No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Plural valuation of nature for equity and sustainability: Insights from the Global South
Abstract
Plural valuation is about eliciting the diverse values of nature articulated by different stakeholders in order to inform decision making and thus achieve more equitable and sustainable outcomes. We explore what approaches align with plural valuation on the ground, as well as how different social-ecological contexts play a role in translating plural valuation into decisions and outcomes. Based on a co-constructed analytical approach relying on empirical information from ten cases from the Global South, we find that plural valuation contributes to equitable and sustainable outcomes if the valuation process: 1) is based on participatory value elicitation approaches; 2) is framed with a clear action-oriented purpose; 3) provides space for marginalized stakeholders to articulate their values in ways that can be included in decisions; 4) is used as a tool to identify and help reconcile different cognitive models about human-nature relations; and 5) fosters open communication and collaboration among stakeholders. We also find that power asymmetries can hinder plural valuation. As interest and support for undertaking plural valuation grows, a deeper understanding is needed regarding how it can be adapted to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability.
... Through proposals to include non-monetary valuations, scholars have claimed and demonstrated that there is a plurality of values associated with nature, which can hardly be based only on monetary or instrumental considerations yet are significant for society or communities (Kenter et al. 2015;Kenter 2016;Raymond et al. 2014). Furthermore, taking account of the plurality of values has been considered a critical element for environmental justice and ecological sustainability (Sikor et al. 2014;Svarstad and Benjaminsen 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020;Guibrunet et al. 2021). ...
... Furthermore, scholars have increasingly appreciated how values, affections, and emotions have to be considered in environmental policies and management strategies. However, despite increasing documentation and validation of the plural values of nature among scholars, there are still unresolved questions about how such values can be included and enabled in practice in environmental governance and community forestry and forest conservation in particular (García-López 2018; Monroy-Sais et al. 2018;Turnhout 2018;Sierra-Huelsz et al. 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020;Guibrunet et al. 2021). These questions are evident insofar as the current strategies seeking to influence people's interactions with their environment are still guided by models of rational choice, conventional economics, and monetary incentives (Zografos and Howarth 2010;Irvine et al. 2016). ...
... These questions have pointed out the ethical and substantive limitations of instrumental and individualist rationalities in terms of their impacts on environmental justice and social sustainability. In response to such critique, scholars have increasingly proposed deliberative approaches for considering the wide variety of valuation mechanisms that could recognize and integrate plural values of nature into decision making and action (Aragão, Jacobs, and Cliquet 2016;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020;Lam et al. 2020;Leventon, Duşe, and Horcea-Milcu 2021). Approaches toward a wide variety of valuation mechanisms aim to recognize that societies produce and reproduce both exchangeable monetary values and 'meaningful use values' (Porto-Gonçalves and Leff 2015;Allen 2018). ...
Community forestry has been suggested as a viable alternative to balance the needs of people and forest sustainability. Drawing upon analytical frameworks of environmental justice, we explore how community forestry has reshaped the plural values of forest and the collective capacities of communities. Based on an ethnographic study in a community in Oaxaca, we investigate the plural values of forests presented in the daily practices of community members and how such values are recognized in decision-making spaces. In our analysis two key aspects are considered: deliberation and social accountability. The study shows that deliberation in the community has mainly focused on assessing the instrumental values placed on the forest and expanding the economic capacities of the community. Social accountability is prominent in the community but is still limited due to limited access of community members to accountability in multilevel governance. We conclude that deliberation and social accountability as collective capacities are crucial for evaluating the actions and performances of the authorities and representatives, and for appraisal of the shared values community members hold of forests. Yet the exclusion of women from spaces of decision-making limits the recognition of the plural values of forests.
... Furthermore, they highlight a role for values in transformation and that scenario planning or futuring processes can assist in surfacing multiple values, creating spaces for negotiating and assessing trade-offs and synergies to identify opportunities for transformation. Instrumental, relational and intrinsic values of nature are currently not effectively evaluated, considered and integrated into the varied and multiple decision-making contexts (both formal government process and informal, and from local to global scales) that shape both our environment and our collective future Harmáčková et al., 2021;Pascual et al., 2017;Vásquez-Fernández & Ahenakew pii tai poo taa, 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). ...
... Systematic literature reviews on learning in environmental governance (Crona & Parker, 2012;Gerlak et al., 2017Gerlak et al., , 2020 and transformative learning (Rodríguez Aboytes & Barth, 2020), complemented by literature on diverse values (Dendoncker et al., 2018;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020) indicates the following enablers of learning processes that promote the inclusion of diverse values for just and sustainable futures. ...
... Collaboration and plural participation in environmental governance are essential for learning processes that promote sustainable and just futures (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). To better ensure that learning with, from and for diverse values occurs, it is important to include it as an explicit objective of the process of transformative environmental governance (Gerlak et al., 2017). ...
The chapter assesses the role of nature's diverse values in supporting social-ecological transformations towards more just and sustainable futures. This is approached as a two-fold and mutually complementing task: a) assessing the diverse values that have been considered in developing and creating visions for, and scenarios of the future, particularly those relating to more just and sustainable futures; and b) assessing how interventions to incorporate more plural valuation into decisions can serve as leverage points for enabling and governing transformation towards just and sustainable futures.
There is a substantial and well-established body of specialised literature on visions and scenarios of socio-ecological futures. A systematic review methodology was employed to assess the role of values and the types of values contained within this body of work. The protocol for this review operationalises the key concepts of
values of nature”, “justice” and “sustainability” elaborated within the wider values assessment and in this chapter. This review of published science is complemented with reviews of grey literature and creative arts.
The specialised literature on transformations and transitions to
ustainability is comparatively recent and is diverse in terms of its primary concepts and units of analysis. For this reason, a two-stage
process of literature review was adopted involving a) expert review to identify and synthesise the main concepts and relationships found in expert selected literatures followed by b) a systematic review using qualitative content analysis and c) a case study of how values are treated in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAP) interventions.
The decision-making typology and framework for the values assessment introduced in Chapter 1 is used as a basis for mapping governance forms and their associated characteristics (such as regime fit, scale and interplay, and the degree to which they - foster adaptiveness, knowledge co-production, and emergence of new actors) in the context of governing the uptake of diverse values of nature as part of a process of transformation towards just and sustainable futures.
These broader reviews and analyses are complemented by expert-led case studies exploring the role of values and valuation in four alternative pathways of transformation: green economy, degrowth,
earth stewardship, and nature protection.
... Está bien establecido en la literatura que la identificación de Contribuciones de la naturaleza a las personas (CNP considerado en esta publicación sinónimo de servicios ecosistémicos (SE) ya que el concepto de base es el mismo según Díaz et al., 2018;Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) y su valoración o evaluación integral debe basarse en un proceso participativo (Boeraeve et al., 2018;Pascual et al., 2017;Rincón-Ruiz et al., 2019;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). La participación de la comunidad en la identificación de CNP conduce a generar una evaluación pertinente para la toma de decisiones para abordar las problemáticas de la región (Rincón-Ruiz et al., 2019). ...
... La participación de la comunidad en la identificación de CNP conduce a generar una evaluación pertinente para la toma de decisiones para abordar las problemáticas de la región (Rincón-Ruiz et al., 2019). Por otra parte, una valoración o evaluación integral apunta a incluir distintas visiones y marcos de conocimientos (Pascual et al., 2017), por lo que es importante incluir en el proceso actores de distintos sectores, con distintos intereses y visiones (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). Sin embargo, hay pocos dispositivos disponibles específicos para conducir estos procesos participativos que además de los desafíos propios de procesos multisectoriales implican desafíos relativos al concepto de CNP. ...
Está bien establecido en la literatura que la identificación de Contribuciones de la Naturaleza a las Personas (CNP) y su valoración debe basarse en un proceso participativo. Sin embargo, hay pocos dispositivos disponibles para conducir estos procesos participativos y el concepto de contribuciones de la naturaleza a las personas presenta desafíos para su comprensión y aplicación para muchos actores de las esferas sociales y/o gubernamentales. Aquí se presenta una propuesta metodológica y el diseño de un dispositivo para la identificación, valoración y mapeo de CNP que fue aplicado con éxito en cuatro unidades territoriales en el centro-este de Patagonia, Argentina.
... In order to enable participatory spaces, it is important to incorporate plural values into decision making. The integration of multiple knowledge systems, language conceptualizations, diverse worldviews and plural values of nature, however, is an enormous challenge that requires appropriate social, political, and institutional arenas [25][26][27]. 6 If there are no conditions to open participatory spaces, regional, national, and global power dynamics determine whose values count and whose values are excluded. This one-way vertical decisionmaking is thus imposed and leads to conflicts that deepen the vulnerabilities of local populations and generate socio-environmental injustice [15]. ...
... Indigenous peoples have developed diverse institutions that allow for collective participation and decision making based on values, such as reciprocity, respect, and solidarity, often expressed through ritual celebrations, offerings, and reciprocal exchanges [26,40,41]. These principles and processes allow the recognition of intrinsic values of nature, the dissolution of the culture/ nature dichotomy, and the reconfiguration of communities of political actors [19,42]. ...
Decision-making processes among Indigenous peoples and local communities are driven by the contextual and sociocultural integration of the intrinsic, relational, and instrumental values, worldviews, and knowledge of humans and other-than-humans. In this article, we review how the values of nature are articulated in the philosophies of ‘good living’ shared by Indigenous people of the Americas to inform decision-making processes. We further analyse how power dynamics and uncertainties impose certain values in decision making, and can therefore hinder or enable ways to achieve the socio–environmental justice.
... Eliciting diverse values of nature does not seem to be enough to foster the uptake of valuation results in management and policy-making. Instead, Zafra-Calvo et al. (2020) found that valuation exercises can impact management decisions when the valuation process is embedded in transdisciplinary research. This finding corresponds the recent policy messages of the IPBES assessment which conclude that the uptake of valuation seems to be fostered by inclusive bottom-up processes where valuation knowledge is co-produced with multiple stakeholders (including decision-makers) through the application of participatory and deliberative methods (IPBES 2022). ...
... Therefore, we advocate for the diversification of the toolset of methods by applying socio-cultural valuation techniques and mixed approaches that can provide insights into tourists' non-monetary values of nature in protected areas. In addition, when the valuation exercise seeks to inform conservation and sustainable tourism in protected areas, it is necessary to account for the values of not just far-distant societies, but also local stakeholders, and to broaden the toolset towards participatory methods to engage different stakeholders and their diverse needs, interests, and worldviews (Jacobs et al. 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020). The engagement of diverse types of tourists and other stakeholders also requires addressing power relations among stakeholders (IPBES 2022). ...
