Suchergebnisse

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – the most comprehensive assessment to date of the status and trends of Earth's ecological systems – warned us that 60% of the benefits nature provides to people ('ecosystem services') are being degraded or used unsustainably. This triggered widespread efforts, by research groups, conservation organizations and think tanks, to design and use ecosystem services assessments and tools around the world. These efforts aim to integrate the 'value of nature' in decision-making, policies, business operations and ultimately to change society's development trajectory to be sustainable.Yet, recent studies point out that not all new tools and scientific knowledge on ecosystem services are effectively used as a basis for decision and action leading to positive social and environmental outcomes. To create change, new scientific and expert knowledge, even when worrying, robust and empirically grounded, is not enough. It needs to be mobilized by leaders and change agents – researchers, conservation NGO practitioners, motivated policy makers or business – who use the information systems and knowledge as part of a strategy of communication, advocacy and action.Context matters. A good understanding of the context for biodiversity and ecosystem services approaches often determines whether a project has impact or not. Such understanding can be gathered quickly and easily using 'context diagnostic1' tools. These can be used by practitioners who are agents of change in real world situations.This report introduces such a context diagnostic tool for conservation and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (BESAV) practitioners. The tool includes five approaches based on well-established social science theories. Each approach gives a contrasting perspective and raises a set of thought-provoking questions on social, organizational, institutional and political aspects of context. The tool is illustrated throughout by examples inspired by real- world case studies, gathered through ...

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – the most comprehensive assessment to date of the status and trends of Earth's ecological systems – warned us that 60% of the benefits nature provides to people ('ecosystem services') are being degraded or used unsustainably. This triggered widespread efforts, by research groups, conservation organizations and think tanks, to design and use ecosystem services assessments and tools around the world. These efforts aim to integrate the 'value of nature' in decision-making, policies, business operations and ultimately to change society's development trajectory to be sustainable.Yet, recent studies point out that not all new tools and scientific knowledge on ecosystem services are effectively used as a basis for decision and action leading to positive social and environmental outcomes. To create change, new scientific and expert knowledge, even when worrying, robust and empirically grounded, is not enough. It needs to be mobilized by leaders and change agents – researchers, conservation NGO practitioners, motivated policy makers or business – who use the information systems and knowledge as part of a strategy of communication, advocacy and action.Context matters. A good understanding of the context for biodiversity and ecosystem services approaches often determines whether a project has impact or not. Such understanding can be gathered quickly and easily using 'context diagnostic1' tools. These can be used by practitioners who are agents of change in real world situations.This report introduces such a context diagnostic tool for conservation and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (BESAV) practitioners. The tool includes five approaches based on well-established social science theories. Each approach gives a contrasting perspective and raises a set of thought-provoking questions on social, organizational, institutional and political aspects of context. The tool is illustrated throughout by examples inspired by real- world case studies, gathered through ...

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – the most comprehensive assessment to date of the status and trends of Earth's ecological systems – warned us that 60% of the benefits nature provides to people ('ecosystem services') are being degraded or used unsustainably. This triggered widespread efforts, by research groups, conservation organizations and think tanks, to design and use ecosystem services assessments and tools around the world. These efforts aim to integrate the 'value of nature' in decision-making, policies, business operations and ultimately to change society's development trajectory to be sustainable.Yet, recent studies point out that not all new tools and scientific knowledge on ecosystem services are effectively used as a basis for decision and action leading to positive social and environmental outcomes. To create change, new scientific and expert knowledge, even when worrying, robust and empirically grounded, is not enough. It needs to be mobilized by leaders and change agents – researchers, conservation NGO practitioners, motivated policy makers or business – who use the information systems and knowledge as part of a strategy of communication, advocacy and action.Context matters. A good understanding of the context for biodiversity and ecosystem services approaches often determines whether a project has impact or not. Such understanding can be gathered quickly and easily using 'context diagnostic1' tools. These can be used by practitioners who are agents of change in real world situations.This report introduces such a context diagnostic tool for conservation and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (BESAV) practitioners. The tool includes five approaches based on well-established social science theories. Each approach gives a contrasting perspective and raises a set of thought-provoking questions on social, organizational, institutional and political aspects of context. The tool is illustrated throughout by examples inspired by real- world case studies, gathered through ...

