Search results

AbstractThis paper aims to sketch rural population decline in Mexico. A comprehensive multi‐scale documentation of Mexico's urban and rural fabric and its depopulation dynamics is undertaken. This paper does not identify the causes and effects of rural depopulation, but aims to detect its geographical presence in a manner which other approaches are unable to do. The granularity of rural depopulation is identified as manifested at four different scales: national, state, municipal, and local village scale. We use census data for the period 2000–2010. We relate rural depopulation to spatio‐geographical features found in the literature; the relationship of depopulating territories with urban ones and the altitude range in which they are located. We find that proximity to and remoteness from urban areas as well as that of altitude do not follow the typical patterns often observed elsewhere. Unlike that shown in other countries, in Mexico, rural depopulation is manifested mostly in lower‐lying areas and despite the fact that most of the country is at altitude. Rural depopulation and disappearance occur mainly in the areas of plains below 1,000 metres above sea level, regardless of the population density of the territories where they were located. Also, our multi‐scaling approach has allowed us to identify not just at what scale the phenomenon of rural depopulation is observed, but also, to identify the areas in which the phenomenon is manifested regionally or locally. As we see, much of the phenomenon is concentrated in different areas to what national narratives suggest.

The valorisation of Cultural Ecosystem Services (CESs) of forests is closely linked to the society involvement with regard to the role of recreational, spiritual and symbolic services of forest resources. In this direction, the aim of the study was to increase the knowledge of forest CESs, analysing the people's preferences on natural areas by a web-based participatory GIS. The analysis shown the possibility to explicit not only the recreational component, but also the other components of CESs. Therefore, the mapping of CES on a large scale could be used for planning and management activities with an increase in awareness of local communities with respect to the natural resources present in the territory.

The most binding nature protection policy in the Netherlands and EU primarily designates areas based on ecological value, ensuring their sustained protection. Of less concern to these policies are the current and future needs of the average citizen, experiencing increases in education, income and health. This paper argues that although existing policies protect biodiversity needs, the spatial-emotional needs of this increasingly 'satisfied' population is of similarly high importance. Drawing upon tourism, planning and psychological research, we analyze the spatial and emotional characteristics of favorite natural places in the Netherlands selected on the Hotspotsmonitor survey by N = 1,715 members of a Dutch nature conservation organization. Content analysis of the open question, "Why is this your favorite place?" identified three categories: peace & quiet, let's explore and peak. These were mapped using GIS to identify predominant hotspots and compared against the most binding nature protection policy – Natura 2000. The important societal benefits of augmenting ecologically based nature protection policies with emotional valuation are discussed.

AbstractAddressing the pressure that population growth puts on the environment has become a high‐level policy priority. Less discussed is the role of population decline in either enhancing or degrading the natural environment, and how the its reshaping can help new forms of de‐peripheralization and de‐marginalization. A long‐term trajectory of marginalization and peripheralization of depopulating places can be reversed in certain situations by adopting a more holistic and sustainable analytical and policy framing. To do this, here we integrate different types of diagnosis frameworks. The first, based on factors that the literature indicates as factors leading to negative effects of depopulation, for which the revitalization of such places is suggested, and the second, proposed in this paper, which adds the integrity of the ecosystems involved in places undergoing depopulation processes. Our findings suggest that as we add ecosystem integrity factor to observations, in some cases, revitalization is possible even in the localities displaying the potentially negative effects of depopulation decrease. This suggests that whereas in some places a policy‐managed abandonment may be appropriate to release human pressures over such degraded ecosystems, in other cases, revitalization may be a viable alternative for such settlements.