In the face of biodiversity loss, it is crucial to broaden the arguments for conservation of protected areas by acknowledging diverse values of nature. We systematically reviewed empirical studies to investigate tourists' values of nature in protected areas over time and across regions. To do so, we explored (1) the main ecological and social characteristics of the case studies; (2) methodological approaches; and (3) value types. Based on the review of 152 articles, we found that economic valuation has received the most scientific attention, while socio-cultural valuation approaches have recently increased. Values were primarily elicited and analyzed quantitatively and in monetary metrics, although valuation methods and frameworks have diversified over the past two decades. However, considering the role of valuation methods and frameworks as value-articulating institutions, we suggest that future research on nature valuation also applies qualitative and non-monetary methods, elicits diverse values, and conducts plural valuation.
... In order to assign importance to and mediate between plural values in environmental conflicts, different methods have been proposed. Valuation methods are classified as cost-benefit, multi-criteria, or deliberative (Dendoncker et al. 2013;Martínez-Alier et al. 1998;Vatn 2009;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020). Each valuation is better suited to represent a certain value category, inclining the balance of power between the actors in conflict. ...
... Instead, a deliberative approach is suggested where the decisions are subject to discussion and agreement between the stakeholders in a forum-like institution to reconcile competing interests (Ibid). In theory, a deliberative approach can offer better recognition to relational and intrinsic values that cannot be articulated, or that stakeholders do not want to articulate in an instrumental framework and market logic (Himes and Muraca 2018;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020). This approach is especially sensitive to values disproportionately manifested by Indigenous peoples and non-Western languages of valuation including "embeddedness, collective meaning, flourishing, heritage, beauty, self-transformation, sense of place, spirituality, livelihoods, justice, conviviality, care, and kinship" (Himes and Muraca 2018:3). ...
The unequal distribution of environmental goods and pollution burdens is determined by valuation decisions dependent on the values present in the public sphere. Accordingly, corporations and movements of resistance adopt strategies to influence public value systems to prioritize their interests. However, pre-existing asymmetric relationships of power grant corporations a dominant position over the public sphere, eschewing environmental management towards instrumental and transactional modes of valuation. The hegemonic valuation of the environment is thus a product and source of power, and a key element for the reproduction of systems of oppression. This article will discuss the mechanisms used by extractive corporations to neglect alternative value systems, illustrated with examples from the oil giant TotalEnergies.
... • Procedural justice concerns the level and form of stakeholders participation in decision-making in the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of NbS, and how much these processes do in fact influence decision-making around NbS interventions. • Distributional justice involves questions of how access to NbS provided services are distributed for all (assessing availability, accessibility, attractiveness and other aspects), but also how the costs and benefits accruing from those amenities are distributed among the population These three justices imply the recognition of plural values in NbS which encourage interventions to: (1) be based on participatory approaches (2) provide action-oriented purpose for all stakeholders, and (3) foster further communication and collaboration among stakeholder groups (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). The last aspect to consider for the transformative governance process of NbS is alignment with national government priorities. ...
... For Woroniecki et al. (2019), it is important for practitioners to recognize that NbS are not always the most attractive priority for local communities and thus, their most pressing challenges may be other ones that NbS cannot solve. However, there appears to be limited of knowledge in these areas and Zafra-Calvo et al. (2020) call for a deeper understanding is needed regarding how practitioners can adapt plural valuation to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability. ...
This study explores the gap between theoretical frameworks of Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) and current NbS interventions. Despite the existence of well-established definitions and practical tools, there are still organizations that implement NbS according to their own interpretations, creating gaps in the way practitioners apply these solutions. Four main gaps were identified: Framing of priorities to address an outcome, measurability and effectiveness of interventions, alignment with transformational governance processes, and understanding of trade-offs. By collecting the perception of NbS practitioners mainly focused on Africa, Europe, Latin America through a structured online survey, the results showed that five main ideas can help close these gaps: (1) designing NbS to address local problems that subsequently address societal challenges may be a more effective framing than targeting interventions to societal challenges that may not capture local stakeholder priorities; (2) interventions should consider both qualitative and quantitative impact-oriented indicators to learn from practice, and establish robust interventions and confidence in NbS; (3) transformative NbS processes must incorporate pluralistic assessment in interventions, attending to distributive, recognition, and procedural justice; (4) systemic socioeconomic and institutional barriers are not exclusively within the power of practitioners to fix but they must be addressed to achieve transformative NbS processes; (5) certain types of governance, scale, and cost-benefit trade-offs may not be fully understood and remain elusive, but they are still important to identify, to integrate and negotiate trade-offs in NbS implementation. We urge NbS practitioners and formulators of the concept to consider these ideas when implementing NbS.
... Choctaw Nation) was caused by unequal historical power relationships (Castro et al. 2016;Burch et al. 2020). In an analysis of ten SES case studies from the Global South, Zafra-Calvo et al. (2020) found that power asymmetries can severely hinder equitable and sustainable outcomes. This negative effect of power asymmetries and inequities can be lessened by considering five points which are key to much of SES research: eliciting participatory values, following a clear action-oriented purpose, providing space for marginalized actors, reconciling different cognitive models of human-nature relations, and fostering open communication and collaboration among actors. ...
... This generated more accurate historical density estimates than those derived from western science alone (Lee et al. 2019). Another strand of research is focusing on unearthing the negative consequences of applying narrow approaches to valuing nature when trying to foster sustainability and justice (Jacobs et al. , 2018Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020;Martín-López 2021). The choice of narrow valuation approaches has led to the exclusion of certain social actors, and their needs, interests, preferences and worldviews in relation to nature (Martín-López 2021). ...
The Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS) was established in 2011, and is now one of the major international social-ecological systems (SES) research networks. During this time, SES research has undergone a phase of rapid growth and has grown into an influential branch of sustainability science. In this Perspective, we argue that SES research has also deepened over the past decade, and helped to shed light on key dimensions of SES dynamics (e.g. system feedbacks, aspects of system design, goals and paradigms) that can lead to tangible action for solving the major sustainability challenges of our time. We suggest four ways in which the growth of place-based SES research, fostered by networks such as PECS, has contributed to these developments, namely by: 1) shedding light on transformational change, 2) revealing the social dynamics shaping SES, 3) bringing together diverse types of knowledge, and 4) encouraging reflexive researchers.
... It suggested that the manifold associations of human and non-human life must be recognized. One way to do this is by mesmerizing with intense interdisciplinary and extensive stakeholder involvement in knowledge sharing [47]. By mobilizing an appropriate mix of scientific and lay knowledge, conservation science, policy and practice would be better equipped to identify and facilitate more legitimate and effective goals and actions, for instance through different approaches to protected areas [48] or through payments for ecosystem services [49]. ...
... How to accomplish conservations should finally depend on what people need and consider authentic and satisfactory. This will need the conservation movement to reflect about socially procedures for making conservation decisions [47]. Despite technocratic projects, which are introduced in a top to the down manner, practices need to be guided by procedural ethics that is committed to openness, learning and adaptation [59]. ...
The conservation of biodiversity has been a matter of serious concern all over the world. Regions of the world with rapidly changing land use and economies require transdisciplinary focus to adequately address today’s challenges for conservation, local livelihoods, and development. Himalayan ecosystem sustainability is vital for the employment of approximately 1.3 billion people in Asia. The Indian Himalayan Region (IHR) are special for their natural geological wealth, forest, flora, fauna and biodiversity, snow, ice and water bodies, traditional knowledge, and mountain agriculture. It is now widely accepted that the rich and diverse Himalayan ecosystem is fragile. The regions are predominantly populated by local societies. Live in biodiversity wealthy regions of the country, the neighboring mountainous communities are dependent upon biodiversity for meeting their livelihood security. Hence, sustaining biodiversity in the mountain region also means defending the benefit of the people. Recognition of the Himalayas as one of 34 global biodiversity hotspots aptly reflects its wide-ranging ecological significance. Societies across the world have had long-standing traditions of using and caring for nature, but the formal, mainstream, and largely western ‘conservation movement’ is only about 120 years old. Biocultural approaches to conservation represent a synthesis of theory across multiple fields linked to biodiversity conservation, including social-ecological systems thinking, commons theory, bio-cultural diversity and heritage, indigenous natural resource management and traditional ecological knowledge, and different models of participatory and people-centered conservation. This synthesis points to the potential for pluralistic, partnership-based, and dynamic approaches to guide conservation processes.
... Time after time, ecologists, hydrologists, environmentalists, and others are encouraging governments and stakeholders to adopt new approaches in policy-making (Adetunji et al., 2020;Díaz et al., 2019;Wu and Kim, 2021), supporting them to consider ecological networks worthwhile (Cook and Overpeck, 2019;Xiao et al., 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). Currently, with the increased levels of human intervention and ecological degradation of the riparian zone, researchers have advocated that ecosystem functioning valuation be used in the decisionmaking process (Ai et al., 2022;Chen et al., 2021;Jacobs et al., 2020). ...
... However, best-practice recommendations, stylized step-by-step valuation diagrams, and methodological decision trees provide some assistance. They can help researchers connect with local issues of fairness and justice (Van Swol et al., 2019;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). If the assessment is a positive force in regional settings, practitioners must know how the valuation interacts with ecological networks and conflicts on the ground (Lee et al., 2015). ...
Environmental illiteracy threatens the functioning mechanisms of ecological networks worldwide, yet many people remain dubious about their existence. The knowledge deficit model suggests that giving the public (local people and government personnel) additional information would alleviate distrust. There is limited evidence indicating that environmental literacy metrics (ELMs) influence ecological network indicators (ENIs) such as plant cover, habitat, exotics, regeneration, erosion, and stressors throughout the drawdown zone (upstream, midstream, and downstream) within dams and reservoirs, despite widespread implementation to enhance riparian zone conservation. This study tackles this knowledge gap by using multivariate statistical methods to assess ENIs on the covered area of 58,000 km 2 in 327 transects through a field-based approach inside China's Three Gorges Reservoir area (TGRA) in 2019. The bar graph results showed the largest lack of information about ELMs (e.g., knowledge, attitude, and behavior) from the general populace, and it had the biggest effect on the plant cover in the midstream and the least impact on regeneration in the upstream. The ELMs of local people influenced the ENIs most within the downstream, with coefficients of Pearson correlation in the range of − 0.67 < r < 0.98. However, the ELMs (knowledge and behavior) of government personnel showed the greatest correlations with ENIs (− 0.41 < r < 0.74) in the midstream, while attitude towards downstream. In comparison among ENIs, vegetation cover, grass exotics, gullying, longitudinal continuity, and farming systems were all-important ENIs within the TGRA. ENIs and ELMs varied substantially for each section of the drawdown zone, according to hierarchical approaches. These results educate decision-makers about the spatial variations in ENIs of riparian regions in dams and reservoirs, which need location-based initiatives to raise inclusive impact awareness among the Chinese public.
