Suchergebnisse

© 2018 Ecosystems around the world generate a wide range of services. Often, there are trade-offs in ecosystem service provision. Managing such trade-offs requires governance of interdependent action situations. We distinguished between (1) enhancing action situations where beneficiaries create, maintain, or improve an ESS and (2) appropriation action situations where actors subtract from a flow of ESS. We classified ESSs in order to identify focal action situations and link them to ESS governance types which are likely to strengthen sustainable ecosystem management. The classification is applied to six forest cases in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Our results confirm that ecosystem management, which more strongly supports the provision of public goods and common pool resources, is often under strong pressure to be transformed into systems that mainly provide private goods. This can be partly explained by incentive constellations in the action situations of public goods and common pool resources. Therefore, governance has to be adapted to specific ESSs. ESS governance needs to identify institutions which best fit to different ESSs and to harmonize them for all the ESSs provided by the system. Our approach helps to understand why institutions fail or succeed in maintaining ESSs.

Loske, R.: Die Zukunft der Umweltpolitik in den transatlantischen Beziehungen. S. 4-25. Moltke, K. von: U.S. foreign environmental policy: A new era in transatlantic relations? S. 26-43. ... Spangenberg, J.: Tansatlantic environmental perspectives: An NGO point of view. S. 54-58. Dittmann, B.: Die Zukunft der transatlantischen Umwelt- und Klimapolitik. Eine Einschätzung aus der Sicht der Industrie. S. 59-67. Bleischwitz, R.: Wissenschaftsbeziehungen in der transatlantischen Umwlt- und Klimapolitik. S. 68-69. ... Mors, M.: The future of transatlantic relations in the field of climate policy. S. 128-133. Müller, M.: Die Ökologische Domino-Strategie. S. 134-137. Schafhausen, F.: Stand und Umsetzung des CO2-Minderungsprogramms der Bundesregierung. S. 138-144

© 2017, The Author(s). In a cross-disciplinary project (LEGATO) combining inter- and transdisciplinary methods, we quantify the dependency of rice-dominated socio-ecological systems on ecosystem functions (ESF) and the ecosystem services (ESS) the integrated system provides. In the collaboration of a large team including geo- and bioscientists, economists, political and cultural scientists, the mutual influences of the biological, climate and soil conditions of the agricultural area and its surrounding natural landscape have been analysed. One focus was on sociocultural and economic backgrounds, another on local as well as regional land use intensity and biodiversity, and the potential impacts of future climate and land use change. LEGATO analysed characteristic elements of three service strands defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA): (a) provisioning services: nutrient cycling and crop production; (b) regulating services: biocontrol and pollination; and (c) cultural services: cultural identity and aesthetics. However, in line with much of the current ESS literature, what the MA called supporting services is treated as ESF within LEGATO. As a core output, LEGATO developed generally applicable principles of ecological engineering (EE), suitable for application in the context of future climate and land use change. EE is an emerging discipline, concerned with the design, monitoring and construction of ecosystems and aims at developing strategies to optimise ecosystem services through exploiting natural regulation mechanisms instead of suppressing them. Along these lines LEGATO also aims to create the knowledge base for decision-making for sustainable land management and livelihoods, including the provision of the corresponding governance and management strategies, technologies and system solutions.

International audience ; The COVID-19 pandemic, its impact on the global economy, and current delays in the negotiation of the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity heighten the urgency to build back better for biodiversity, sustainability, and well-being. In 2019 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) concluded that addressing biodiversity loss requires a transformative change of the global economic system. Drawing on the IPBES findings, this policy perspective discusses actions in four priority areas to inform the post-2020 agenda: (1) Increasing funding for conservation; (2) redirecting incentives for sustainability; (3) creating an enabling regulatory environment; and (4) reforming metrics to assess biodiversity impacts and progress toward sustainable and just goals. As the COVID-19 pandemic has made clear, and the negotiations for the post-2020 agenda have emphasized, governments are indispensable in guiding economic systems and must take an active role in transformations, along with businesses and civil society. These key actors must work together to implement actions that combine short-term impacts with structural change to shift economic systems away from a fixation with growth toward human and ecological well-being. The four priority areas discussed here provide opportunities for the post-2020 agenda to do so.