Context: Place-based transdisciplinary research involves multiple academic disciplines and non-academic actors. Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) platform is one concept with ~ 80 initiatives globally. Objectives: As an exercise in learning through evaluation we audited (1) the siting, construction and maintenance of individual LTSER platforms, and (2) them as a distributed infrastructure for place-based transdisciplinary research with focus on the European continent. Methods: First, we defined a normative model for ideal performance at both platform and network levels. Second, four surveys were sent out to the 67 self-reported LTSER platforms officially listed at the end of 2016. Third, with a focus on the network level, we analyzed the spatial distribution of both long-term ecological monitoring sites within LTSER platforms, and LTSER platforms across the European continent. Fourth, narrative biographies of 18 platforms in different stages of development were analyzed. Results: While the siting ofLTSER platforms represented biogeographical regions well, variations in land use history and democratic governance were not well represented. Platform construction was based on 2.1 ecological monitoring sites, with 72% ecosystem and 28% social system research. Maintenance of a platform required three to five staff members, focused mostly on ecosystem research, was based mainly on national funding, and had 1–2 years of future funding secured. Networking with other landscape approach concepts was common. Conclusions: Individually, and as a network, LTSER platforms have good potential for transdisciplinary knowledge production and learning about sustainability challenges. To improve the range of variation of Pan-European social–ecological systems we encourage interfacing with other landscape approach concepts. ; Peer reviewed

Context Place-based transdisciplinary research involves multiple academic disciplines and non-academic actors. Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) platform is one concept with similar to 80 initiatives globally.Objectives As an exercise in learning through evaluation we audited (1) the siting, construction and maintenance of individual LTSER platforms, and (2) them as a distributed infrastructure for place-based transdisciplinary research with focus on the European continent.MethodsFirst, we defined a normative model for ideal performance at both platform and network levels. Second, four surveys were sent out to the 67 self-reported LTSER platforms officially listed at the end of 2016. Third, with a focus on the network level, we analyzed the spatial distribution of both long-term ecological monitoring sites within LTSER platforms, and LTSER platforms across the European continent. Fourth, narrative biographies of 18 platforms in different stages of development were analyzed.ResultsWhile the siting of LTSER platforms represented biogeographical regions well, variations in land use history and democratic governance were not well represented. Platform construction was based on 2.1 ecological monitoring sites, with 72% ecosystem and 28% social system research. Maintenance of a platform required three to five staff members, focused mostly on ecosystem research, was based mainly on national funding, and had 1-2years of future funding secured. Networking with other landscape approach concepts was common.ConclusionsIndividually, and as a network, LTSER platforms have good potential for transdisciplinary knowledge production and learning about sustainability challenges. To improve the range of variation of Pan-European social-ecological systems we encourage interfacing with other landscape approach concepts. ; Peer reviewed

Context Place-based transdisciplinary research involves multiple academic disciplines and non-academic actors. Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) platform is one concept with similar to 80 initiatives globally.Objectives As an exercise in learning through evaluation we audited (1) the siting, construction and maintenance of individual LTSER platforms, and (2) them as a distributed infrastructure for place-based transdisciplinary research with focus on the European continent.MethodsFirst, we defined a normative model for ideal performance at both platform and network levels. Second, four surveys were sent out to the 67 self-reported LTSER platforms officially listed at the end of 2016. Third, with a focus on the network level, we analyzed the spatial distribution of both long-term ecological monitoring sites within LTSER platforms, and LTSER platforms across the European continent. Fourth, narrative biographies of 18 platforms in different stages of development were analyzed.ResultsWhile the siting of LTSER platforms represented biogeographical regions well, variations in land use history and democratic governance were not well represented. Platform construction was based on 2.1 ecological monitoring sites, with 72% ecosystem and 28% social system research. Maintenance of a platform required three to five staff members, focused mostly on ecosystem research, was based mainly on national funding, and had 1-2years of future funding secured. Networking with other landscape approach concepts was common.ConclusionsIndividually, and as a network, LTSER platforms have good potential for transdisciplinary knowledge production and learning about sustainability challenges. To improve the range of variation of Pan-European social-ecological systems we encourage interfacing with other landscape approach concepts.