... There is consensus among IPBES member-states that environmental and development decisions are not achieving their intended values-related outcomes (IPBES/6/INF/9). This 'values crisis' relates directly to humanity's multiple socio-environmental crises, including the loss of biological and cultural diversity, the risks associated with climate change, the emergence of pandemic diseases and obstacles for achieving equitable, just and sustainable lifestyles (IPBES, 2019c;MEA, 2005;Pörtner et al., 2021;United Nations, 2015;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). In this context, 'values' include life goals, beliefs and general guiding principles. ...
... In this chapter, the reader will find typologies and frameworks to identify and organize the diversity of values, showing areas of convergence and overlap, fuzzy conceptual boundaries and points of difference. These characterizations are grounded in the 'relational turn' in environmental policy and decision-making, which recognises not only the instrumental and intrinsic values of nature, but also principles embodied in relationships between humans and the other-thanhuman world Hart, 2010;Raymond et al., 2013;2017b;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). ...
... Since then, major biodiversity initiatives (Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD]; U.N. Sustainable Development Goals), international platforms (IPBES, IUCN), and major conservation NGOs (e.g., WWF International, The Nature Conservancy) have all broadened their mission statements to include some variation of "nature and people" and explicit valuation of nature's contributions to people (NCPs; Díaz et al., 2018). An interesting consequence of the continued rapprochement between the fields of conservation of biodiversity and human development is the heightened awareness regarding the immense diversity of values that emanate from nature and how these are often site-, time-and culture-specific (Díaz et al., 2018;Fletcher et al., 2021;Kohler et al., 2019;Obura et al., 2021;Pascual et al., 2017Pascual et al., , 2021Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). ...
... Answering these questions will require interdisciplinary approaches capable of blending scientific information, normative values (which capture, e.g., personal preferences, tolerance to different types of risk, and worldviews), and knowledge of local needs. Although international biodiversity organizations and initiatives will retain key roles (in assessing global biodiversity trends, and addressing global threats to biodiversity such as trade and telecoupling), the mantle of authority regarding biodiversity targets will logically shift toward grass-roots, local, and regional initiatives (Obura et al., 2021;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020) to account for local needs, and cultural values. ...
The field of conservation aims to protect biodiversity—the diversity of life on earth in all its forms. Traditional conservation objectives and measures have already been expanded and modified in response to shifting social values and climate‐related challenges. As climate change progresses, we argue that these changes will need to be accelerated. First, an even greater fraction of conservation objectives will need to prioritize the basic well‐being of humans, especially in areas where humans are strongly dependent on their natural surroundings. For example, urban biodiversity and low‐impact forms of agriculture and forestry that reconcile biodiversity and contributions to humans should increasingly be viewed as compatible with conservation objectives. Second, more conservation measures will need to allow for, and even foster, changes in biodiversity. Indeed, changing species' characteristics and biotic community composition are not only adaptive responses to inevitable climate change but will, in many instances, also be necessary to maintain functioning ecosystems. Conversely, attempts to maintain biodiversity in a historical state will likely become increasingly difficult, expensive, and possibly counterproductive. Finally, in addition to continuing climate adaptation work, conservation efforts will need to focus more on reducing atmospheric carbon concentrations. We explore how collectively these changes are transforming the field of conservation and how they have the potential to lead to a more just and sustainable world despite impending climate change.
This article is categorized under: Climate, Ecology, and Conservation > Conservation Strategies
Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Comparative Environmental Values
Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being
... As a result, potential trade-offs between different interest groups or societal groups, and the implications for their types of livelihoods and opportunities remain unclear. This is further related to the general absence of explicit consideration of justice and equity issues in future scenarios across peer-reviewed and gray literature, including even implicit dimensions of distributional, procedural, and recognitional aspects [65][66][67]. ...
Values have been recognized as critical leverage points for sustainability transformations. However, there is limited evidence unpacking which types of values are associated with specific types of sustainable and unsustainable futures, as described by future scenarios and other types of futures-related works. This paper builds on a review of 460 future scenarios, visions, and other types of futures-related works in the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Values Assessment, synthesizing evidence from academia, private sector, governmental and non-governmental strategies, science-policy reports, and arts-based evidence, to identify the types of values of nature that underlie different archetypes of the future. The results demonstrate that futures related to dystopian scenario archetypes such as Regional Competition, Inequality, and Breakdown are mostly underpinned by deeply individualistic and materialistic values. In contrast, futures with more sustainable and just outcomes, such as Global Sustainable Development and Regional Sustainability, tend to be underpinned by a more balanced combination of plural values of nature, with a dominant focus on nature’s contribution to societal (as opposed to individual) aspects of well-being. Furthermore, the paper identifies research gaps and illustrates the key importance of acknowledging not only people’s specific values directly related to nature, such as instrumental, intrinsic, and relational human-nature values and relationships, but also broad values and worldviews that affect the interactions between nature and society, with resulting impacts on Nature's Contributions to People and opportunities for a good quality of life.
... But studies of participation also highlight massive gaps between rhetoric and reality, pertaining to our arguments to recognize and better understand particular risks associated with naive valuation agendas. The challenges are wide-ranging, many of them technical (whose values to include, how, where, when, etc.) but are mostly underpinned by issues of power [44]. A naive participatory agenda assumes that more diverse valuation is a means of empowerment of marginalized groups. ...
This paper critically examines the current political context in which valuation studies of nature are undertaken. It challenges the belief that somehow, more and technically better valuation will drive the societal change toward more just and sustainable futures. Instead, we argue that current and proposed valuation practices risk to continue to overrepresent the values of those who hold power and dominate the valuation space, and to perpetuate the discrimination of the views and values of nondominant stakeholders. In tackling this politically sensitive issue, we define a political typology of valuations, making explicit the roles of power and discrimination. This is done to provide valuation professionals and other actors with a simple framework to determine if valuation actions and activities
are constructive, inclusive, resolve injustices and enable systemic change, or rather entrench the status quo or aggravate existing injustices. The objective is to buttress actors in their decisions to support, accept, improve, oppose, or reject such valuations
... Explicitly recognizing and including the marginalized values of nature into decision-making processes is not only desirable as an end in itself but also means to environmental decision-making that offers better social and ecological outcomes [12,14,66]. Linking recognition (and epistemic), procedural, and distributive justice can help identify the root causes of injustice. ...
Aiming at just and sustainable futures for biodiversity conservation requires clarity concerning how justice relates to the diverse values of nature. By drawing upon and expanding on the recent Values Assessment of Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, this article discusses the implications of the diverse values of nature for different dimensions of justice. It also addresses how achieving transformative change that protects biodiversity requires the inclusion of diverse values of nature into valuation and decision-making processes, and how this imperative is interconnected with different dimensions of justice.
... However, work with Indigenous peoples and local communities, often with pluricentric worldviews and diverse knowledge systems, has revealed new options for sustainability transformation [52]. The typology provides a tool to identify how multiple value layers and types shape decisions within social-ecological contexts, expanding on existing plural valuation of nature for justice and sustainability [53]. Table 1 Summary of examples navigating the 'horizontal' and 'vertical' interactions within and among the typology's value layers to confront two environmental research and policy-making challenges. ...
... Having local knowledge about the multiple values of nature and understanding how these values vary across different sectors of society is essential for ensuring the equitable distribution of benefits [44]. ...
Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice in NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on work by Fricker and Byskov. We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included both NbS for water management and Indigenous People in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identify indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors. Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people’s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role of some actors in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.
... Environmental knowledge that is usable from the perspective of decision-makers needs to rebalance the primary logic at global scale [75]. Steps toward plural valuation for equity and sustainability can help in this process [76]. ...
... Hence, interventions should be tailored accordingly, as illustrated by choice of transport mode being affected by availability of public transportation infrastructure. Furthermore, integrating values into policy decisions is more likely to occur when valuation is tailored for a specific policy purpose 46,70 . For instance, at a national level, development of standardized, high spatial resolution ecosystem accounts 71 can provide the biophysical indicators to inform policy design. ...
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis³ still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever⁴. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)⁵ and the UN Sustainable Development Goals⁶, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature⁷. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change⁸, pandemic emergence⁹ and socio-environmental injustices¹⁰. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.
... The discussion of how to best value nature, until recently dominated by technical issues (e.g., the need for better precision and standardization), is now increasingly focused on issues of equity, legitimacy, and inclusiveness (e.g., who gets to decide the value of nature, from which perspective, and who benefits from and who is damaged by the final decision). In other words, social valuation for decision-making is now increasingly seen as an arena for deliberation and social negotiation, as well as a technical issue (15,20,(26)(27)(28). ...
... In contrast, our findings also uncovered the widespread lack of application of many other resilience principles, such as managing social diversity and redundancy (P1S), managing social connectivity (P2S), managing slow ecological variables and feedbacks (P3E) and slow social variables and feedbacks (P3S), understanding of SES as complex adaptive systems (CAS; P4), adaptive learning and experimentation processes (P5), participation (P6), and polycentric governance (P7). This may be due to deep-rooted, expert-driven, top-down command and control economic development strategies (Holling and Meffe 1996, Jiren et al. 2018b, Reed et al. 2020) that are typified by strong power hierarchies and asymmetries (Armitage et al. 2009, Foli et al. 2018, which is common in many parts of the Global South (e.g., see Faye 2017, Mustalahti et al. 2020, Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020. Linked to this is the possible marginalization of local people, their traditional knowledge, social networks, norms, and lifestyles (Megerssa and Kassam 2020, van Noordwijk 2020, Zinngrebe et al. 2020, which could eventually lead to a deterioration of their relationship with nature (Faye 2017, White 2017, Lyver et al. 2019. ...
Addressing ecosystem destruction and unsustainable development requires appropriate frameworks to comprehensively investigate social-ecological systems. Focusing on woody plant management in southwestern Ethiopia, we combined social-ecological resilience and a leverage points perspective to (1) assess how stakeholders perceive and operationalize resilience principles; (2) investigate resilience challenges and solutions across different levels of systemic depth; and (3) assess how different stakeholder groups noted challenges and solutions at different levels of system depth. Data were collected in focus group discussions with multiple types of stakeholders and analyzed via quantitative content and descriptive analysis. All stakeholder groups identified two principles currently applied in the landscape, while other principles were not currently applied widely. In total, we identified 37 challenges and 44 solutions to resilience, mainly focused on "deeper" systemic change. This trend was noted across stakeholder groups, but particularly by local people. Based on our work, we suggest to foster bottom-up changes in system goals, rules, paradigms, and intent, drawing explicitly on local people and their knowledge. More broadly, we suggest that further research on combining social-ecological resilience and leverage points perspectives could be helpful to better navigate and transform social-ecological systems.
... Decolonial conservation approaches that engage with transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge and impact evaluations are opening new horizons (Rodríguez and Inturias, 2018). For instance, the shift enables Connected Conservation to be more aligned with local conceptions of well-being and the full suite of values that influence and motivate behaviours; it also helps reveal the true extent of injustices created by environmental harms, or indeed sometimes conservation intervention itself (Carmenta et al., n.d.;Cundill et al., 2017;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). New relational frameworks are enriching our understanding of the ways in which the environment mediates and contributes to multi-dimensional human well-being (Chan et al. 2016;Sterling et al., 2017). ...