International audience ; The COVID-19 pandemic, its impact on the global economy, and current delays in the negotiation of the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity heighten the urgency to build back better for biodiversity, sustainability, and well-being. In 2019 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) concluded that addressing biodiversity loss requires a transformative change of the global economic system. Drawing on the IPBES findings, this policy perspective discusses actions in four priority areas to inform the post-2020 agenda: (1) Increasing funding for conservation; (2) redirecting incentives for sustainability; (3) creating an enabling regulatory environment; and (4) reforming metrics to assess biodiversity impacts and progress toward sustainable and just goals. As the COVID-19 pandemic has made clear, and the negotiations for the post-2020 agenda have emphasized, governments are indispensable in guiding economic systems and must take an active role in transformations, along with businesses and civil society. These key actors must work together to implement actions that combine short-term impacts with structural change to shift economic systems away from a fixation with growth toward human and ecological well-being. The four priority areas discussed here provide opportunities for the post-2020 agenda to do so.

International audience ; The COVID-19 pandemic, its impact on the global economy, and current delays in the negotiation of the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity heighten the urgency to build back better for biodiversity, sustainability, and well-being. In 2019 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) concluded that addressing biodiversity loss requires a transformative change of the global economic system. Drawing on the IPBES findings, this policy perspective discusses actions in four priority areas to inform the post-2020 agenda: (1) Increasing funding for conservation; (2) redirecting incentives for sustainability; (3) creating an enabling regulatory environment; and (4) reforming metrics to assess biodiversity impacts and progress toward sustainable and just goals. As the COVID-19 pandemic has made clear, and the negotiations for the post-2020 agenda have emphasized, governments are indispensable in guiding economic systems and must take an active role in transformations, along with businesses and civil society. These key actors must work together to implement actions that combine short-term impacts with structural change to shift economic systems away from a fixation with growth toward human and ecological well-being. The four priority areas discussed here provide opportunities for the post-2020 agenda to do so.

International audience ; The COVID-19 pandemic, its impact on the global economy, and current delays in the negotiation of the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity heighten the urgency to build back better for biodiversity, sustainability, and well-being. In 2019 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) concluded that addressing biodiversity loss requires a transformative change of the global economic system. Drawing on the IPBES findings, this policy perspective discusses actions in four priority areas to inform the post-2020 agenda: (1) Increasing funding for conservation; (2) redirecting incentives for sustainability; (3) creating an enabling regulatory environment; and (4) reforming metrics to assess biodiversity impacts and progress toward sustainable and just goals. As the COVID-19 pandemic has made clear, and the negotiations for the post-2020 agenda have emphasized, governments are indispensable in guiding economic systems and must take an active role in transformations, along with businesses and civil society. These key actors must work together to implement actions that combine short-term impacts with structural change to shift economic systems away from a fixation with growth toward human and ecological well-being. The four priority areas discussed here provide opportunities for the post-2020 agenda to do so.

International audience ; The COVID-19 pandemic, its impact on the global economy, and current delays in the negotiation of the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity heighten the urgency to build back better for biodiversity, sustainability, and well-being. In 2019 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) concluded that addressing biodiversity loss requires a transformative change of the global economic system. Drawing on the IPBES findings, this policy perspective discusses actions in four priority areas to inform the post-2020 agenda: (1) Increasing funding for conservation; (2) redirecting incentives for sustainability; (3) creating an enabling regulatory environment; and (4) reforming metrics to assess biodiversity impacts and progress toward sustainable and just goals. As the COVID-19 pandemic has made clear, and the negotiations for the post-2020 agenda have emphasized, governments are indispensable in guiding economic systems and must take an active role in transformations, along with businesses and civil society. These key actors must work together to implement actions that combine short-term impacts with structural change to shift economic systems away from a fixation with growth toward human and ecological well-being. The four priority areas discussed here provide opportunities for the post-2020 agenda to do so.

