Suchergebnisse

International audience ; Although 2010 was a make-or-break year for international climate change negotiations, delegates arrived in Cancún for the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP 16) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) without much enthusiasm and with few expectations. After the disappointing outcomes of the previous COP in Copenhagen (COP 15), many feared that the UNFCCC would not be able to recover from yet another failure. But as the final hours of the Cancún conference ended in standing ovations and loud cheers, there was a collective sigh of relief symbolizing faith restored in the UNFCCC process and an overall acknowledgment that significant progress had been made. The Cancún Agreements garnered support from all but one of the Convention's 194 parties. This can largely be attributed to the COP president, Patricia Espinosa - Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Affairs, who focused first and foremost on building an effective, transparent and inclusive international process. Her skilful diplomacy was praised by both delegates and media, who rewarded her with deafening applause as the conference came to a close. The Cancún Agreements delivered two decisive texts, one on Long-Term Cooperative Action (LCA) and one on the future of the Kyoto Protocol, following the two negotiating tracks. The agreements materialized after much compromise by both developed and developing country parties and are considered as marking a "new era of international cooperation on climate change", as Mexican President Felipe Calderón emphasized. Even though technical details and legal issues - notably on a global goal for reducing global emissions by 2050 and a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol - have been deferred to further negotiations, the Cancún Agreements contain key political decisions which will guide and catalyze comprehensive work programmes and substantive discussions in 2011. But do they really constitute a step forward or are they just a rushed deal stemming from the pressure to ...

International audience ; Although 2010 was a make-or-break year for international climate change negotiations, delegates arrived in Cancún for the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP 16) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) without much enthusiasm and with few expectations. After the disappointing outcomes of the previous COP in Copenhagen (COP 15), many feared that the UNFCCC would not be able to recover from yet another failure. But as the final hours of the Cancún conference ended in standing ovations and loud cheers, there was a collective sigh of relief symbolizing faith restored in the UNFCCC process and an overall acknowledgment that significant progress had been made. The Cancún Agreements garnered support from all but one of the Convention's 194 parties. This can largely be attributed to the COP president, Patricia Espinosa - Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Affairs, who focused first and foremost on building an effective, transparent and inclusive international process. Her skilful diplomacy was praised by both delegates and media, who rewarded her with deafening applause as the conference came to a close. The Cancún Agreements delivered two decisive texts, one on Long-Term Cooperative Action (LCA) and one on the future of the Kyoto Protocol, following the two negotiating tracks. The agreements materialized after much compromise by both developed and developing country parties and are considered as marking a "new era of international cooperation on climate change", as Mexican President Felipe Calderón emphasized. Even though technical details and legal issues - notably on a global goal for reducing global emissions by 2050 and a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol - have been deferred to further negotiations, the Cancún Agreements contain key political decisions which will guide and catalyze comprehensive work programmes and substantive discussions in 2011. But do they really constitute a step forward or are they just a rushed deal stemming from the pressure to reach a successful outcome? We look into this question here, focusing primarily on the outcomes for tropical forests and adaptation.

Le deuxième "sommet de la Terre", dix ans après celui de Rio qui s'était concrétisé par la signature de conventions internationales, ne suscite pas le même enthousiasme, Pour comprendre les enjeux des négociations qui suivent de tels sommets, NSS revient avec cet article sur les accords de Kyoto, en particulier les controverses que la question des puits de carbone a suscitées. En analysant la confrontation des argumentaires autour d'une mesure précise, à savoir la possibilité pour les États de comptabiliser les puits dans la réduction des émissions à effet de serre, les auteurs montrent combien la scène de la négociation internationale est complexe et traversée par des enjeux où science et politique sont constamment imbriquées.