The convergence of the biodiversity and climate crises, widening of wealth inequality, and most recently the COVID-19 pandemic underscore the urgent need to mobilize change to secure sustainable futures. Centres of tropical biodiversity are a major focus of conservation efforts, delivered in predominantly site-level interventions often incorporating alternative-livelihood provision or poverty-alleviation components. Yet, a focus on site-level intervention is ill-equipped to address the disproportionate role of (often distant) wealth in biodiversity collapse. Further these approaches often attempt to 'resolve' local economic poverty in order to safeguard biodiversity in a seemingly virtuous act, potentially overlooking local communities as the living locus of solutions to the biodiversity crisis. We offer Connected Conservation: a dual-branched conservation model that commands novel actions to tackle distant wealth-related drivers of biodiversity decline, while enhancing site-level conservation to empower biodiversity stewards. We synthesize diverse literatures to outline the need for this shift in conservation practice. We identify three dominant negative flows arising in centres of wealth that disproportionately undermine biodiversity, and highlight the three key positive, though marginalized, flows that enhance biodiversity and exist within biocultural centres. Connected Conservation works to amplify the positive flows, and diminish the negative flows, and thereby orientates towards desired states with justice at the centre. We identify connected conservation actions that can be applied and replicated to address the telecoupled, wealth-related reality of
... The tension between management of peatlands for climate mitigation and sustainability goals versus numerous alternative potential outcomes (such as plantations, grazing, field sports) results in often contested landscapes (Carmenta et al 2017;Davies et al. 2016;Goldstein 2016). From the tropics to the UK uplands, configuring more sustainable, and equitable, peatland management is a climate-significant governance challenge that will require understanding the divergent viewpoints operating in peat landscapes and their interplay on the ways in which peat landscape management impacts people-nature relations (Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020). ...
Sustainable peatland management is a global environmental governance challenge given peat’s carbon storage. Peatlands worldwide are sites of contested demands between stakeholders with distinct management priorities. In the United Kingdom, peatland management is a focus of political interest for nature-based solutions (NBS), causing tensions with land managers who feel their traditional knowledge is undervalued. Using Q-method (a semi-quantitative method for clarifying distinct viewpoints) with estate managers, gamekeepers, farmers, and employees of land-owning organisations, we explored perceptions around changing upland management in the Yorkshire Dales. Land managers hold strong values of ownership, aesthetics, and stewardship. The prospect of changing management causes fears of losing these relational values alongside instrumental values. Yorkshire Dales stakeholders agreed on NBS aims (reducing flooding, limiting wildfires, protecting wild birds), but disagreed on methods to achieve these. Our research supports engaging local stakeholders at all stages of peatland protection schemes to minimise resentment towards top-down management.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13280-023-01850-3.
... Current approaches seem unable to reverse the declining global trend of biodiversity (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). This is blamed in part to a prioritisation of a narrow set of instrumental values of nature when making political and economic decisions (Jax et al., 2018;Stålhammar, 2021). ...
... In recent decades, there has been an increasing recognition that more pluralistic and integrative strategies for environmental governance are needed (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020;Pascual et al., 2021). Such approaches seek to build collaborations between stakeholder groups and reconcile different knowledge systems to develop new transdisciplinary ways of tackling interrelated social and environmental challenges (Djenontin and Meadow, 2018;Turnhout et al., 2020). ...
There is increasing recognition of the role of Indigenous and local knowledge systems in sustainable land use and conservation practices. However, the evidence base remains fragmented, while local knowledge remains marginalised in many national biodiversity strategies and development plans. This applies to the Tonga people of Zambia and Zimbabwe. Here, we synthesise existing evidence of Tonga knowledge and practices to explore their potential contribution to the implementation of integrated landscape approaches that aim to incorporate multiple stakeholders’ objectives in landscape-scale management. Based on a semi-systematic literature review, we identify how various dimensions of Tonga knowledge contribute to biodiversity, food security, soil conservation, and other well-being dimensions. Research gaps identified include significantly less documented evidence of Tonga knowledge and practices in Zimbabwe and limited attention to the biophysical impact of local practices on land and natural resources. Furthermore, there is limited attention to the historical processes that have led to the erosion of Tonga local knowledge and the political disempowerment of Tonga knowledge holders. The findings contribute to greater recognition and validation of Tonga local knowledge and practices in natural resource governance, particularly how such knowledge can contribute to integrated landscape governance. Finally, the review helps to define a future research agenda based on the knowledge gaps identified.
... The value of asset is indicated by the Price on demand and supply and relies on the assumption of rationality. It should be that the asset valuation is not only from a material point of view but also from a sociological point of view (Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). ...
The purpose of this study is to uncover financial management practices from a sociological perspective. Conventional finance focuses only on materials or assets, which seem to have no spirit or social oxygen, even though those spirits have an important role in financial governance. This study used transcendental phenomenological methodology. A total of five key informants were involved in the study. All the key informants involved have at least ten years of experience as banana traders "Epe" on the Losari beach of Makassar City. This research found that the harmonization between the heart and the rational is supplied by new benefits of social oxygen that create new spirits and new energy in the form of social and economic. So that it has the potential to provide the best financial governance (excellent value) to other companies, in addition to the company's internals, the company will become dazzling and have the potential to produce the best performance (always the best) and sustainable growth. So it is not an exaggeration that excellent value, charm, always the best, and sustainable growth are characteristics of humanist financial management that are not found in conventional financial management.
... These demands are also increasingly present in the sustainability agenda [7]. We follow the suggestion of Leach et al. [8] to differentiate 'sustainability' ('the general capability to maintain any unspecified feature of system structure or function over indefinite periods of time', p. 18) from Sustainability ('the capability of maintaining specified values of human well-being, social equity and environmental quality over indefinite periods of time', p. 18). ...
In recent years, the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus approach has been widely used as a framework in the context of urban Sustainability. However, some elements of the approach are normative, leading to a technical view of resources and technocratic policy implementation. To avoid such tendencies, this study uses the framework of ‘nexus of humility’. We used insights from the Science and Technology Studies to better assess the interactions between water, energy, and food, and consider the social construction aspects of the nexus itself. The approach of Pathways to Sustainability is combined with this framework to analyze two government programs in the cities of São Paulo and Guarulhos, Brazil; namely, the Green and Healthy Environments Program and the Environmental Health Program, respectively. We interviewed 20 individuals linked to these policies and analyzed narratives inductively and deductively. The results showed six groups of narratives, namely: environmental and social determinants of health, health prevention and promotion, intersectorality, politics and economy, territory, learning, and participation. Moreover, we concluded that narratives related to the WEF nexus, even if not explicitly part of the government guidelines, are present within the existing axes of action. Public health was understood as an important support pillar for the development of synergies related to Sustainability in urban areas. Finally, we sought to contribute to the literature by showing how this new framework can ‘open up’ avenues for sustainability within the contexts of high urban vulnerability and social inequality.
... The covid-19 crisis accelerated impoverishment and global divide processes, bolding inequalities and social suffering in the most fragile areas of the Global South (Hansel et al., 2022;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). As a result, the poor mental well-being and quality of life of people living in poor conditions have been severely affected in developed and developing countries during the pandemic (Keshky et al., 2020). ...
Quality of life (QoL) has been studied as an antecedent of good
mental health in contexts characterized by extreme poverty and
acute conflict. The covid-19 crisis exacerbated the risks of health related consequences in such contexts. Vaccination campaigns
have been started worldwide to contain the virus outbreak with
high rates of hesitancy and refusal. Our exploratory study sheds
light on the relationship between QoL and vaccine reluctance via
mental health and fear of covid-19 in a Palestinian population
affected by military occupation or socioeconomic marginalization.
Who-QolBref, Fcov-19, and Dass were administered to 1122
Palestinian adults living in the occupied territories and Israel.
Structural equation modelling was applied to test the relations
between variables. Results showed that fear of COVID-19, stress,
anxiety and depression mediated the association between QoL and
vaccination reluctance with a good model fit (χ2 (5) = 828.37; p
= .001; GFI=.93; AGFI=.94; RMSEA=.046; NFI=.94; CFI=.95). QoL and
mental health were negatively associated with stress (βX, Y = - .35; p
< .001), depression (βX, Y = −.37; p < .001), and anxiety (βX, Y = −.36;
p < .001). QoL and fear of COVID- 19 (βX, Y = −.16; p < .001) were
inversely correlated. A positive effects was found between stress
(βM, Y = .17; p < .001), anxiety (βM, Y = .18; p < .001), and depression
(βM, Y = .17; p < .001), fear of COVID-19 and vaccination reluctance
(βX, Y = .23; p < .001). According to our findings, Public health measures to ease the social suffering of people with low QoL due to
conflict and social marginality might favor the acceptance of the
vaccine.
... Such a broader view on linking equity and ES research offers an opportunity to meaningfully contribute to sustainability (Schröter et al. 2017) in practice and research by considering intra-and intergenerational aspects of ES elicitation in terms of their distribution, the decision-making processes as well as their recognition. This paves a way to name and address value and knowledge plurality (Santos 2007;Zafra-Calvo et al. 2020) into governance, which may foster transformative processes (Laterra et al. 2019) if conservation interventions on ES are to be aligned with equity principles. ...
Mainstreaming of ecosystem service approaches has been proposed as one path toward sustainable development. Meanwhile, critics of ecosystem services question if the approach can account for the multiple values of ecosystems to diverse groups of people, or for aspects of inter- and intra-generational justice. In particular, an ecosystem service approach often overlooks power dimensions and capabilities that are core to environmental justice. This article addresses the need for greater guidance on incorporating justice into ecosystem services research and practice. We point to the importance of deep engagement with stakeholders and rights holders to disentangle contextual factors that moderate justice outcomes on ecosystem service attribution and appropriation in socio-political interventions. Such a holistic perspective enables the integration of values and knowledge plurality for enhancing justice in ecosystem services research. This broadened perspective paves a way for transformative ecosystem service assessments, management, and research, which can help inform and design governance structures that nourish human agency to sustainably identify, manage, and enjoy ecosystem services for human wellbeing.
... appropriate to the diversity of a given decision context, with the aim of increasing legitimacy, justice and robustness of valuations (Jacobs et al., 2020;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020). Valuation may also be considered more plural if it mobilizes a diversity of methods and integrates diverse knowledge systems. ...
This is the final text version of Chapter 4. A laid-out version of the full assessment report will be made available in the coming months.
