Suchergebnisse

Pastoralist societies have developed customary institutions to respond to an unpredictable environment and fluctuation in grazing resources for their livestock. This chapter describes how reindeer herders' customary institutions, including laws, norms and rights embedded in social networks, as well as traditional knowledge, structure these responses. Furthermore, it analyses how reindeer herders' customary institutions are integrated into state governance of natural resources or recognized in national legislation. Central to the chapter is the Sámi siida and the corresponding Finnish tokkakunta – both represent customary herding groups that seek to balance the relationship between human–reindeer units to the spatial and temporal availability of grazing resources. The need for revitalization and a better understanding of reindeer herders' customary institutions is identified, as well as an increased recognition of their traditional knowledge in resource management and land use planning to increase the resilience of reindeer husbandry to the cumulative challenges of climate change and resource extraction.

AbstractSocial innovation is perceived as a collaborative response from civic society actors to societal challenges and as such is increasingly being recognised as a driver for sustainable development. Social innovation promotes civic values, particularly in marginalised rural areas that are often struggling with biophysical and market limits, as well as shortages of public funding. In order to identify diverging development paths (DDPs) for social innovation, in this article, we use two large sets of empirical material from the SIMRA research project. First, for meta‐analyses of social innovation in diverse situations and contexts, we use 211 validated social innovation examples. Second, we rely on 11 in‐depth cases to reflect on the contexts and dimensions of social innovation. The elaboration of conceptualisation and deductive analyses result in the creation of a typology of social innovation DDPs, with four DDPs identified and explained. The article provides an improved understanding of how social innovation emerges and develops and how to capture processes and resulting changes in marginalised rural areas in order to turn such areas' diversity into strengths. An important conclusion is that social innovation involves both local and external actors, yet cannot develop without specific internal local activity and local knowledge.

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; publishedVersion ; Peer reviewed

Science-policy interface organizations and initiatives (SPIORG) are a key component of environmental governance designed to make links between science and society. However, the science­policy interface literature lacks a structured approach to explaining the impacts of context on and by these initiatives. To better understand these impacts on and interactions with governance, this paper uses the concept of the governance 'meshwork' to explore how dynamic processes – encompassing prior, current and anticipated interactions – co­produce knowledge and impact via processes, negotiation and networking activities at multiple governance levels. To illustrate the interactions between SPIORGs and governance meshwork we use five cases representing archetypal SPIORGs. These cases demonstrate how all initiatives and organizations link to their contexts in complex and unique ways, yet also identifies ten important aspects that connect the governance meshwork to SPIORGs. These aspects of the meshwork, together with the typology of organizations, provide a comprehensive framework that can help make sense how the SPIORGs are embedded in the surrounding governance contexts. We highlight that SPIORGs must purposively consider and engage with their contexts to increase their potential impact on knowledge co-­production and policy making.

Science-policy interface organizations and initiatives (SPIORG) are a key component of environmental governance designed to make links between science and society. However, the science­policy interface literature lacks a structured approach to explaining the impacts of context on and by these initiatives. To better understand these impacts on and interactions with governance, this paper uses the concept of the governance 'meshwork' to explore how dynamic processes – encompassing prior, current and anticipated interactions – co­produce knowledge and impact via processes, negotiation and networking activities at multiple governance levels. To illustrate the interactions between SPIORGs and governance meshwork we use five cases representing archetypal SPIORGs. These cases demonstrate how all initiatives and organizations link to their contexts in complex and unique ways, yet also identifies ten important aspects that connect the governance meshwork to SPIORGs. These aspects of the meshwork, together with the typology of organizations, provide a comprehensive framework that can help make sense how the SPIORGs are embedded in the surrounding governance contexts. We highlight that SPIORGs must purposively consider and engage with their contexts to increase their potential impact on knowledge co-­production and policy making. ; Peer reviewed

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. ...

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks.

