Suchergebnisse

The unprecedented global heatwave of 2014–2017 was a defining event for many ecosystems. Widespread degradation caused by coral bleaching, for example, highlighted the vulnerability of hundreds of millions of people dependent on reefs for their livelihoods, well-being, and food security. Scientists and policy makers are now reassessing long-held assumptions about coping with anthropogenic climate change, particularly the assumption that strong local institutions can maintain ecological and social resilience through ecosystem-based management, adaptation, and restoration. Governance is struggling to address the new normal as ecosystem assemblages transform to novel configurations. A central challenge for policy makers in the Anthropocene is navigating environmental crises and coping with societal insecurity and change. Ecosystem governance needs a new paradigm to embrace rapid change and shape future trajectories. In this Perspective, we focus on coral reefs as vanguards for governance transformation. We explain the spatial, temporal, and political dynamics of reefs as they respond to climate change and outline a new governance paradigm applicable to all ecosystems.

rade-offs are manifestations of the complex dynamics in interdependent social-ecological systems. Addressing trade-offs involves challenges of perception due to the dynamics of interdependence. We outline the challenges associated with addressing trade-offs and analyze knowledge coproduction as a practice that may contribute to tackling trade-offs in social-ecological systems. We discuss this through a case study in coastal Kenya in which an iterative knowledge coproduction process was facilitated to reveal social-ecological trade-offs in the face of ecological and socioeconomic change. Representatives of communities, government, and NGOs attended two integrative workshops in which methods derived from systems thinking, dialogue, participatory modeling, and scenarios were applied to encourage participants to engage and evaluate trade-offs. Based on process observation and interviews with participants and scientists, our analysis suggests that this process lead to increased appreciation of interdependences and the way in which trade-offs emerge from complex dynamics of interdependent factors. The process seemed to provoke a reflection of knowledge assumptions and narratives, and management goals for the social-ecological system. We also discuss how stakeholders link these insights to their practices.

Trade-offs are manifestations of the complex dynamics in interdependent social-ecological systems. Addressing trade-offs involves challenges of perception due to the dynamics of interdependence. We outline the challenges associated with addressing trade-offs and analyze knowledge coproduction as a practice that may contribute to tackling trade-offs in social-ecological systems. We discuss this through a case study in coastal Kenya in which an iterative knowledge coproduction process was facilitated to reveal social-ecological trade-offs in the face of ecological and socioeconomic change. Representatives of communities, government, and NGOs attended two integrative workshops in which methods derived from systems thinking, dialogue, participatory modeling, and scenarios were applied to encourage participants to engage and evaluate trade-offs. Based on process observation and interviews with participants and scientists, our analysis suggests that this process lead to increased appreciation of interdependences and the way in which trade-offs emerge from complex dynamics of interdependent factors. The process seemed to provoke a reflection of knowledge assumptions and narratives, and management goals for the social-ecological system. We also discuss how stakeholders link these insights to their practices.

Trade-offs are manifestations of the complex dynamics in interdependent social-ecological systems. Addressing trade-offs involves challenges of perception due to the dynamics of interdependence. We outline the challenges associated with addressing trade-offs and analyze knowledge coproduction as a practice that may contribute to tackling trade-offs in social-ecological systems. We discuss this through a case study in coastal Kenya in which an iterative knowledge coproduction process was facilitated to reveal social-ecological trade-offs in the face of ecological and socioeconomic change. Representatives of communities, government, and NGOs attended two integrative workshops in which methods derived from systems thinking, dialogue, participatory modeling, and scenarios were applied to encourage participants to engage and evaluate trade-offs. Based on process observation and interviews with participants and scientists, our analysis suggests that this process lead to increased appreciation of interdependences and the way in which trade-offs emerge from complex dynamics of interdependent factors. The process seemed to provoke a reflection of knowledge assumptions and narratives, and management goals for the social-ecological system. We also discuss how stakeholders link these insights to their practices.

International audience ; Trade-offs are manifestations of the complex dynamics in interdependent social-ecological systems. Addressing trade-offs involves challenges of perception due to the dynamics of interdependence. We outline the challenges associated with addressing trade-offs and analyze knowledge coproduction as a practice that may contribute to tackling trade-offs in social-ecological systems. We discuss this through a case study in coastal Kenya in which an iterative knowledge coproduction process was facilitated to reveal social-ecological trade-offs in the face of ecological and socioeconomic change. Representatives of communities, government, and NGOs attended two integrative workshops in which methods derived from systems thinking, dialogue, participatory modeling, and scenarios were applied to encourage participants to engage and evaluate trade-offs. Based on process observation and interviews with participants and scientists, our analysis suggests that this process lead to increased appreciation of interdependences and the way in which trade-offs emerge from complex dynamics of interdependent factors. The process seemed to provoke a reflection of knowledge assumptions and narratives, and management goals for the social-ecological system. We also discuss how stakeholders link these insights to their practices.