... These governance issues and the pathways to address them should be explicitly articulated. Governance quality, particularly an emerging focus on equity and rights, is receiving increasing attention within conservation policies [167], multi-stakeholder processes [169] and assessment tools [170], with potential to expose the flaws of conservation based on external assumptions about local communities and promote more nuanced approaches. ...
Attempts to link human development and biodiversity conservation goals remain a constant feature of policy and practice related to protected areas (PAs). Underlying these approaches are narratives that simplify assumptions, shaping how interventions are designed and implemented. We examine evidence for five key narratives: 1) conservation is pro-poor; 2) poverty reduction benefits conservation; 3) compensation neutralises costs of conservation; 4) local participation is good for conservation; 5) secure tenure rights for local communities support effective conservation. Through a mixed-method synthesis combining a review of 100 peer-reviewed papers and 25 expert interviews, we examined if and how each narrative is supported or countered by the evidence. The first three narratives are particularly problematic. PAs can reduce material poverty, but exclusion brings substantial local costs to wellbeing, often felt by the poorest. Poverty reduction will not inevitably deliver on conservation goals and trade-offs are common. Compensation (for damage due to human wildlife conflict, or for opportunity costs), is rarely sufficient or commensurate with costs to wellbeing and experienced injustices. There is more support for narratives 4 and 5 on participation and secure tenure rights, highlighting the importance of redistributing power towards Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in successful conservation. In light of the proposed expansion of PAs under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we outline implications of our review for the enhancement and implementation of global targets in order to proactively integrate social equity into conservation and the accountability of conservation actors.
... For example, the ultimate objective of the UNFCCC (Article 2) refers to the need to prevent harms to ecosystems, food production and economic development, and many national climate change policies refer to similar high-level goals. But it is well understood that the relationship between ecosystem conservation and well-being is contingent on mechanisms for access and inclusion 103 , that food production is only one factor in hunger and malnutrition and that economic development does not necessarily lead to enhanced well-being 104 . Many food-oriented interventions have excluded Traditional Owners from ecosystems, enhanced food production in ways that increase prices or sustained economic activities that concentrate profits and marginalize workers. ...
The consequences of climate change and responses to climate change interact with multiple dimensions of human well-being in ways that are emerging or invisible to decision makers. We examine how elements of well-being—health, safety, place, self and belonging—are at risk from climate change. We propose that the material impacts of a changing climate, discourses and information on future and present climate risks, and policy responses to climate change affect all these elements of well-being. We review evidence on the scale and scope of these climate change consequences for well-being and propose policy and research priorities that are oriented towards supporting well-being though a changing climate. This Review by Neil Adger and colleagues examines the multiple dimensions of human well-being that are affected by climate change. The authors propose policy and research priorities that are oriented towards supporting well-being.
... Future reviews should include additional relevant search strings to capture the growing number of ecology and environmental science journals in non-English languages(Amano et al., 2021).Chapter 4: Using Participatory Scenario Development to create regional narratives for the Atlantic Forest biome4.1. Introduction: Participatory Scenario Development for Brazil's AtlanticForestThe work towards creating a new global biodiversity strategy to follow the CBD's 2011-2020 Strategic Plan (CBD, 2021) has highlighted the difficulties in setting policy-based biodiversity targets which account for plural values and relationships with nature, consider more theories and evidence outside the natural sciences(Jacobs et al., 2020;Pascual et al., 2021;Zafra-Calvo et al., 2020), and improve the participation of diverse groups of people and experts, beyond western scientific knowledge(Díaz-Reviriego et al., 2019). These same challenges apply to setting targets and delivering on large-scale restoration across the tropics. ...
Brazil’s Atlantic Forest biome (Mata Atlântica) is a global conservation and restoration hotspot lying within the Neotropics, one of the most species-rich realms on Earth. Around 80% of Brazil’s population live within its range, competing for land and natural resources. The biome’s remaining forests are highly degraded and fragmented and ambitious targets have been set to restore native forest over the coming decades. Diverse, often marginalised, rural communities from different socio-political, cultural and ethnic backgrounds exist across areas targeted for large-scale restoration. This thesis uses mixed-methods to explore opportunities for Forest Landscape Restoration to benefit both biodiversity and livelihoods while reaching Atlantic Forest restoration targets. First, I explore evidence on forest cover thresholds to understand the ecological evidence-base for restoration targets. I then combine Participatory Scenario Development, creating narratives of change for the region, and partial economic equilibrium modelling to evaluate the potential implications of restoration policy pathways using GLOBIOM-Brazil, a Brazilian regional biosphere management model. Modelling outcomes from different policy scenarios are explored comparing indicators of agricultural development, land-use change, and biodiversity. Finally, I use a case study of agroforestry as a restoration method, exploring its potential to deliver biodiversity and livelihood gains for subsistence farmers from the Rural Landless Workers Movement (MST). This case study allows an in-depth understanding of family farmers’ place in Atlantic Forest restoration, and explores the feasibility of modelled policy scenarios. It shows that restoration through agroforestry can deliver benefits to these communities, but multiple policy and financial barriers prevent uptake and implementation. Scenario modelling results show different policy pathways involve trade-offs between biodiversity gains, spatial distribution of restoration and agriculture, but importantly suggest that restoration goals are not incompatible with necessary agricultural development in the biome. I end by outlining recommendations towards the creation of policy and management options which promote restoration approaches which may benefit smallholder farmers in the Atlantic Forest.
There is broad agreement on the potential role of values to incite intentional transformative change toward sustainability. However, there is no proposed heuristic on how to mobilize values for sustainability transformation, especially in the context of multilevel decision-making. We aim to fill this gap based on a literature analysis conducted as part of Chapter 5 of the IPBES Values Assessment. We outline four modes of mobilizing values for sustainability transformation: enabling, including, shifting, and reflecting. They differ in terms of the mix of agency and conversely of outside steering needed for each value mobilization mode. We then explore key tensions and insights that emerge through this classification: interdependencies between the modes of mobilizing values, tensions between shifting versus enabling and including values, tensions between which values to shift and which values to enable, and tensions between levels of values intervention (individuals, community, and society).
The Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science- Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services shows that multiple valuation methods and approaches exist to assess diverse value types. The evidence is based on the largest review of academic valuation studies on nature to date, developed for the Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). We evaluate studies according to environmental justice criteria. The results suggest that although diverse value types and indicators are assessed across studies, few individual studies are plural, and studies fail to provide evidence on distributive justice and score low on procedural justice indicators. We provide a set of recommendations for incorporating issues of justice in the design of valuation studies.
Context
The management of Portuguese agroforestry landscapes is currently focused on specialised cork and cattle production. Sustainable landscape management is increasingly discussed as an effective option to foster the multifunctionality of these landscapes. Such management requires consideration of multiple values connected to the landscape and to the products stemming from it.
Objectives
The aim of this study is to (1) assess the importance of specific values related to cork and to the cork production landscapes, (2) analyse how values differ across the value chain actors, and (3) compare the types of values associated to cork and the cork production landscapes.
Methods
We combine value chain analysis with the concept of plural valuation in order to illuminate the values amongst value chain actors. We conducted interviews with 62 actors divided across the value chain using a semi-structured questionnaire.
Results
We found that a broad range of instrumental, intrinsic and relational values were expressed by our respondents. Our results show an imbalance between the perception of the ecosystem health expressed by actors involved in the industrial transformation of cork compared to those directly involved with the landscape. This imbalance shows the necessity to find a common management ideal for cork production landscapes favouring multifunctionality.
Conclusions
Our study shows the relevance of considering plural values when planning and implementing sustainable landscape management. Integrated into a landscape approach, value chain analysis is useful in reaching actors in order to uncover different points of view towards a single landscape. Our study suggests that focusing on the multifunctional nature of the cork production landscapes may be key in ensuring a sustainable future for this social-ecological system.
Use of tropical peatlands as the last frontier for migrant-dependent expansion of industrial agriculture has become problematic, as drainage of peatlands increases fire risk. Haze and health costs attract high-level policy attention. Repairing damage by rewetting requires collective action that is hard to achieve, with a lack of dedicated institutions at the relevant scale. Realistic solutions may require the blending of insights of resource ecology and economics, political ecology and ecological politics, and sociality research and anthropology. The moral underpinnings of the management of hydrological units with peatlands as their core are diverse. Migrant farming communities express mostly instrumental values of (modified) peat landscapes, while for people with long histories of living in the margins of peatlands, threats to their resource claims and ways of living are expressed in a ‘sense of place’, as relational value. Holistic appreciation of relational and instrumental values of tropical peat landscapes is still needed.
The supply of ecosystem services (ES) is commonly assumed to be linked to human wellbeing within socio-ecological systems. However, these linkages are seldom assessed using quantitative approaches at large scales and low spatial resolution. Here, we investigated the complex bidirectional linkages between ES supply and material wellbeing (income) using data from 382,199 rural properties in 178 municipalities from Chilean Patagonia. We assessed two model groups using structural equation modeling (SEM), wherein the first group assumed an impact of ES supply on wellbeing and the second postulated the opposite impact, with wellbeing affecting ES supply. For each group we run a separate SEM per ES category (i.e. provisioning, regulating, and cultural), making a total of six SEM analyzed. We found that neither model group was significantly stronger than the other, as the linkage between ES supply and material wellbeing was not significant in any model. Each model differed notably in their significant path coefficients, with models for cultural and regulating ES showing a better fit than for provisioning ES. We therefore assert that previously assumed links between ES and material wellbeing do not necessarily hold at larger spatial scales and in contexts where rural economies are more diverse and less dependent on natural capital. Understanding ES supply-wellbeing dynamics and how they vary across spatial and temporal scales is important for fostering sustainable socio-ecological systems. ARTICLE HISTORY
The proper governance of agriculture water is crucial for meeting global food securityand achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially when considering small-scale farmers in the Global South. Water management has been examined as a form ofthe commons for agriculture, but shortcomings in Ostrom’s Design Principles restrict thescope of analysis. There is an urgent need for a novel framework for informing theories andpractices found in water commons. This research builds upon Ostrom’s Design Principlesto suggest a new lens of environmental justice to explain one successful approach to thegovernance of water commons. Using an empirically grounded framework, the researchexamined the governance of irrigation water as a common-pool resource shared bymultiple ethnic groups at a World Heritage watershed site in Yunnan Province, China. Theresearch suggested that a local shared notion of multi-dimensional justice, incorporatingdistributive, procedural, and recognitional justice, is a precondition for the successfulmanagement of irrigation water. The policy implication calls for a wider understanding of plurality and multidimensionality of justice and the roles they play in justice practices situated in local value systems in China and beyond.