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; Peer reviewed

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; Peer reviewed

Social innovations can tackle various challenges related to gender equity in rural areas, especially when such innovations are initiated and developed by women themselves. We examine cases located in rural areas of Canada, Italy, Lebanon, Morocco, and Serbia, where women are marginalized by gender roles, patriarchal values, male dominated economy and policy, and lack of opportunities for education and employment. Our objective is to analyze five case studies on how women-led social innovation processes can tackle gender equity related challenges manifested at the levels of everyday practice, institutions, and cognitive frames. The analyses are based on interviews, workshops, literature screening, and are examined via the qualitative abductive method. Results summarize challenges that rural women are facing, explore social innovation initiatives as promising solutions, and analyze their implications on gender equity in the five case studies. Based on our results we propose a new concept: reconstructive social innovation cycle. It refers to is defined as cyclical innovation processes that engage women via civil society initiatives. These initiatives reconstruct the existing state of affairs, by questioning marginalizing and discriminative practices, institutions, and cognitive frames that are often perceived as normal. The new concept helps with to assessing the implications that women-led social innovations have for gender equity. ; The authors are grateful to the European Commission for financial support to the project on Social Innovation in Marginalised Rural Areas (SIMRA) provided from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 677622. Contribution of the author from the James Hutton Institute to this study was also partly funded by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services Division of the Scottish Government through its Strategic Research Programme (2016–2021). The Nunavut/Canada case study was supported by Nordforsk Nordic Centre of Excellence: Resource Extraction and Sustainable Arctic Communities (REXSAC: project number 76938).

A better, more effective dialogue is needed between biodiversity science and policy to underpin the sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity. Many initiatives exist to improve communication, but these largely conform to a 'linear' or technocratic model of communication in which scientific "facts" are transmitted directly to policy advisers to "solve problems". While this model can help start a dialogue, it is, on its own, insufficient, as decision taking is complex, iterative and often selective in the information used. Here, we draw on the literature, interviews and a workshop with individuals working at the interface between biodiversity science and government policy development to present practical recommendations aimed at individuals, teams, organisations and funders. Building on these recommendations, we stress the need to: (a) frame research and policy jointly; (b) promote inter- and trans-disciplinary research and "multi-domain" working groups that include both scientists and policy makers from various fields and sectors; (c) put in place structures and incentive schemes that support interactive dialogue in the long-term. These are changes that are needed in light of continuing loss of biodiversity and its consequences for societal dependence on and benefits from nature.

Ecological restoration is key to counteracting anthropogenic degradation of biodiversity and to reducing disaster risk. However, there is limited knowledge of barriers hindering the wider implementation of restoration practices, despite high level political priority to halt the loss of biodiversity. In Europe, progress on ecological restoration has been slow and insufficient to meet international agreements and comply with European Union Nature Directives. We assessed European restoration experts' perceptions on barriers to restoration in Europe, and their relative importance, through a multiple expert consultation using a Delphi process. We found that experts share a common multi‐dimensional concept of ecological restoration. Experts identified a large number of barriers (33) to the advancement of ecological restoration in Europe. Major barriers pertained to the socio‐economic, not the environmental, domain. The three most important being insufficient funding, conflicting interests among different stakeholders and low political priority given to restoration. Our results emphasize the need to increase political commitment at all levels, comply with existing nature laws, and optimize the use of financial resources by increasing funds for ecological restoration and eradicate environmentally harmful subsidies. The experts also call for the integration of ecological restoration into land‐use planning and facilitating stakeholders' collaboration. Our study identifies key barriers, discusses ways to overcome the main barriers to ER in Europe, and contributes knowledge to support the implementation of the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the EU 2030 Restoration Plan in particular. ; We appreciate the support given by BiodivERsA (project funded under the EU Horizon 2020 ERA-NET COFUND scheme), and the EKLIPSE project (European Union Horizon 2020 grant agreement 690474), and particularly by Juliette C. Young. JCS research is financially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Education and Universities and European Regional Development Funds (FEDER; project COSTERA, RTI2018-095954-B-I00). PMRG research is funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through FCT Investigator Program grant number IF/00059/2015, and Centro de Estudos Florestais is supported by FCT grants UID/AGR/00239/2019 and UIDB/00239/2020.