Environmental decisions made by individuals, civil society and the state involve questions of economic efficiency, environmental effectiveness, equity and political legitimacy. These four criteria are constitutive of economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, which has become the dominant rhetorical device of environmental governance. We discuss the tendency for different strands of social science to focus on particular subsets of the four criteria and argue that such a practice promotes solutions that do not acknowledge the dynamics of scale and the heterogeneity of institutional and historical contexts. We propose a more interdisciplinary approach to understanding environmental decisions that seeks to identify legitimate and context-sensitive institutional solutions producing equitable, efficient and effective outcomes. We examine two examples that illustrate the indivisible and integrated nature of the four criteria in actual environmental decisions. The first example relates to international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the second one to local resource management in the UK. We utilise the example to outline a new agenda for future research on environmental governance and decision-making.

The film The Day After Tomorrow depicts the abrupt and catastrophic transformation of the Earth's climate into a new ice age, playing upon the uncertainty surrounding a possible North Atlantic thermohaline circulation (Gulf Stream) shutdown. This paper investigates the impact of the film on people's perception of climate change through a survey of filmgoers in the UK. Analysis focuses on four issues: the likelihood of extreme impacts; concern over climate change versus other global problems; motivation to take action; and responsibility for the problem of climate change. It finds that seeing the film, at least in the short term, changed people's attitudes; viewers were significantly more concerned about climate change, and about other environmental risks. However, while the film increased anxiety about environmental risks, viewers experienced difficulty in distinguishing science fact from dramatized science fiction. Their belief in the likelihood of extreme events as a result of climate change was actually reduced. Following the film, many viewers expressed strong motivation to act on climate change. However, although the film may have sensitized viewers and motivated them to act, the public do not have information on what action they can take to mitigate climate change.

Coastal systems are special cases of coupled infrastructure systems (CIS). Here, system fragilities that exist elsewhere are magnified due to the unique features of the coastal natural infrastructure which exhibits a concentration of resource scarcity within a densely linked CIS in the vicinity of several key thresholds (e.g., salt vs freshwater). Accordingly, coastal regions warrant special attention and can provide early insights into other systems of intertwined human and natural infrastructure. In order to better understand the characteristics of such CIS, existing common pool resource (CPR) theories and methodologies were applied to the comparative analysis of coastal vulnerability to global change in three regions: Cornwall, Britain; Languedoc, France; and Eden District, South Africa. Utilizing an interdisciplinary, collaborative approach, we iteratively "translated" local research findings from the three systems into the Robustness Framework and applied the design principles of long-enduring CPR governance systems before comparing the outcomes. We found that: (1) the density of connections in the coastal systems magnified unintended consequences of poorly coordinated rules (e.g., rules governing coastal development, environmental protection, watershed management, etc.) which often pursue disparate goals; (2) a devolution of authority from the national to the local level coupled with government austerity measures is limiting the ability of local governments to mitigate the effects of climate change, and is fostering an under-provisioning of public soft infrastructure; and (3) short-term political agendas are favoring the production of large-scale hard infrastructure projects over long-term mitigation/adaptation strategies. These three characteristics inhibited institutional robustness, magnified CIS fragilities, and caused vulnerability transfers. We argue that our iterative and transdisciplinary comparative approach provides insights into key features of complex coastal CIS which may be useful to the examination and understanding of other densely linked systems. (Texte intégral)

Environmental decisions made by individuals, civil society, and the state involve questions of economic efficiency, environmental effectiveness, equity, and political legitimacy. These four criteria are constitutive of the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, which has become the dominant rhetorical device of environmental governance. We discuss the tendency for disciplinary research to focus on particular subsets of the four criteria, and argue that such a practice promotes solutions that do not acknowledge the dynamics of scale and the heterogeneity of institutional contexts. We advocate an interdisciplinary framework for the analysis of environmental decisionmaking that seeks to identify legitimate and context-sensitive institutional solutions producing equitable, efficient, and effective outcomes. We demonstrate the usefulness of our approach by using it to examine decisions concerning contested nature conservation and multiple-use commons in the management of Hickling Broad in Norfolk in the United Kingdom. We conclude that interdisciplinary approaches enable the generalisation and transfer of lessons in a way that respects the specifics and context of the issue at hand.