International audience ; Humans play an undeniable role in the acceleration of threats to the diversity of ecosystems, species and genes. This book is a response to the urgent need of policy oriented socio-ecological research, profoundly based on empirical evidence. Socio-environmental patterns and political responses are compared through the use of case studies analyzing a range of pressures to biodiversity. Aquatic bioinvasions in the Ebro River and Lake Izabal exemplify socio-environmental processes linked to river basins. Other cases examine processes at the regional level: the social attitudes to genetically modified organisms in Catalan agriculture, the implementation of a Regional Strategy for Biodiversity in the I^le-de-France, the management of an invasive insect in the city of Paris, and the comparative analysis in Kent (UK) and Tartu (Estonia) county of the effects of the Common Agricultural Policy on pollinators' diversity. An economic valuation of the decline of pollinators in Germany and Spain, and an analysis of land use changes in the new EU member states focus on processes at the national scale within the EU frame. A case study in Argentina, about the emergence of pesticide resistance in an invasive pest, embodies the relationship between a national state and the processes of the world economy. The ALARM project aims to promote creative thinking. Inspired by ecological economics, methodologies employed range from multi-criteria evaluation and participatory techniques to social network analysis, valuation of environmental services, scenario modelling and historical analysis. The authors have uniquely explored case-study-based research for socio-economic analyses of biodiversity risks. Emphasis is put both on the lessons learnt from the comparative analysis as well as on the methodological innovations.

International audience ; Humans play an undeniable role in the acceleration of threats to the diversity of ecosystems, species and genes. This book is a response to the urgent need of policy oriented socio-ecological research, profoundly based on empirical evidence. Socio-environmental patterns and political responses are compared through the use of case studies analyzing a range of pressures to biodiversity. Aquatic bioinvasions in the Ebro River and Lake Izabal exemplify socio-environmental processes linked to river basins. Other cases examine processes at the regional level: the social attitudes to genetically modified organisms in Catalan agriculture, the implementation of a Regional Strategy for Biodiversity in the I^le-de-France, the management of an invasive insect in the city of Paris, and the comparative analysis in Kent (UK) and Tartu (Estonia) county of the effects of the Common Agricultural Policy on pollinators' diversity. An economic valuation of the decline of pollinators in Germany and Spain, and an analysis of land use changes in the new EU member states focus on processes at the national scale within the EU frame. A case study in Argentina, about the emergence of pesticide resistance in an invasive pest, embodies the relationship between a national state and the processes of the world economy. The ALARM project aims to promote creative thinking. Inspired by ecological economics, methodologies employed range from multi-criteria evaluation and participatory techniques to social network analysis, valuation of environmental services, scenario modelling and historical analysis. The authors have uniquely explored case-study-based research for socio-economic analyses of biodiversity risks. Emphasis is put both on the lessons learnt from the comparative analysis as well as on the methodological innovations.

International audience ; Humans play an undeniable role in the acceleration of threats to the diversity of ecosystems, species and genes. This book is a response to the urgent need of policy oriented socio-ecological research, profoundly based on empirical evidence. Socio-environmental patterns and political responses are compared through the use of case studies analyzing a range of pressures to biodiversity. Aquatic bioinvasions in the Ebro River and Lake Izabal exemplify socio-environmental processes linked to river basins. Other cases examine processes at the regional level: the social attitudes to genetically modified organisms in Catalan agriculture, the implementation of a Regional Strategy for Biodiversity in the I^le-de-France, the management of an invasive insect in the city of Paris, and the comparative analysis in Kent (UK) and Tartu (Estonia) county of the effects of the Common Agricultural Policy on pollinators' diversity. An economic valuation of the decline of pollinators in Germany and Spain, and an analysis of land use changes in the new EU member states focus on processes at the national scale within the EU frame. A case study in Argentina, about the emergence of pesticide resistance in an invasive pest, embodies the relationship between a national state and the processes of the world economy. The ALARM project aims to promote creative thinking. Inspired by ecological economics, methodologies employed range from multi-criteria evaluation and participatory techniques to social network analysis, valuation of environmental services, scenario modelling and historical analysis. The authors have uniquely explored case-study-based research for socio-economic analyses of biodiversity risks. Emphasis is put both on the lessons learnt from the comparative analysis as well as on the methodological innovations.