Suchergebnisse

En tredjedel av all mat som produceras försvinner på vägen. Det innebär att en stor del av den negativa miljöpåverkan som livsmedelsproduktionen står för, har skett alldeles i onödan. I EU:s livsmedelsstrategi är matsvinn en av nyckelfrågorna.

Biodiversity loss can degrade ecosystems and impactthe ability of ecosystems to contribute to people. The last 20 years of ecosystem service research has increased society's interest in fighting the consequences of ecosystem degradation. During the last decades, attitudes towards conservation have been shaped in many ways. According to Mace (2014), "nature for itself" was a key principle during 1960s–1970s supporting concepts such as protected and wilderness areas. Human pressures on nature during the 1980s and early 1990s resulted in extinctions, habitat loss, and pollution, which made it urgent to act for"nature despite of people". That period was followed by a "nature for people" period, in which biodiversity challenges were mainstreamed via concepts such as ecosystem approach, ecosystem services and economic values. The latest paradigm, which was developed by Mace (2014) is called "people and nature". Key concepts in conservation circles include environmental change, resilience, adaptability and socio-ecological systems. Several assessments of the state and trends of biodiversity, ecosystems and ecosystem services have been carried out via various initiatives, such as Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA, 2005), followed by the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) assessments and the Aichi biodiversity targets of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). In Europe, Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) has generated a lot of new knowledge on the quantification of ecosystem services and use of this information in decision-making. Today, more and more open data is available through research infrastructures, for example, remote sensing data through the Copernicus programme of the European Union and European Space Agency. Naturebased solutions and green and blue infrastructure are becoming popular in landscape planning and highlight different aspects of the socio-ecological (synon. coupled human-environment) systems and their sustainable management. The most significant attempt to highlight the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services globally, has been the establishment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). IPBES has launched a series of thematic and geographical assessments. The European and Central Asian regional assessment has been ongoing parallel to this Nordic IPBES-like assessment that has focused on coastal ecosystems and their services. This assessment covers the Nordic countries, i.e. Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, and autonomous areas such as Åland, Faroe Islands and Greenland, which are a unique "biocultural" piece of Earth with unique nature values and well-established societies.

This book is about the historical sciences' way of producing knowledge by contextualizing. It is aimed primarily at students and researchers in the humanities disciplines who work with historical perspectives. The book's ambition is to bring the reader into the actual making and show how contextualisation is an important element in historical studies at all levels. The book thus hopes to stimulate increased reflection and discussion about how we proceed when we interpret, create or reinterpret historical, cultural and social contexts.
The book firstly provides an introduction to what contextualization can be and do when we encounter the past in the form of texts, images or artifacts. From the very first day at the university, students in historical disciplines end up in such meetings. Therefore, the first four chapters of the book are primarily aimed at students in the introductory semesters. What does it really mean to analyze, synthesize, contextualize or criticize - and how do the ways of working with the past relate to each other? And further, what historical times are we working with: do we read source material from our own horizons or from those of the historical actors? Is the source material part of a long story or a short one? And who decides the answer to such questions?
Secondly, the book provides an in-depth discussion of the role of contextualisation when we create new historical knowledge. The book's later chapters ask questions about how contextualisation relates to historical theory and method, and sheds light on the activity of creating, arguing for, and reconsidering the contexts that give meaning and significance to historical source material.
The most central lesson the book wants to convey is that contextualization is an ongoing activity. Human horizons of understanding are constantly moving in step with contemporary knowledge interests. There will always be new ways of understanding historical expressions, and that is one reason why historical studies form an important part of society's common knowledge base.

The purpose of IPBES assessments is to depict how the natural world and human societies interact with each other on a conceptual level. Habitat degradataion, eutrophication, fishing and climate change are examples of drivers of change that affect Nordic coastal habitats. Policy and governance are principal indirect drivers that both could lead to decline and deteriorations, as well as improvements and recoveries environments. Climate change will affect Nordic marine biodiversity profoundly in the future by changes in, for example, bio-chemical cycles and in the distribution of biodiversity. Such changes might lead to increased oxygen depletion in many areas, leakage of nutrients, changed thropic structures and spread of pathogens. It is therefore of paramount importance that effective governance is developed to mitigate impacts on nature's contributions to people (NCP) and to build sustainability and strategies for sustainability. Less overfishing, less euthropication, fewer pollutants and better land-use and nature protection are measures that will improve the overall resilience of Nordic coastal environments.

This chapter provides an overview of the status and trends in biodiversity and ecosystem function through assessment of key species and habitats, and summarizes the ecological status of selected Nordic regions. Important habitats across the Nordic coastal region include sea grass beds, kelp forests, blue mussel beds and soft sediments. Declines in sea grass have occurred since the 1970's, most likely due to eutrophication and overfishing. Norwegian kelp forests are recovering following severe losses in the 1960–1970's, most likely due to increased water temperature and changes in grazing pressure. Seabird populations have declined significantly during the last decades, reaching historical lows. Knowledge gaps are identified and a common biodiversity indicator system across the Nordic region is suggested. An indigenous local knowledge perspective is also presented.

This chapter examines the conceptual framework boxes and fluxes on "Institutions and governance and other indirect drivers" (Ch. 1, Fig. 1). International and EU governance of relevance for ecosystem services, biodiversity and water is presented. Policy integration, policy coherence, management regimes and stakeholder involvement is reflected upon. The chapter contributes to further understanding of the current and future challenges for sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. It provides insights in options for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services into sustainable development strategies and provides examples of current policy conflicts, along with trade-offs and innovative governance strategies for management of natural resources. Policy-makers need to find ways to handle policy conflicts, improve integration of different stakeholders' perspectives and value dimensions including ILK in policymaking, develop new data collection methods for linking biodiversity and ecosystem services, and develop governance systems that enhance transparency, sustainability and human well-being.