Polycentric governance involves multiple actors at multiple scales beyond the state. The potential of polycentric governance for promoting both climate mitigation and adaptation is well established. Yet, dominant conceptualizations of polycentric governance pay scant attention to how power dynamics affect the structure and the outcomes of climate action. We review emerging evidence on power within polycentric and distributed governance across the climate, forestry, marine, coastal, urban, and water sectors, and relate them to established positions on power within research on federalism, decentralization, international relations, and networked governance. We develop a typology of design, pragmatic, and framing power that focuses on how and in whose interests power is mobilized to achieve outcomes. We propose that the conceptual model helps to explain power dynamics across different sectors and across both climate change mitigation and adaptation. Significant research challenges arising from the analysis include the measurement and monitoring of the outcomes of power asymmetries over time. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e479. doi:10.1002/wcc.479. For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

Polycentric governance involves multiple actors at multiple scales beyond the state. The potential of polycentric governance for promoting both climate mitigation and adaptation is well established. Yet, dominant conceptualizations of polycentric governance pay scant attention to how power dynamics affect the structure and the outcomes of climate action. We review emerging evidence on power within polycentric and distributed governance across the climate, forestry, marine, coastal, urban, and water sectors, and relate them to established positions on power within research on federalism, decentralization, international relations, and networked governance. We develop a typology of design, pragmatic, and framing power that focuses on how and in whose interests power is mobilized to achieve outcomes. We propose that the conceptual model helps to explain power dynamics across different sectors and across both climate change mitigation and adaptation. Significant research challenges arising from the analysis include the measurement and monitoring of the outcomes of power asymmetries over time.

People living along coastlines are facing multiple risks such as flooding, submersion and erosion. The association of growing issues and risks in the face of global change is challenging the responses of individual, collective and public authorities to manage vulnerability of these areas and of their social and ecological components. Depending on the context and on the dominant world views, decision-makers are referring to a multitude of discursive arguments to tell their stories about coastal management and to comment on their adaptation choices. Here, we identify the main frames mobilized in coastal management in three contexts: Cornwall in England, Languedoc in France and Garden Route in South Africa. Through a revision of coastal management documents and a thematic analysis of interviews conducted with institutional decision-makers, we identify the main frames mobilized in the three study cases. Two opposed frames of response emerged across the three sites: the command and control VS living with the risk frames. However, these frames are unequally mobilized through the case studies, and differently introduced and justified. Determinants related to the context, occurrence of extreme events, availability of resources to adapt or socio-political history of the country are pushing towards the use of one of the frame rather than the other. Conversely, the use of the same frame in two different contexts can be explain by a different set of determinants related to the context. This study highlights how adaptation reflects both how different stakeholders diversely interpret information about global change and adaptation, but also how these rationales are strongly context-dependent, leading to diverse cognitive and non-cognitive barriers and opportunities for renewed responses in the face of global change along coastlines. (Texte intégral)

Introduction: Taxing tobacco is one of the most effective ways to reduce smoking prevalence, mitigate its devastating consequential health harms, and progress towards a tobacco-free society. This study modelled the health and economic impacts of increasing the existing cigarette tobacco duty escalator (TDE) in the UK from the current 2% above consumer price inflation to 5%. Methods: A two-stage modelling process was used. Firstly, a non-linear multivariate regression model was fitted to cross-sectional smoking data, creating longitudinal projections from 2015 to 2035. Secondly, these projections were used to predict the future incidence, prevalence and cost of 17 smoking-related diseases using a Monte Carlo microsimulation approach. A sustained increase in the duty escalator was evaluated against a baseline of continuing historical smoking trends and the existing duty escalator. Results: A sustained increase in the TDE is projected to reduce adult smoking prevalence to 6% in 2035, from 10% in a baseline scenario. After increasing the TDE, only 65% of female and 60% of male would-be smokers would actually be smoking in 2035. The intervention is projected to avoid around 75,200 new cases of smoking-related diseases between 2015-2035. In 2035 alone, £49m in NHS and social care costs and £192m in societal premature mortality and morbidity costs is projected to be avoided. Conclusion: Increasing the UK TDE to 5% above inflation could effectively reduce smoking prevalence, prevent diseases, and avoid healthcare costs. It would deliver substantial progress towards a tobacco-free society, and should be implemented by the UK Government with urgency.

UID/SOC/04647/2013; ; Transformations in social-ecological systems to overturn poverty and ecosystem degradation require approaches to knowledge synthesis that are inclusive and open to creative innovation. We draw on interviews with participants and in-depth process observation of an iterative knowledge cocreation process in Kenya and Mozambique that brought together scientists, community representatives, government representatives, and practitioners who had expertise or experience in poverty and/or coastal natural resource use and management. We analyze the communicative spaces opened by techniques of system diagrams and future scenarios, and provide a rich account of the emergent process of developing a "shared conceptual repertoire" as a basis for effective communication and knowledge synthesis. Our results highlight the difficulties of challenging dominant narratives and the creative potential that exists in reflecting on their underpinning assumptions. In our analysis, stories and lived experiences emerged as key means shaping the construction of shared concepts and ideas. We conclude by outlining the implications of designing knowledge cocreation processes that support the task of devising systemic interventions that are robust for a range of future scenarios. This includes embracing the role of stories in generating shared meanings and opening up spaces for exploration of knowledge assumptions that are embedded in intervention narratives. ; publishersversion ; published