Unlabelled:
Mangrove forests are globally significant blue carbon sinks that remain critically under-governed and under threat. In Indonesia, the rapid rate of mangrove loss over the past three decades, combined with the promise of these carbon-dense ecosystems to mitigate climate change impacts, has catalyzed the world's largest replanting program. Institutional and ideological divisions between advocates of conservation and commodification approaches to mangrove governance, however, have historically compromised Indonesia's ability to meet its climate commitments. Market valuations of mangroves as blue carbon have further complicated their governance by opening up new opportunities for environmental collaboration and resource exploitation. Drawing on the concept of leverage points, this study examines how plural valuations of mangroves might be applied to sustainability interventions in Riau Province, Indonesia. Using document analysis and interviews with public, private and societal stakeholders, we examine how sector-level values translate into collaborative actions through mangrove partnerships. We posit that integrating indigenous knowledge and place-based values into mangrove policy development could help to address the existing conservation-commodification divide. As plural values are mutually transformative, we argue that recognizing areas of strategic compatibility creates space for flexible and adaptive cross-sector cooperation. Such recognition is especially important for mangrove communities, whose marginal socioeconomic position reinforces their need to remain ideologically and tactfully open to areas of compatibility with shifting market valuations, both to sustainably develop locally important resources and to avoid livelihood capture by predatory development interests.
Supplementary information:
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-023-01297-1.
Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice for NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino (2021) and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on the work by Fricker (2007) and Byskov (2021). We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included NbS for water management and Indigenous Peoples in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identified indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors. Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people’s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role that some actors have in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.
Pajareros are people who know, use and handle songbirds. Their profession, a tradition in Mexico and part of the living biocultural heritage of the country, is currently threatened by various social factors, such as a distorted perception and criminalization. This research aims to document for the first time in an academic article their experiences concerning this problem. The methodology used was ethnographic immersion, participant observation, and 60 interviews with aviaries in Mexico. Pajareros coincided in naming five types of problems, and most of the solutions proposed were based on the request to be heard. To solve this problem and for their voice to be part of a plural valuation of the profession, transdiscipline is proposed as a democratic environmental practice that places them as protagonists in the decision-making process for permit issuance, and promotes teaching/learning processes among all those involved.
This is the final text version of Chapter 1. A laid-out version of the full assessment report will be made available in the coming months.
En el oeste de la provincia de Córdoba (Argentina) se observan profundos cambios socioproductivos como consecuencia de la expansión de la frontera agropecuaria. Usando una metodología multiactoral, participativa e interdisciplinaria, el artículo analiza a) cómo distintos tipos de productores agropecuarios perciben y valoran los ecosistemas y las Contribuciones de la Naturaleza para la Gente (CNG) que éstos producen; b) las estrategias que despliegan los productores para apropiarse de las CNG, y c) el rol que estas transformaciones juegan en los procesos de acumulación de capital. En relación con la valoración de las CNG, los resultados muestran una heterogeneidad elevada. Los campesinos identifican y valoran 21 CNG (sobre un total de 22); los grandes productores ganaderos (GPG), 7, y los grandes productores agrícolas (GPA), sólo 4. Los ecosistemas con bosque más conservado son los que ofrecen una mayor cantidad de CNG. Se observan diferentes percepciones, valoraciones y usos de los seis principales ecosistemas presentes en la región, lo que se traduce en diferentes modos de apropiación de la naturaleza. Mientras los campesinos desarrollan estrategias más generalistas y conservativas, las de los GPG y GPA son más focalizadas y adquisitivas. El avance de la frontera agropecuaria sobre el bosque nativo favorece la conversión del capital natural en capital económico, en favor de los productores más capitalizados (i.e., GPG and GPA) y genera pasivos sociales y ambientales. Estas transformaciones deben entenderse el marco de procesos económicos y políticos más generales, que profundizan el extractivismo, la acumulación de capital y la concentración económica. Las nuevas estrategias de acumulación de capital requieren de nuevos modos de ordenamiento del territorio y la aceptación social de narrativas que justifiquen y legitimen la expansión del capital agrario.
Addressing the global extent of the current biodiversity crisis requires engaging with the existence of multiple equally legitimate values, but also with diverse ethical perspectives underpinning conceptions of right and wrong actions. However, western monist positions have mostly explicitly or implicitly directed conservation strategies by defining the space of legitimate arguments, overlooking solutions that do not fit neatly the chosen approaches. As ignoring diverse ethical positions leads to injustices and reduces the potential of conserving biodiversity, there is a need to recognise and navigate the ethical landscape. Ethical pluralism may provide opportunities to do so. However, the ethical underpinnings of pluralism have not been fully considered in biodiversity conservation. In
this article, we elaborate the meaning, importance and limits of ethical pluralism while highlighting opportunities and challenges that the position may entail in biodiversity conservation science and practice. We argue that ethical pluralism allows recognising not only the existence of incommensurable plural values, but also that moral conflicts should embrace intra and inter-cultural criticism and the legitimacy of agonism and dissent, as opposed to monistic and relativistic approaches. We conclude by discussing how grounding ethical pluralism in environmental justice and environmental pragmatism may contribute to navigating the ethical landscape in biodiversity conservation. Particularly, we highlight opportunities to: i) promote (non-anthropocentrically understood) recognition and environmental justice in biodiversity conservation and, ii) move beyond theoretical debates seeking the single best ethical theory and focus on ethical diversity as a common source of possible solutions.
Natural systems in Argentina have gradually faded as a consequence of land use change, resulting in a diminished capacity to provide the ecosystem services (ES) essential for the well-being of the communities. The basin of the Chocancharava River fits within that context and is immersed in an urban-agricultural matrix that has produced major forest fragmentation. Based on this socio-environmental problem, the present report recounts the challenges and possibilities pertaining to an experience in community management. First of all, a conservation-status assessment of the forest remnants was used as a steppingstone to convene the first meeting of institutions linked to the territory. This interagency coupling allowed for a more holistic diagnosis and the formulation of action plans. The first result was the creation of a peri-urban provincial reserve. Managing the reserve demanded a wider involvement from the community and the provision of a space where all possible voices could be heard. Therefore, the first participative workshop was held, in which ties with the environment were problematized through the ES framework. This experience was of importance when pondering about unilateral decision-making models and grasping the value of community-based networks to generate more inclusive policies. In addition, the workshop provided a space for the co-production of knowledge regarding main actors and tensions about natural resources uses. Furthermore, this process constituted a road of reflection regarding our practices, which are vital for new community processes with results that are legitimate and relevant for the socioecological transformation of the system.
Natural systems in Argentina have gradually faded as a consequence of land use change, resulting in a diminished capacity to provide the ecosystem services (ES) essential for the well-being of the communities. The basin of the Chocancharava River fits within that context and is immersed in an urban-agricultural matrix
that has produced major forest fragmentation. Based on this socio-environmental problem, the present report recounts the challenges and possibilities pertaining to an experience in community management. First of all, a conservation-status assessment of the forest remnants was used as a steppingstone to convene the first meeting of institutions linked to the territory. This interagency coupling allowed for a more holistic diagnosis and the formulation of action plans. The first result was the creation of a peri-urban provincial reserve. Managing the reserve demanded a wider involvement from the community and the provision of a space where all possible voices could be heard. Therefore, the first participative workshop was held, in which ties with the environment were problematized through the ES framework. This experience was of importance when pondering about unilateral decision-making models and grasping the value of community-based networks to generate more inclusive policies. In addition, the workshop provided a space for the co-production of knowledge regarding main actors and tensions about natural resources uses. Furthermore, this process constituted a road of reflection regarding our practices, which are vital for new community processes with results that are legitimate and relevant for the socioecological transformation of the system.
Social-ecological systems underpinning nature-based solutions (NbS) must be resilient to changing conditions if they are to contribute to long-term climate change adaptation. We develop a two-part conceptual framework linking social-ecological resilience to adaptation outcomes in NbS. Part one determines the potential of NbS to support resilience based on assessing whether NbS affect key mechanisms known to enable resilience. Examples include social-ecological diversity, connectivity, and inclusive decision-making. Part two includes adaptation outcomes that building social-ecological resilience can sustain, known as nature's contributions to adaptation (NCAs). We apply the framework to a global dataset of NbS in forests. We find evidence that NbS may be supporting resilience by influencing many enabling mechanisms. NbS also deliver many NCAs such as flood and drought mitigation. However, there is less evidence for some mechanisms and NCAs critical for resilience to long-term uncertainty. We present future research questions to ensure NbS can continue to support people and nature in a changing world.
Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Volume 47 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
Attempts to link human development and biodiversity conservation goals remain a constant feature of policy and practice related to protected areas (PAs). Underlying these approaches are narratives that simplify assumptions, shaping how interventions are designed and implemented. We examine evidence for five key narratives: 1) conservation is pro-poor; 2) poverty reduction benefits conservation; 3) compensation neutralises costs of conservation; 4) local participation is good for conservation; 5) secure tenure rights for local communities support effective conservation. Through a mixed-method synthesis combining a review of 100 peer-reviewed papers and 25 expert interviews, we examined if and how each narrative is supported or countered by the evidence. The first three narratives are particularly problematic. PAs can reduce material poverty, but exclusion brings substantial local costs to wellbeing, often felt by the poorest. Poverty reduction will not inevitably deliver on conservation goals and trade-offs are common. Compensation (for damage due to human wildlife conflict, or for opportunity costs), is rarely sufficient or commensurate with costs to wellbeing and experienced injustices. There is more support for narratives 4 and 5 on participation and secure tenure rights, highlighting the importance of redistributing power towards Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in successful conservation. In light of the proposed expansion of PAs under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we outline implications of our review for the enhancement and implementation of global targets in order to proactively integrate social equity into conservation and the accountability of conservation actors.
Engaging with normative questions in land system science is a key challenge. This debate paper highlights the potential of incorporating elements of environmental justice scholarship into the evolving telecoupling framework that focuses on distant interactions in land systems. We first expose the reasons why environmental justice matters in understanding tele-coupled systems, and the relevant approaches suited to mainstream environmental justice into telecoupled contexts. We then explore which specific elements of environmental justice need to be incorporated into telecou-pling research. We focus on 1) the distribution of social-ecological burdens and benefits across distances, 2) power and justice issues in governing distantly tied systems, and 3) recognition issues in information flows, fram-ings and discourses across distances. We conclude our paper highlighting key mechanisms to address injustices in telecoupled land systems.
Decisions on the use of nature reflect the values and rights of individuals, communities and society at large. The values of nature are expressed through cultural norms, rules and legislation, and they can be elicited using a wide range of tools, including those of economics. None of the approaches to elicit peoples’ values are neutral. Unequal power relations influence valuation and decision-making and are at the core of most environmental conflicts. As actors in sustainability thinking, environmental scientists and practitioners are becoming more aware of their own posture, normative stance, responsibility and relative power in society. Based on a transdisciplinary workshop, our perspective paper provides a normative basis for this new community of scientists and practitioners engaged in the plural valuation of nature.