Understanding how power asymmetries arise and how they can affect policy outcomes are crucial questions for ecosystem services (ES) research. In political sciences and sociology, the distribution of power among individuals has been widely studied with social network analysis (SNA). SNA have also been used to understand natural resource governance, for example in the context of fisheries, REDD+ or urban green areas. In this paper, we propose to analyze the structure of social networks of influence and domination related with ES governance in the Mariño watershed (Peru). The objectives of this paper are (1) to propose a framework for analyzing power asymmetries in relation with ES governance and (2) to apply it to the study case to highlight power differentials between selected stakeholders from different sectors and scales. We conducted face-to-face semi-structured interviews with representatives of 52 stakeholders of the watershed to understand how they relate with each other. For the influence network, we specifically asked them to identify the stakeholders with whom they exchange information, collaborate for projects, have regular and unregular meetings, do business with. In contrast, for the network of domination, we asked them to identify the stakeholders they restrict, punish, advice, or supervise, as well as the stakeholders that have such control over them. We assessed degree, closeness and betweenness centralities of the two networks. Four categories of stakeholders were distinguished depending on stakeholder's levels of influence and domination. Stakeholders from local scale, business and civil society showed significantly lower levels of both influence and domination than other stakeholders. Power was significantly correlated with the benefits received and participation to ES management: ES managers showed higher levels of power, and were found in the core of the two networks. These power asymmetries raise issues of equity and might reduce the adaptive capacity of the social-ecological system.

Human benefits from ecosystems result from complex interactions between ecological and social processes. People affect ecosystems' capacity to deliver services that contribute to the well-being of humans and their resilience. The delivery of ecosystem services (ES) has often been considered as a linear and direct flow from nature to people without feedbacks or human inputs. We adjusted the widely used ES cascade to highlight how humans mediate each step in the ES delivery. We then applied the proposed framework to empirical field studies in Indonesia. We focused on the role of forested landscapes to increase rural people's resilience to climate hazards such as drought and floods. We found that human actions determine benefits from ES through several mechanisms (ES management, mobilization, allocation-appropriation, and appreciation). These mechanisms are influenced by peoples' decisions along the ES cascade, which depend on specific factors related to rules, assets, values, and spatial context. By facilitating or hindering ES flows, some stakeholders can determine who benefits from ES and influence the well-being of others. A better understanding of the mediating mechanisms, factors, and feedbacks in ES delivery can support the design of sound environmental assessments and sustainable land management practices.

Assessments of ecosystem services (ES) improve our understanding of social-ecological systems and can support decision-making and policy development. Integrative ES assessments are challenging because of the diversity of ES, ecosystems that supply services, and social groups that benefit from ES. Challenges are the greatest for nonmaterial benefits that people receive from nature (often called cultural ES), for example, through recreation, aesthetic experiences, spiritual enrichment, or cognitive development, particularly because of their subjectivity. As the definition of nonmaterial benefits differs between cultures and social groups, there is a need to assess cultural ES with transdisciplinary methods that recognize multiple worldviews on nature and explicitly link assessment results with the people concerned by ES. In other terms, the assessment should strongly integrate the "what" and the "for whom" questions, particularly because responses to the latter question determine how the former question should be addressed. We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several complementary methods, ranging from participatory methods (focus group discussions, interviews, and surveys) to big data modelling (analysis of geotagged pictures from the Internet). Discourse analysis applied to interview content allowed to understand the diversity of views on the nonmaterial interactions between people and ecosystems and helped us develop a framework for analyzing such interactions. Surveys showed what landscape or ecosystem attributes explained cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements, and how ES perceptions differed among different social groups (e.g. by gender, age, and origin). The analysis of geotagged data from the Internet also revealed preferences on ES attributes and the location of ecosystem providing high levels of nonmaterial benefits. Results allow to discuss the complementary of different approaches for assessing ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values. (Texte intégral)

