The TEEB approach to the use of ecosystem services has found its way to policy as a means to biodiversity conservation and greening of the economy. In this paper we analysed the uptake of the TEEB approach at national and local levels by applying a framework that revolves around the problem, approach and solution frame. At the national level (United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands) TEEB is mainly used to develop integrated decision making. In policy documents the importance of clearly formulated divisions of tasks is emphasised, while the practical implementation is transferred to lower government levels and stakeholders from the private sector. At the local level explorative studies are implemented, while a shared vision is often a major outcome of such processes. Shared visions are directed to incentives and management plans and also point to new societal challenges for future development. The uptake of an ecosystem services approach requires new types of contracts, ample resources, sufficient knowledge and new modes of governance to attract societal involvement. The research suggests that long term engagement of stakeholders in the participatory processes was however not guaranteed due to insufficient resources. Keywords
How can companies successfully integrate the sustainable management of ecosystems and biodiversity into their business models? This was the central question at the international conference 'Business Meets Biodiversity' held in Utrecht, The Netherlands, on June 27th 2012. The organizing committee, consisting of the Copernicus Institute of Utrecht University in cooperation with the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, Hivos, Rabobank Group, WWF-NL and Tropenbos International, brought together a unique showcase of international frontrunner companies and experts to demonstrate the potential of business to have a neutral or even positive impact on nature. The conference made clear that profitable business can go hand in hand with a positive balance for nature; while 'no-net-loss' of biodiversity is rapidly becoming the new norm in business. The economic damage resulting from the global loss and degradation of biodiversity and ecosystems is enormous. In 2010, the loss of biodiversity amounted to EUR 545 billion, in comparison to the year 2000. Biodiversity loss results in a decline of the capacity to produce goods (e.g. food, timber) and of vital services for human well-being such as water purification, pollination and climate regulation. The loss of ecosystem goods and services implies large risks for business as well. Examples are the increasing scarcity and costs of resources, disruption of operations, restricted access to land and resources and reputational risk. At the same time, the business sector is a key contributor to this ecological decline. An increasing number of companies worldwide recognizes the need to incorporate the conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity in their business strategies. During the conference, small and medium-sized companies, investors, researchers and multinationals - including Rabobank, Unilever, DSM and Dow Chemical - from across the world shared their experiences regarding the development of 'no-net-loss' business, i.e. business operations with a neutral or even positive overall net effect on ecosystems and biodiversity. They also addressed the question of how to scale up promising initiatives. In summary, over 20 international experts provided presentations to more than 160 high-level attendees from the business sector, government and NGOs. The conference clearly demonstrated the potential of doing business with a neutral or even positive impact on biodiversity. Although the existing 'no-net-loss' success stories often still operate at a small scale, they provide excellent examples for larger companies. A widely held view was that companies need to better quantify their dependencies and impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity, as a key first step in implementing a no-net-loss strategy. Also, both companies and government representatives expressed the need for large-scale restoration of degraded ecosystems. In particular at the landscape level, professional cooperation between government agencies, businesses, the financial sector and NGOs is needed to successfully implement such large-scale solutions.
Governments around the world try to stimulate the development and use of renewable energy technologies, like wind energy. While wind turbines are increasingly being implemented, however, a lack of social acceptance at the local level remains an important challenge for developers of wind power plants. This article aims to explore the relative importance of social and institutional conditions and their interdependencies in the operational process of planning wind power schemes. The article not only focuses on how negative local social conditions can frustrate public policy (cf. NIMBY syndrome), but also on how positive local social conditions can compensate for a negative public policy framework. We analyzed the cases of implementing wind power of two actors (the regional energy distributor and small private investors) in the municipality of Zeewolde, the Netherlands. Both cases illustrate that the formal institutional framework (formal rules, procedures and instruments) is neutral in a certain sense. Social conditions - management styles, interests and informal contacts - put meaning in this framework. The way stakeholders deal with the prevailing institutional structure clarifies social acceptance and therewith implementation.