Failure to address unsustainable global change is often attributed to failures in conventional environmental governance. Polycentric environmental governance-the popular alternative-involves many centres of authority interacting coherently for a common governance goal. Yet, longitudinal analysis reveals many poly-centric systems are struggling to cope with the growing impacts, pace, and scope of social and environmental change. Analytic shortcomings are also beginning to appear, particularly in the treatment of power. Here we draw together diverse social science perspectives and research into a variety of cases to show how different types of power shape rule setting, issue construction, and policy implementation in polycentric governance. We de-lineate an important and emerging research agenda for polycentric environmental governance, integrating diverse types of power into analytical and practical models.
Non-technical summary
Nature and culture are intricately linked and the rapid loss of both biological and cultural diversity around the globe has led to increasing concerns about its effects on sustainability. Important efforts to understand biocultural relations and bolster sustainable practices have been made by scientists, local communities, civil society organizations and policy makers. In spite of their efforts, a stronger articulation between sectors and biocultural discourses is needed for a broader transformative impact. Here, we analyse the connections between prominent biocultural discourses and discuss how the biocultural paradigm can contribute to both local and global sustainability.
The globalisation of agriculture is evident in the rising volumes and values of internationally traded agricultural products. Export growth has led to increasingly commercialised agricultural production, particularly in regions where a large share of produce is exported. However, the increasing share of exports in global agriculture has led to adverse environmental and societal outcomes that are of growing concern. We mapped the 12 most important export crops using a spatial allocation algorithm that combines global cropland maps with data on each crop’s suitability for export. The results reveal that export crops are concentrated in Latin America, the US, and Southeast Asia and show the growing focus on a few high-value crops. Anticipating the spatial imprint of export-oriented agriculture helps to pinpoint the telecoupled land-use footprints of global consumption patterns.
1. Drawing on seminal work by the late Donella Meadows, we propose a leverage points perspective as a hitherto under‐recognized heuristic and practical tool for sustainability science. A leverage points perspective focuses on places to intervene in complex systems to bring about transformative change.
2. A leverage points perspective recognizes increasingly influential leverage points relating to changes in parameters, feedbacks, system design and the intent encapsulated by a given system. We discuss four key advantages of a leverage points perspective.
3. First advantage: A leverage points perspective can bridge causal and teleological explanations of system change – that is, change is seen to arise from variables influencing one another, but also from how human intent shapes the trajectory of a system.
4. Second advantage: A leverage points perspective explicitly recognizes influential, ‘deep’ leverage points – places at which interventions are difficult but likely to yield truly transformative change.
5. Third advantage: A leverage points perspective enables the examination of interactions between shallow and deep system changes – sometimes, relatively superficial interventions may pave the way for deeper changes, while at other times, deeper changes may be required for superficial interventions to work.
6. Fourth advantage: A leverage points perspective can function as a methodological boundary object – that is, providing a common entry point for academics from different disciplines and other societal stakeholders to work together.
7. Drawing on these strengths could initiate a new stream of sustainability studies, and may yield both practical and theoretical advances.
This article proposes an innovative theoretical framework that combines institutional and policy network approaches to study multi-level governance. The framework is used to derive a number of propositions on how cross-level power imbalances shape communication and collaboration across multiple levels of governance. The framework is then applied to examine the nature of cross-level interactions in climate change mitigation and adaptation policy processes in the land use sectors of Brazil and Indonesia. The paper identifies major barriers to cross-level communication and collaboration between national and sub-national levels. These are due to power imbalances across governance levels that reflect broader institutional differences between federal and decentralized systems of government. In addition, powerful communities operating predominantly at the national level hamper cross-level interactions. The analysis also reveals that engagement of national level actors is more extensive in the mitigation and that of local actors in the adaptation policy domain, and specialisation in one of the climate change responses at the national level hampers effective climate policy integration in the land use sector.
Transformations toward sustainability have recently gained traction, triggered in part by a growing recognition of the dramatic socio-cultural, political, economic, and technological changes required to move societies toward more desirable futures in the Anthropocene. However, there is a dearth of literature that emphasizes the crucial aspects of sustainability transformations in the diverse contexts of the Global South. Contributors to this Special Feature aim to address this gap by weaving together a series of case studies that together form an important navigational tool on the “how to” as well as the “what” and the “where to” of sustainability transformations across diverse challenges, sectors, and geographies. They propose the term “transformative space” as a “safe-enough” collaborative process whereby actors invested in sustainability transformations can experiment with new mental models, ideas, and practices that can help shift social-ecological systems onto more desirable pathways. The authors also highlight the challenges posed to researchers as they become “transformative space-makers,” navigating the power dynamics inherent in these processes. Because researchers and practitioners alike are challenged to provide answers to complex and often ambiguous or incomplete questions around sustainability, the ideas, reflections and learning gathered in this Special Feature provide some guidance on new ways of engaging with the world.
This Special Feature re-examines the relationship between natural resources and processes of conflict and cooperation as they occur in the Global South. Here we introduce key issues and reflect on learning from recent research. While covering a range of resources, contributions share an emphasis on middle-range theory in terms of moving from empirical phenomenon to analytical understanding. What emerges are nuanced understandings of conflict and cooperation, as embedded within specific contexts and wider processes of power and accumulation. In considering how social-ecological resilience can emerge for the poorest and most marginalized groups in the Global South, middle-range theory built upon comparative case study research and data-rich analyses brings issues of environmental (in)justice in resource access and distribution to the fore. Our conclusions reiterate a view of conflict transformation whose dynamics are locally situated with complex drivers that negate any conjuring of simplistic solutions and underline the important role research can play in informing appropriate development action.
Addressing complex environmental problems requires the collaboration of stakeholders with divergent perspectives, a goal that is challenged by diverse factors. Challenges hindering multi-stakeholder collaboration (MSC) for sustainability have previously been addressed in the context of transnational partnerships. However, less is known regarding how place-based MSC operates, especially in the context of the Global South. To contribute to addressing the factors that hinder place-based MSC for sustainability in the Global South, we analyzed 38 MSC projects spanning diverse ecological and social contexts across Mexico. In a series of participatory workshops, 128 stakeholders from academia, government, business, local communities, and civil society organizations discussed factors that hinder place-based MSC and co-constructed strategies to strengthen collaboration. Some challenges coincided with those identified in previous studies (e.g., divergent visions, inadequate project planning), whereas other concerns that have not been commonly regarded as important emerged as crucial obstacles for MSC. We discuss these challenges in the context of areas of limited statehood and point to the traditions of popular education and participatory action research as a source of valuable tools for place-based MSC. We identify strategies capable of addressing diverse challenges, a result that could aid prioritizing resource allocation to strengthen MSC.
Addressing food insecurity in South Africa requires innovative responses that fundamentally reconsider its causes, particularly because challenges facing the food system cut across issues, sectors, and scales. We discuss our experience in the Southern Africa Food Lab, a transformative space for diverse stakeholders from across the food system to engage in dialogue, paying particular attention to the relationship between dialogue and action. We argue that dialogue gives rise to action not only because it generates new ideas but because it creates commitments and relationships for new action. A particularly important aspect of such dialogue is to proactively address power imbalances and to give voice to the marginalized in the system. Such efforts, when implemented vigorously, likely result in a new set of challenges, but such resistance is a signal that indeed we are having at least some success at addressing deep-seated, structural dimensions of systems transformation.
This review paper addresses the challenging question of “how to” design and implement co-production of knowledge in climate science and other environmental and agricultural sciences. Based on a grounded theory review of nine (9) published case studies of transdisciplinary and collaborative research projects, the paper offers a set of common themes regarding specific components and processes for the design, implementation, and achievement of co-production of knowledge work, which represent the “Modus Operandi” of knowledge co-production. The analysis focuses on practical methodological guidance based on lessons from how different research teams have approached the challenges of complex collaborative research. We begin by identifying broad factors or actions that inhibit or facilitate the process, then highlight specific practices associated with co-production of knowledge and necessary competencies for undertaking co-production. We provide insights on issues such as the integration of social and professional cultures, gender and social equity, and power dynamics, and illustrate the different ways in which researchers have addressed these issues. By exploring the specific practices involved in knowledge co-production, this paper provides guidance to researchers on how to navigate different possibilities of the process of conducting transdisciplinary and co-production of knowledge research projects that best fit their research context, stakeholder needs, and research team capacities.
A major challenge today and into the future is to maintain or enhance beneficial contributions of nature to a good quality of life for all people. This is among the key motivations of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), a joint global effort by governments, academia, and civil society to assess and promote knowledge of Earth's biodiversity and ecosystems and their contribution to human societies in order to inform policy formulation. One of the more recent key elements of the IPBES conceptual framework (1) is the notion of nature's contributions to people (NCP), which builds on the ecosystem service concept popularized by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2). But as we detail below, NCP as defined and put into practice in IPBES differs from earlier work in several important ways. First, the NCP approach recognizes the central and pervasive role that culture plays in defining all links between people and nature. Second, use of NCP elevates, emphasizes, and operationalizes the role of indigenous and local knowledge in understanding nature's contribution to people.
On 25 September 2015, the seventieth session of the General Assembly in the United Nations approved new Sustainable Development Goals building upon the vision of the original Millennium Development Goals. I argue that this post-2015 agenda still neglects fundamental qualities of cultural sovereignty that are key to maintaining sustainable practices, values and lifestyle habits. No single goal emphasises the need to protect local ecological knowledge, cultural heritage and alternative economic practices - nor their interrelation with biodiversity - as a pathway to sustainability. The factors that threaten sustainable lifestyles remain a conspicuous absence in the goals. The article presents a thought experiment to provoke the addition of the ‘inextricable link’ of biological, cultural and linguistic diversity to the Sustainable Development Goals: the recognition and affirmation of biocultural heritage.
The values (i.e., importance) that people place on ecosystems have been identified as a crucial dimension of sustainable management of social-ecological systems. Recently, the call for integrating plural values of ecosystems beyond intrinsic and instrumental values has prompted the notion of “relational values.” With the aim of contributing to environmental management, we assess the environmental motivations (i.e., egoistic, biospheric, altruistic) and values that people attribute to the ecosystems of the mid-upper stream of the Otún River watershed, central Andes, Colombia. We analyzed 589 questionnaires that were collected in urban and rural areas of the Otún River watershed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regressions. We found salient biospheric motivations and the attribution of plural values (i.e., intrinsic, relational, and instrumental) to the ecosystems of the mid-upper stream of the Otún River watershed. Particularly, relational values were the most frequently mentioned value domain. Further, our results showed that environmental motivations and socioeconomic factors are associated with the expression of different value domains. We found negative associations between egoistic motivations and intrinsic values and between rural respondents and instrumental values. We found positive associations between altruistic motivations and relational values and between rural respondents and both intrinsic and relational values. In light of our results, we argue that intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values coexist in people’s narratives about the importance of ecosystems. Plural valuation approaches could be enhanced by differentiating relational from instrumental values and by expressing them in nonmonetary terms. We argue that multiple values of ecosystems expressed by rural and urban societies should be included in environmental management to tackle social conflicts and consider the diverse needs and interests of different social actors.
