystem services provisioning
to urbanization: A case of China. Ecol. Indic. 57, 505–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ecolind.2015.04.025.
L. Berrouet, et al.
Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G.D., Bennett, E.M., 2010. Ecosystem service bundles for
analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 5242–5247.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907284107.
Rey-Valette, H., Mathé, S., Salles, J.M., 2017. An assessment method of ecosystem ser-
vices based on stakeholders perceptions: The Rapid Ecosystem Services Participatory
Appraisal (RESPA). Ecosyst. Serv., SI:Servicing ES-EcoSummit16 28, 311–319.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.08.002.
Secretaria de Medio Ambiente de la Alcaldía de Medellín, Corporación Autónoma
Regional del Centro de Antioquia, -CORANTIOQUIA, 2013. Corporación Autonóma
de los Ríos Negro y Nare - CORNARE, Área Metropolitana del Valle de Aburrá -
AMVA, Centro de Ciencia y Tecnología de Antioquia - CTA, Agencia Suiza para el
Desarrollo y la Coperación - COSUDE, Empresas Públicas de Medellín - EPM,
Universidad de Antioquia - UdeA, Universidad de Medellín - UM, Universidad
Pontificia Bolivariana - UPB, Tecnológico de Antioquia - TDA, Centro de Producción
más limpia y tecnologías ambientales, Good Stuff International, World Wildlife Fund
- WWF, UNESCO, Universidad Politénica de Cataluña. Evaluación de la huella hidríca
en la Cuenca del Río Porce (Resumen de Resultados) (Técnico), Colombia.
17
Land Use Policy 97 (2020) 104737
Smit, B., Wandel, J., 2006. Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob.
Environ. Change 16, 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008.
Soto, H., Schuschny, A.R., 2009. Guía metodológica: diseño de indicadores compuestos de
desarrollo sostenible.
Tapia, C., Abajo, B., Feliu, E., Mendizabal, M., Martinez, J.A., Fernández, J.G., Laburu, T.,
Lejarazu, A., 2017. Profiling urban vulnerabilities to climate change: An indicator-
based vulnerability assessment for European cities. Ecol. Indic. 78, 142–155. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.02.040.
Tobón Cardona, J., 1989. El Potencial de Producción de la Agricultura Campesina
Colombiana | Tobón Cardona | Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía. Rev. Fac.
Nac. Agron. Medellín 42, 11–18.
Villegas-Palacio, C., Berrouet, L., López, C., Ruiz, A., Upegui, A., 2016. Lessons from the
integrated valuation of ecosystem services in a developing country: Three case studies
on ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation. Ecosyst. Serv., Integrated va-
luation of ecosystem services: challenges and solutions 22 (Part B), 297–308. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.10.017.