This report constitutes background material to a Nordic IPBES-like assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Nordic coastal ecosystems and departs from case studies from ten different geographical areas in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) as well as the autonomous areas of Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. The purpose is to reflect upon the local situation regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services, e.g. status and trends, drivers of change and policies for governance, and what future we are to expect. These case studies describe the situation in the Näätämö catchment area (FI), the Kalix archipelago (SE), the Quark (FI/SE), Lake Puruvesi (FI), the Bay of Lumparn (ÅL/FI), Öresund (SE/DK), the Helgeland archipelago (NOR), the Faroe Islands (DK), the northern coastline of Iceland, and Disko Bay (Greenland/DK), respectively. Consequently, these areas stretch from fresh water areas to ecosystems in the Atlantic Ocean and from urbanised areas with heavy pressures on the ecosystems, e.g. Öresund, to sparsely populated areas, like Greenland with a population of around 0,03 habitants/km2 .

The Helgeland archipelago stretches across 200 km, extending from Trøndelag in the south to Salten in the north. This iconic part oftheNorwegian coast comprises a myriad of islands and islets (more than 12,000) and large shallow sea areas (fig. 61 and 62). All along the coast there are white beaches, sheltered coves, fjords and steep towering mountain walls rising straight from the open sea. A wealth of marine life thrives in the area, spanning from the smallest microalgae to the largest mammals. Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), Atlantic puffins (Fratercula arctica), white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) and greylag goose (Anser anser) are among typical species encountered.

The Faroe Islands (Faroes) is an archipelago consisting of 18 islands about halfway between Norway and Iceland, 320 kilometres north-northwest of Scotland (62°00′N 06°47′W). The islands cover a land area of 1,400 km². The maritime economic zone is approximately 274,000 km².

In this chapter, essential ecological and societal aspects of the Nordic coastal environment are highlighted. These show that local communities and stakeholders need to be more involved in decision-making because their needs and their ecological knowledge are essentialto this process. This also relates to Aichi targets 14, 15, 16 and 18 (see Lucas et al., 2015). There is the need to improve the monitoring of all types of NCP or ecosystem services and to critically review existing indicators that may be used to track the development of biodiversity and NCP. Only by actively analysing data and creating syntheses, is it possible to understand changes in the ecosystem linking biodiversity and NCP.

Much of the effort to address environmental issues at the local level has focused on defining principles and aims rather than addressing the operational difficulties of implementation. Drawing upon insights from sustainability scholarship, this study reviews two cases: the development of a Swedish standard for implementing sustainable development at municipality, county council, and regional levels, and attempts by a small rural municipality to establish a process towards implementing the Aalborg Commitments. The research illustrates the specific organizational and managerial complexity of these case study experiences. It concludes that an organizational focus on integration and mainstreaming deserves particular attention to achieve broader sustainability, or related environmental or adaptation goals. The results, in particular, highlight the role that integrated management systems can play for sustainability work at the local level.

Adaptation research and practice too often overlooks the wider social context within which climate change is experienced. Mainstream approaches frame adaptation problems in terms of the consequences that flow from biophysical impacts and as a result, we argue, ask the wrong questions. A complementary approach gaining ground in the field, foregrounding the social, economic and political context, reveals differentiation in adaptation need, and how climate impacts interconnect with wider processes of change. In this paper, we illustrate how this kind of approach frames a different set of questions about adaptation using the case of Nepal. Drawing on fieldwork and a review of literature, we contrast the questions that emerge from adaptation research and practice that take climate risk as a starting point with the questions that emerge from examination of contemporary rural livelihoods. We find that while adaptation efforts are often centred around securing agricultural production and are predicated on climate risk management, rural livelihoods are caught in a wider process of transformation. The numbers of people involved in farming are declining, and households are experiencing the effects of rising education, abandonment of rural land, increasing wages, burgeoning mechanisation, and high levels of migration into the global labour market. We find the epistemological framing of adaptation too narrow to account for these changes, as it understands the experiences of rural communities through the lens of climate risk. We propose that rather than seeking to integrate local understandings into a fixed, impacts-orientated epistemology, it is necessary to premise adaptation on an epistemology capable of exploring how change occurs. Asking the right questions thus means opening up adaptation by asking: 'what are the most significant changes taking place in people's lives?', along with the more standard: 'what are the impacts of climate change?' Viewing adaptation as occurring between and within these two perspectives has the potential to reveal new vulnerabilities and opportunities for adaptation practice to act upon.

The number of pastoralists maintaining production systems with small numbers of traditional breeds of cattle decreased dramatically with the modernisation and industrialisation of agriculture in Europe during the twentieth century. While these pastoral systems were not compatible with agricultural industrialisation policies, they provide a far better match to current European Union (EU) policy with its emphasis on high nature values and various cultural heritage protection measures. Today, these farms can obtain EU funding for preserving natural and/or cultural heritage values rather than producing agricultural goods. Although such EU subsidies make a welcome contribution to the livelihood of traditional farmers, the critical definitions that have to be made regarding what is considered traditional or non-traditional can be problematic. This paper provides an example from Swedish fäbodbruk, a smallholder system of forest pasturing with traditional breeds of cattle, goats and sheep in northern Sweden. As policymaking and agricultural subsidies during the twentieth century reflected the contemporary political agenda of that time, farmers have been subjected to many changes in priority in political decision making. The contemporary push for traditional farming and heritage has made policymaking potentially even more difficult, e.g. as regards the question of what should be considered traditional and what makes up natural and cultural heritage. This paper examines how farmers are affected by valuations and assessments made by the relevant authorities on whether they are producing natural and/or cultural heritage.