The theory of ecosystem services (ES) needs to be operationalized to contribute to practices leading to sustainable use of ecosystems, which includes solving trade-offs between private and public benefits and incorporating monetary and non-monetary values to help inform decisions. We developed a framework to analyse the impacts of farmers’ management alternatives on Nothofagus antarctica (G. Forst.) Oerst. forest in northern Patagonia, and analysed synergies and trade-offs between private and public benefts based on three conceptual and methodological approaches: a) a state-and-transition model of ecosystem dynamics, and b) indicators of values of ecosystem service benefits based on the cascade model, implemented as c) a decision support tool based on a Bayesian network. We optimized a utility function for short (0-10 yr) and long (70-140 yr) term management decisions (levels of grazing, logging and tree planting) based on monetary and non-monetary indicators of benefits that fulfilled “farmer’s satisfaction” objectives. We then assessed the consequences of these decisions on the fulfilment of public benefits as defined by the National Forest Law when projected into short (0-10 yr), intermediate (10-40 yr) and long (70-140 yr) time horizons. We found that when short-term decisions are projected into a long-time horizon, they lead to high losses of benefits, mainly linked to “regulating and maintenance” ES. On the other hand, long-term decisions improved the level of benefits in degraded systems but resulted in the degradation of well-preserved forests. The decisions that optimize farmer’s satisfaction did not change with different weights of “farm income” in the utility function, indicating the absence of trade-ofs between monetary and non-monetary benefits considered in the utility function. The tool developed helps to show long-term impacts of management, and discloses cause-effect relationships between levels of use and multiple benefits. It can therefore support measures aiming to raise awareness about degradation trends, and improve the functional understanding of the system wich can help to identify solutions for socio-economic and environmental sustainability.
Across leading environmental challenges—fire management, climate change, deforestation – there is growing awareness of the need to better account for diverse stakeholder perceptions across complex, multi-level governance arrangements. Perceptions often condition behavior, compliance and engagement in ways that impact environmental outcomes. We illustrate the importance of, and approaches to, examining perceptions across scales of governance (e.g. international, national, local) and sectors (e.g. civil society, government, corporate) through the example of Indonesian peatland fires. Peatlands are crucial global carbon stocks threatened by land use change and fire and subject to a range of policy interventions that affect many different stakeholder groups. Peatland drainage and conversion to plantation agriculture has been associated with severe, uncontrolled peat fires that present significant climate, public health and economic risks. Peatland fire management has become a domestic and international priority, spurring intensely contentious debates, policies and legal proceedings. Previous fire management interventions (FMI) are numerous yet have suffered widespread implementation failures. Against this backdrop, our manuscript provides a thematically and methodologically novel analysis of how diverse stakeholders, from local farmers to international policy makers, perceive peatland fires in terms of, i) how they prioritize the associated benefits and burdens, and ii) the perceived effectiveness of FMI. We adopt an innovative application of Q method to provide needed insights that serve to quantify the areas of contention and consensus that exist among the stakeholders and their multi-dimensional perspectives. We show that many of the contemporary FMI were perceived as among the most effective interventions overall, but were also the most controversial between groups. Clear consensus areas were related to the shared concerns for the local health impacts and the potential of government support for fire-free alternatives as a solution pathway. Improved understanding of stakeholder perceptions has potential to: give voice to marginalized communities; enable transparent mediation of diverse priorities; inform public education campaigns, and shape future policy and governance arrangements.
We are increasingly confronted with severe social and economic impacts of environmental degradation all over the world. From a valuation perspective, environmental problems and conflicts originate from trade-offs between values. The urgency and importance to integrate nature's diverse values in decisions and actions stand out more than ever.
Valuation, in its broad sense of ‘assigning importance’, is inherently part of most decisions on natural resource and land use. Scholars from different traditions -while moving from heuristic interdisciplinary debate to applied transdisciplinary science- now acknowledge the need for combining multiple disciplines and methods to represent the diverse set of values of nature. This growing group of scientists and practitioners share the ambition to explore how combinations of ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation tools can support real-life resource and land use decision-making.
The current sustainability challenges and the ineffectiveness of single-value approaches to offer relief demonstrate that continuing along a single path is no option. We advocate for the adherence of a plural valuation culture and its establishment as a common practice, by contesting and complementing ineffective and discriminatory single-value approaches. In policy and decision contexts with a willingness to improve sustainability, integrated valuation approaches can be blended in existing processes, whereas in contexts of power asymmetries or environmental conflicts, integrated valuation can promote the inclusion of diverse values through action research and support the struggle for social and environmental justice.
The special issue and this editorial synthesis paper bring together lessons from pioneer case studies and research papers, synthesizing main challenges and setting out priorities for the years to come for the field of integrated valuation.
Researchers working in the field of ecosystem services have long acknowledged the importance of recognising multiple values in ecosystems and biodiversity. Yet the operationalisation of value pluralism in ecosystem service assessments remains largely elusive. The aim of this research is to present a taxonomy of values and valuation methods to widen the evaluative space for ecosystem services. First, we present our preanalytic positions in regards to values and valuation of ecosystem services. Second, we review different value definitions that we deem relevant for the discussion of ecosystem services valuation. Third, we propose a taxonomy of ecosystem service values based on different conceptions of human-nature relationships. Finally, we present a taxonomy of different methods that can be used to recognise plural values in ecosystem services. This taxonomy for a plural valuation of ecosystem services can help ES scientists and practitioners with the aim of representing people's multiple and context specific ways of valuing nature. The taxonomy can also serve to pay broader attention to ES values that are overlooked or misrepresented in assessments that restrict their focus to monetary valuations.
Indigenous peoples and local communities live in, manage and own vast areas often rich in biodiversity and critical for ecosystem services. Bridging indigenous and local knowledge systems with scientific knowledge systems is vital to enhance knowledge, practice, and ethics to move towards sustainability at multiple scales. We focus on international science-policy processes and present a framework for evidence-based guidance on how tasks to mobilise, translate, negotiate, synthesise and apply multiple forms of evidence can bridge knowledge systems. Effective engagement of actors, institutions and knowledge-sharing processes is crucial in each of these tasks. We use examples from the intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to illustrate and discuss our framework.
There is increasing recognition of the need to unite analytical and participatory methodologies to establish more comprehensive valuations of ecosystem services and move beyond individual conceptions of value. This research integrates a three-stage choice experiment with participatory systems modelling, participatory mapping and psychometric analysis in a coastal case study in Scotland. It aimed to explore contrasts between individual willingness to pay and shared values expressed as group-deliberated fair prices, how deliberation on social-ecological systems would impact on value formation, and how participatory mapping might elicit distinct values not reflected in the monetary valuation. Results indicated marked differences between individual and deliberated group values, with deliberated individual values falling between the two. The systems modelling intervention combined with explicit discussion of transcendental values (life goals and guiding principles) generated significant learning and helped to better reflect transcendental values in monetary values. The deliberations and fair price framing shifted participants towards a public policy perspective, balancing benefit trade-offs with questions of fairness and responsibility. The highly localised nature of many values expressed through participatory mapping suggests that many of these places-based values would have been under-recognised by monetary valuation alone.
The scale, rate, and intensity of humans' environmental impact has engendered broad discussion about how to find plausible pathways of development that hold the most promise for fostering a better future in the Anthropocene. However, the dominance of dystopian visions of irreversible environmental degradation and societal collapse, along with overly optimistic utopias and business-as-usual scenarios that lack insight and innovation, frustrate progress. Here, we present a novel approach to thinking about the future that builds on experiences drawn from a diversity of practices, worldviews, values, and regions that could accelerate the adoption of pathways to transformative change (change that goes beyond incremental improvements). Using an analysis of 100 initiatives, or " seeds of a good Anthropocene " , we find that emphasizing hopeful elements of existing practice offers the opportunity to: (1) understand the values and features that constitute a good Anthropocene, (2) determine the processes that lead to the emergence and growth of initiatives that fundamentally change human–environmental relationships, and (3) generate creative, bottom-up scenarios that feature well-articulated pathways toward a more positive future.
Despite substantial focus on sustainability issues in both science and politics, humanity remains on largely unsustainable development trajectories. Partly, this is due to the failure of sustainability science to engage with the root causes of unsustainability. Drawing on ideas by Donella Meadows, we argue that many sustainability interventions target highly tangible, but essentially weak, leverage points (i.e. using interventions that are easy, but have limited potential for transformational change). Thus, there is an urgent need to focus on less obvious but potentially far more powerful areas of intervention. We propose a research agenda inspired by systems thinking that focuses on transformational ‘sustainability interventions’, centred on three realms of leverage: reconnecting people to nature, restructuring institutions and rethinking how knowledge is created and used in pursuit of sustainability. The notion of leverage points has the potential to act as a boundary object for genuinely transformational sustainability science.
Why does co-produced, policy-relevant, adequately communicated science fail to influence policy implementation? Analysts of the science–policy interface often focus on the societal relevance of the research questions and on the strategies to convey findings to the political sphere. We argue that these conditions are necessary but not sufficient. We analyze a case study from Argentina, the process leading to the Córdoba Provincial Law for the Protection of Native Forests, in the light of two contrasting models of the science–policy interface: the Information Deficit and the Power Dynamics Models, and conclude that the second better describes the process. We propose some broad conditions that should influence the likelihood of a piece of scientific knowledge to be incorporated into environmental policy implementation.
We developed an empirical approach to consider social-ecological system change and transformation by drawing on resource users' knowledge and perceptions. We applied this approach in the Cau Hai lagoon, a coastal area dominated by small-scale fisheries in central Vietnam. Nine focus groups with more than 70 fishers were used to gather information about key social-ecological system elements and interactions, historical social-ecological dynamics, and possible thresholds between distinct social-ecological system identities. The patterns of change in livelihoods and resource exploitation in the Cau Hai lagoon are similar to those seen in other coastal lagoon and small-scale fishery contexts. Our findings show some promise for the use of local knowledge and the perceptions of resource user communities to understand and characterize social-ecological transformations. Importantly, however, we also demonstrate how social-ecological transformations are complicated processes driven by many factors beyond the control of any singular individual or group. We argue that (1) the occurrence of social-ecological transformations can result in either positive or negative outcomes and (2) that we need to direct our thinking away from drawing tidy conclusions about if and when social-ecological transformations take place. Our research also encourages scholars to carefully consider how we frame the benefits of participatory, community-based governance initiatives. Importantly, we need to examine the ways that governance initiatives will be beneficial for some people and detrimental for others, and we need to be fully aware of locally contested interests and acknowledge competing priorities for fisheries management and human well-being. Community-oriented assessments informed by resilience thinking can help to open up questions about economic, political, cultural, and environme