Suchergebnisse

Les politiques du développement durable sont-elles favorables à la forêt des agriculteurs ? Malmenée par l'histoire, la forêt des agriculteurs (que nous avons qualifiée de forêt « domestique » ou « rurale ») est un objet orphelin indissociable de l'histoire des systèmes de production agricoles et des modes de vie paysans. Ses qualités hybrides, alliant à la fois production, qualités environnementales et bénéfices sociaux en font un exemple de choix pour le développement durable. Les crises actuelles la remettent au centre des stratégies rurales à travers des dynamiques de valorisation variées mettant en avant les synergies entre productions spécifiques, valeur environnementale, et développement social. Ces dynamiques permettent d'interroger l'un des grands chantiers du développement durable: la mise en avant du local comme caution et instruments d'une gestion durable des territoires. Dans les régions où les trajectoires locales vers la durabilité sont entravées par la marginalité économique, l'action publique, qui reconnait aujourd'hui la valeur du local après l'avoir longtemps dénigrée, estelle apte à accompagner sa mutation en suscitant de nouvelles synergies ? Ou bien, au contraire, va-telle accentuer le décalage qui a toujours existé entre les pratiques réelles, concrètes, mouvantes, des agriculteurs et l'appréciation qui en est faite ? Une approche dialectique de l'identité de la forêt domestique et de ses trajectoires de durabilité POPULAR a travaillé à travers le renforcement d'un réseau de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la forêt domestique permettant de mutualiser les expériences en approfondissant les questionnements sur la domestication, la résilience, la patrimonialisation, et en les synthétisant autour de la question du développement durable. La méthodologie globale est basée sur une approche comparative, cumulative et intégrative confrontant les trajectoires historiques et contemporaines de forêts affectées par des mesures publiques ou des dynamiques propres (valorisation de produits spécifiques ...

This document contains the draft Chapter 1 of the IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Governments and all observers at IPBES-7 had access to these draft chapters eight weeks prior to IPBES-7. Governments accepted the Chapters at IPBES-7 based on the understanding that revisions made to the SPM during the Plenary, as a result of the dialogue between Governments and scientists, would be reflected in the final Chapters. IPBES typically releases its Chapters publicly only in their final form, which implies a delay of several months post Plenary. However, in light of the high interest for the Chapters, IPBES is releasing the six Chapters early (31 May 2019) in a draft form. Authors of the reports are currently working to reflect all the changes made to the Summary for Policymakers during the Plenary to the Chapters, and to perform final copy editing.

This document contains the draft Chapter 2 NCP of the IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Governments and all observers at IPBES-7 had access to these draft chapters eight weeks prior to IPBES-7. Governments accepted the Chapters at IPBES-7 based on the understanding that revisions made to the SPM during the Plenary, as a result of the dialogue between Governments and scientists, would be reflected in the final Chapters. IPBES typically releases its Chapters publicly only in their final form, which implies a delay of several months post Plenary. However, in light of the high interest for the Chapters, IPBES is releasing the six Chapters early (31 May 2019) in a draft form. Authors of the reports are currently working to reflect all the changes made to the Summary for Policymakers during the Plenary to the Chapters, and to perform final copyediting.

This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of the AAAS for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Science 359(6373) on 19/01/2018, DOI:10.1126/science.aap8826 ; 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. ; PLEASE READ BEFORE VALIDATING: Licence unknown. Brighton University Repository on their webpage for this output https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/publications/assessing-natures-contributions-to-people they have the author's accepted manuscript with the following bibliographical note "This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of the AAAS for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Science 359(6373) on 19/01/2018, DOI:10.1126/science.aap8826". Contacted Brighton repository for informatio about the licence and if it was specifically for their repository and they replied "I don't think it specifically said - I think the risk is very low of including it in your IR. From memory I think it was a generic statement and permission was not directly sought as their policy covered self-archiving in IRs as long as the statement was included.". Also, accoridng to Sherpa Romeo https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/id/publication/11114, the accepted manuscript can be deposited without embargo. Should we also upload it in ours with this disclaimer? CBoula, 10/11/2021 OK, will do so, will add disclaimer to a note field in repositoroy RVO