Perceived impacts of woody encroachment on ecosystem services in Hluhluwe, South Africa
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 27, Heft 1
ISSN: 1708-3087
12 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 27, Heft 1
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Environmental management: an international journal for decision makers, scientists, and environmental auditors, Band 40, Heft 1, S. 46-61
ISSN: 1432-1009
In: The biology of habitats series
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 24, Heft 4
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 18, Heft 1
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 26, Heft 3
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Band 24, Heft 2
ISSN: 1708-3087
A horizon scan was conducted to identify emerging and intensifying issues for biodiversity conservation in South Africa over the next 5–10 years. South African biodiversity experts submitted 63 issues of which ten were identified as priorities using the Delphi method. These priority issues were then plotted along axes of social agreement and scientific certainty, to ascertain whether issues might be "simple" (amenable to solutions from science alone), "complicated" (socially agreed upon but technically complicated), "complex" (scientifically challenging and significant levels of social disagreement) or "chaotic" (high social disagreement and highly scientifically challenging). Only three of the issues were likely to be resolved by improved science alone, while the remainder require engagement with social, economic and political factors. Fortunately, none of the issues were considered chaotic. Nevertheless, strategic communication, education and engagement with the populace and policy makers were considered vital for addressing emerging issues.
BASE
To examine the different uses and perceptions of introduced Australian acacias (wattles; Acacia subgenus Phyllodineae) by rural households and communities. Eighteen landscape-scale case studies around the world, in Vietnam, India, Réunion, Madagascar, South Africa, Congo, Niger, Ethiopia, Israel, France, Portugal, Brazil, Chile, Dominican Republic and Hawai'i. Qualitative comparison of case studies, based on questionnaire sent to network of acacia researchers. Information based on individual knowledge of local experts, published and unpublished sources. We propose a conceptual model to explain current uses and perceptions of introduced acacias. It highlights historically and geographically contingent processes, including economic development, environmental discourses, political context, and local or regional needs. Four main groupings of case studies were united by similar patterns: (1) poor communities benefiting from targeted agroforestry projects; (2) places where residents, generally poor, take advantage of a valuable resource already present in their landscape via plantation and/or invasion; (3) regions of small and mid-scale tree farmers participating in the forestry industry; and (4) a number of high-income communities dealing with the legacies of former or niche use of introduced acacia in a context of increased concern over biodiversity and ecosystem services. Economic conditions play a key role shaping acacia use. Poorer communities rely strongly on acacias (often in, or escaped from, formal plantations) for household needs and, sometimes, for income. Middle-income regions more typically host private farm investments in acacia woodlots for commercialization. Efforts at control of invasive acacias must take care to not adversely impact poor dependent communities.
BASE
Aim To examine the different uses and perceptions of introduced Australian acacias (wattles; Acacia subgenus Phyllodineae) by rural households and communities. Location Eighteen landscape-scale case studies around the world, in Vietnam, India, Re´union, Madagascar, South Africa, Congo, Niger, Ethiopia, Israel, France, Portugal, Brazil, Chile, Dominican Republic and Hawai'i. Methods Qualitative comparison of case studies, based on questionnaire sent to network of acacia researchers. Information based on individual knowledge of local experts, published and unpublished sources. Results We propose a conceptual model to explain current uses and perceptions of introduced acacias. It highlights historically and geographically contingent processes, including economic development, environmental discourses, political context, and local or regional needs. Four main groupings of case studies were united by similar patterns: (1) poor communities benefiting from targeted agroforestry projects; (2) places where residents, generally poor, take advantage of a valuable resource already present in their landscape via plantation and/or invasion; (3) regions of small and mid-scale tree farmers participating in the forestry industry; and (4) a number of high-income communities dealing with the legacies of former or niche use of introduced acacia in a context of increased concern over biodiversity and ecosystem services. Main conclusions Economic conditions play a key role shaping acacia use. Poorer communities rely strongly on acacias (often in, or escaped from, formal plantations) for household needs and, sometimes, for income. Middle-income regions more typically host private farm investments in acacia woodlots for commercialization. Efforts at control of invasive acacias must take care to not adversely impact poor dependent communities.
BASE
Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre-emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision-making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non-substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling-up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. ; Fil: Chan, Kai M. A. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Boyd, David R. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Gould, Rachelle. University of Vermont; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Jetzkowitz, Jens. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; Alemania ; Fil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Muraca, Bárbara. University of Oregon; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Naidoo, Robin. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Beck, Paige. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Satterfield, Terre. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica ; Fil: Singh, Gerald G. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Sumaila, Rashid. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Ngo, Hien T. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Alemania ; Fil: Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Agard, John. The University Of The West Indies; Trinidad y Tobago ; Fil: de Aguiar, Ana Paula D. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia ; Fil: Armenteras, Dolors. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Colombia ; Fil: Balint, Lenke. BirdLife International; Reino Unido ; Fil: Barrington-Leigh, Christopher. Mcgill University; Canadá ; Fil: Cheung, William W. L. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina ; Fil: Driscoll, John. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Esler, Karen. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica ; Fil: Eyster, Harold. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Gregr, Edward J. University of British Columbia; Canadá ; Fil: Hashimoto, Shizuka. The University Of Tokyo; Japón ; Fil: Hernández Pedraza, Gladys Cecilia. The World Economy Research Center; Cuba ; Fil: Hickler, Thomas. Goethe Universitat Frankfurt; Alemania ; Fil: Kok, Marcel. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos ; Fil: Lazarova, Tanya. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países Bajos ; Fil: Mohamed, Assem A. A. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; Egipto ; Fil: Murray-Hudson, Mike. University Of Botswana; Botsuana ; Fil: O'Farrell, Patrick. University of Cape Town; Sudáfrica ; Fil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; España ; Fil: Saysel, Ali Kerem. Boğaziçi University; Turquía ; Fil: Seppelt, Ralf. Martin-universität Halle-wittenberg; Alemania ; Fil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research-iDiv; Alemania ; Fil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina; Brasil ; Fil: Xue, Dayuan. Minzu University Of China; China ; Fil: Brondízio, Eduardo S. Indiana University; Estados Unidos
BASE