International audience ; Assessment of ecosystem services (ES) can improve decision-making and policy development on land use and the environment. As the determinants of supply and demand for ES are spatially variable, ES assessments often need to be spatially explicit. ES mapping has gained increasing attention in research and has been used to identify priority areas for ES provision or with most pressing threats on ES. Mapping can be combined with scenarios of environmental, political, social or economic to investigate future ES changes, define sensitive areas to change and estimate the impact of changes on society. ES mapping is more often applied to provisioning and regulation services rather than cultural services. Among cultural ES (e.g., scenic beauty, recreation, spiritual, heritage, etc.), the recreation-related ES are the most often mapped because they are relatively simple to quantify (e.g., based on site visits), compared to other cultural services whose assessment require to understand personal preferences, beliefs or spiritual values (e.g., aesthetics or sense of place). We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several methods with a focus on spatial variations. We used participatory mapping methods during workshops and interviews to understand the spatial distribution of the supply and use of ES. We also used surveys to analyze what landscape or ecosystem attributes explain cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements. We then used those attributes to map ES supply and we compared the maps produced by the two approaches (direct participatory mapping vs. mapping with attributes). We also compared differences in ES maps resulting from different information sources and stakeholders. Results allow to discuss the pros and cons of different approaches applied to ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values.

International audience ; Assessment of ecosystem services (ES) can improve decision-making and policy development on land use and the environment. As the determinants of supply and demand for ES are spatially variable, ES assessments often need to be spatially explicit. ES mapping has gained increasing attention in research and has been used to identify priority areas for ES provision or with most pressing threats on ES. Mapping can be combined with scenarios of environmental, political, social or economic to investigate future ES changes, define sensitive areas to change and estimate the impact of changes on society. ES mapping is more often applied to provisioning and regulation services rather than cultural services. Among cultural ES (e.g., scenic beauty, recreation, spiritual, heritage, etc.), the recreation-related ES are the most often mapped because they are relatively simple to quantify (e.g., based on site visits), compared to other cultural services whose assessment require to understand personal preferences, beliefs or spiritual values (e.g., aesthetics or sense of place). We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several methods with a focus on spatial variations. We used participatory mapping methods during workshops and interviews to understand the spatial distribution of the supply and use of ES. We also used surveys to analyze what landscape or ecosystem attributes explain cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements. We then used those attributes to map ES supply and we compared the maps produced by the two approaches (direct participatory mapping vs. mapping with attributes). We also compared differences in ES maps resulting from different information sources and stakeholders. Results allow to discuss the pros and cons of different approaches applied to ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values.

Ecosystem management can contribute to climate change mitigation by storing carbon and reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Ecosystem management can also help people adapt to climate variations: e.g., forests regulate microclimate and water, and mangroves buffer climatic impacts in coastal areas. Nature-based solutions have been integrated into climate change policies in many countries in Latin America. For example, new approaches, such as climate-smart landscapes, have been proposed and tested for addressing the multiple challenges of adaptation and mitigation and the tradeoffs between them through ecosystem management. Although there is some evidence that nature-based solutions are increasingly being incorporated in national policies, knowledge is missing on how they have been conceptualized and how paradigms have evolved. Scholars in the Transformative Adaptation Research Alliance have proposed a framework for analyzing nature-based adaptation based on three pillars: adaptation services (contribution of current and future ecosystems to adaptation); value, rules and knowledge (adaptation decision contexts that enable transformational change), and adaptation pathways (metaphor of the journeys of social-ecological systems into uncertain futures). We extend this framework (originally focusing on adaptation) to nature-based solutions and apply it for studying the evolution of climate policies in several Latin America countries, through the review of national policy documents (e.g. Intended Nationally Determined Contributions and National Adaptation Plans), which inform about national priorities, concepts and perspectives regarding adaptation and mitigation. With content analysis methods, we identify key attributes of the conceptualization and operationalization of nature-based solutions, including knowledge on the role of ecosystem services, values and decision-making contexts that enable or constrain transformation, and mechanisms for implementing transformative pathways. The analysis leads to a typology of framings of nature-based solutions and highlights how framings have evolved over time in policy.