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – the most comprehensive assessment to date of the status and trends of Earth's ecological systems – warned us that 60% of the benefits nature provides to people ('ecosystem services') are being degraded or used unsustainably. This triggered widespread efforts, by research groups, conservation organizations and think tanks, to design and use ecosystem services assessments and tools around the world. These efforts aim to integrate the 'value of nature' in decision-making, policies, business operations and ultimately to change society's development trajectory to be sustainable.Yet, recent studies point out that not all new tools and scientific knowledge on ecosystem services are effectively used as a basis for decision and action leading to positive social and environmental outcomes. To create change, new scientific and expert knowledge, even when worrying, robust and empirically grounded, is not enough. It needs to be mobilized by leaders and change agents – researchers, conservation NGO practitioners, motivated policy makers or business – who use the information systems and knowledge as part of a strategy of communication, advocacy and action.Context matters. A good understanding of the context for biodiversity and ecosystem services approaches often determines whether a project has impact or not. Such understanding can be gathered quickly and easily using 'context diagnostic1' tools. These can be used by practitioners who are agents of change in real world situations.This report introduces such a context diagnostic tool for conservation and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (BESAV) practitioners. The tool includes five approaches based on well-established social science theories. Each approach gives a contrasting perspective and raises a set of thought-provoking questions on social, organizational, institutional and political aspects of context. The tool is illustrated throughout by examples inspired by real- world case studies, gathered through ...

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – the most comprehensive assessment to date of the status and trends of Earth's ecological systems – warned us that 60% of the benefits nature provides to people ('ecosystem services') are being degraded or used unsustainably. This triggered widespread efforts, by research groups, conservation organizations and think tanks, to design and use ecosystem services assessments and tools around the world. These efforts aim to integrate the 'value of nature' in decision-making, policies, business operations and ultimately to change society's development trajectory to be sustainable.Yet, recent studies point out that not all new tools and scientific knowledge on ecosystem services are effectively used as a basis for decision and action leading to positive social and environmental outcomes. To create change, new scientific and expert knowledge, even when worrying, robust and empirically grounded, is not enough. It needs to be mobilized by leaders and change agents – researchers, conservation NGO practitioners, motivated policy makers or business – who use the information systems and knowledge as part of a strategy of communication, advocacy and action.Context matters. A good understanding of the context for biodiversity and ecosystem services approaches often determines whether a project has impact or not. Such understanding can be gathered quickly and easily using 'context diagnostic1' tools. These can be used by practitioners who are agents of change in real world situations.This report introduces such a context diagnostic tool for conservation and Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (BESAV) practitioners. The tool includes five approaches based on well-established social science theories. Each approach gives a contrasting perspective and raises a set of thought-provoking questions on social, organizational, institutional and political aspects of context. The tool is illustrated throughout by examples inspired by real- world case studies, gathered through ...

The guide aims to help practitioners understand local context and external pressures – the formal and informal institutional, political, legal, economic and social setting of conservation – to guide action for better ecosystem management.

The guide aims to help practitioners understand local context and external pressures – the formal and informal institutional, political, legal, economic and social setting of conservation – to guide action for better ecosystem management.

The guide aims to help practitioners understand local context and external pressures – the formal and informal institutional, political, legal, economic and social setting of conservation – to guide action for better ecosystem management.

The guide aims to help practitioners understand local context and external pressures – the formal and informal institutional, political, legal, economic and social setting of conservation – to guide action for better ecosystem management.

The guide aims to help practitioners understand local context and external pressures – the formal and informal institutional, political, legal, economic and social setting of conservation – to guide action for better ecosystem management.