International audience ; Assessment of ecosystem services (ES) can improve decision-making and policy development on land use and the environment. As the determinants of supply and demand for ES are spatially variable, ES assessments often need to be spatially explicit. ES mapping has gained increasing attention in research and has been used to identify priority areas for ES provision or with most pressing threats on ES. Mapping can be combined with scenarios of environmental, political, social or economic to investigate future ES changes, define sensitive areas to change and estimate the impact of changes on society. ES mapping is more often applied to provisioning and regulation services rather than cultural services. Among cultural ES (e.g., scenic beauty, recreation, spiritual, heritage, etc.), the recreation-related ES are the most often mapped because they are relatively simple to quantify (e.g., based on site visits), compared to other cultural services whose assessment require to understand personal preferences, beliefs or spiritual values (e.g., aesthetics or sense of place). We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several methods with a focus on spatial variations. We used participatory mapping methods during workshops and interviews to understand the spatial distribution of the supply and use of ES. We also used surveys to analyze what landscape or ecosystem attributes explain cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements. We then used those attributes to map ES supply and we compared the maps produced by the two approaches (direct participatory mapping vs. mapping with attributes). We also compared differences in ES maps resulting from different information sources and stakeholders. Results allow to discuss the pros and cons of different approaches applied to ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values.

Assessment of ecosystem services (ES) can improve decision-making and policy development on land use and the environment. As the determinants of supply and demand for ES are spatially variable, ES assessments often need to be spatially explicit. ES mapping has gained increasing attention in research and has been used to identify priority areas for ES provision or with most pressing threats on ES. Mapping can be combined with scenarios of environmental, political, social or economic to investigate future ES changes, define sensitive areas to change and estimate the impact of changes on society. ES mapping is more often applied to provisioning and regulation services rather than cultural services. Among cultural ES (e.g., scenic beauty, recreation, spiritual, heritage, etc.), the recreation-related ES are the most often mapped because they are relatively simple to quantify (e.g., based on site visits), compared to other cultural services whose assessment require to understand personal preferences, beliefs or spiritual values (e.g., aesthetics or sense of place). We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several methods with a focus on spatial variations. We used participatory mapping methods during workshops and interviews to understand the spatial distribution of the supply and use of ES. We also used surveys to analyze what landscape or ecosystem attributes explain cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements. We then used those attributes to map ES supply and we compared the map s produced by the two approaches (direct participatory mapping vs. mapping with attributes). We also compared differences in ES maps resulting from different information sources and stakeholders. Results allow to discuss the pros and cons of different approaches applied to ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values.

International audience ; Assessment of ecosystem services (ES) can improve decision-making and policy development on land use and the environment. As the determinants of supply and demand for ES are spatially variable, ES assessments often need to be spatially explicit. ES mapping has gained increasing attention in research and has been used to identify priority areas for ES provision or with most pressing threats on ES. Mapping can be combined with scenarios of environmental, political, social or economic to investigate future ES changes, define sensitive areas to change and estimate the impact of changes on society. ES mapping is more often applied to provisioning and regulation services rather than cultural services. Among cultural ES (e.g., scenic beauty, recreation, spiritual, heritage, etc.), the recreation-related ES are the most often mapped because they are relatively simple to quantify (e.g., based on site visits), compared to other cultural services whose assessment require to understand personal preferences, beliefs or spiritual values (e.g., aesthetics or sense of place). We assessed several cultural ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values in the Mariño watershed (Apurímac region) in Peru using several methods with a focus on spatial variations. We used participatory mapping methods during workshops and interviews to understand the spatial distribution of the supply and use of ES. We also used surveys to analyze what landscape or ecosystem attributes explain cultural ES, for example aesthetic preferences for certain landscape elements. We then used those attributes to map ES supply and we compared the maps produced by the two approaches (direct participatory mapping vs. mapping with attributes). We also compared differences in ES maps resulting from different information sources and stakeholders. Results allow to discuss the pros and cons of different approaches applied to ES related to recreation, scenic beauty and spiritual values.