Over the last two decades, sustainable landscape approaches are increasingly being adopted worldwide. An important challenge for these approaches is to analyse and improve governance systems that promote non-conflicting land uses to provide multiple ecosystem services and safeguard biodiversity for diverse social groups over the long term. Our study provides a diagnostic of the gaps and limitations of the current institutional arrangements of an ecosystem corridor in Central Sumatra covering Riau, Jambi and West Sumatera, known as the RIMBA corridor landscape. We identify actions that stakeholders think should be taken to improve the governance of the RIMBA corridor to achieve sustainable landscape goals. We used a combination of methods, including (1) Focus Group Discussions with key stakeholders of the RIMBA programme; (2) the use of a "context diagnostic approach for conservation" to analyse the results of the Focus Group Discussions; (3) a survey on formal institution design for coordination and management of the RIMBA corridor. We found that although transformational dynamics have already been initiated at the local, provincial and national levels through a pilot project, new regulations and institutional changes, many obstacles to effective governance of the RIMBA landscape still remain. Our study points at the need for a new institution to enable cooperation for green economy policy objectives established through a Presidential Decree to achieve the required institutional innovations at the scales required. Our experimental diagnostic approach can be applied in other settings in Indonesia and elsewhere to analyse and improve the effectiveness of governance for the management of biodiversity and ecosystem services at landscape scales.

The limited understanding of how ecosystem service knowledge (ESK) is used in decision making constrains our ability to learn from, replicate, and convey success stories. We explore use of ESK in decision making in three international cases: national coastal planning in Belize; regional marine spatial planning on Vancouver Island, Canada; and regional land-use planning on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. Decision makers, scientists, and stakeholders collaborated in each case to use a standardized ecosystem service accounting tool to inform spatial planning. We evaluate interview, survey, and observation data to assess evidence of 'conceptual', 'strategic', and 'instrumental' use of ESK. We find evidence of all modes: conceptual use dominates early planning, while strategic and instrumental uses occur iteratively in middle and late stages. Conceptual and strategic uses of ESK build understanding and compromise that facilitate instrumental use. We highlight attributes of ESK, characteristics of the process, and general conditions that appear to affect how knowledge is used. Meaningful participation, scenario development, and integration of local and traditional knowledge emerge as important for particular uses.

IntroductionColorectal cancer (CRC) screening is associated with significant reductions in burden, mortality and cost. Primary care providers in Alberta do not have access to integrated CRC testing histories for patients. Providing this information will support CRC screening among patients at average and high risk, follow-up of abnormal tests, and surveillance.
Objectives and ApproachCalgary Laboratory Services, Colon Cancer Screening Centre, Alberta Cancer Registry, and endoscopy data were linked to create a comprehensive CRC screening history at the patient level. Based on screening histories and the current Clinical Practice Guideline, an algorithm was created to determine CRC screening statuses with the aim of providing accurate screening rates when linked to primary care provider patient panels. Results from the linkage are designed to be incorporated into clinic and EMR workflow processes to support adherence to evidence-based screening recommendations at the point of care.
ResultsA comprehensive assessment of screening status was determined by integrating Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) and colonoscopy data. Among a sample cohort, patients were identified as being due for screening with FIT, requiring follow-up for a positive FIT test, or requiring appropriate surveillance for a positive-screen or abnormal colonoscopy findings. A summary report, actionable list, and resources were developed to convey findings. The summary report displayed CRC screening rates for a provider's panel. The actionable list provided CRC screening statuses for each patient aged 40 to 84 indicating patients due for screening with FIT, for follow-up of positive FIT, or for surveillance colonoscopy. The resources were developed to support quality improvement for colorectal cancer screening for patients.
Conclusion/ImplicationsThe data linkages and algorithm provide comprehensive CRC screening, follow-up, and surveillance information that could support guideline-adherent screening, increase screening rates, reduce duplication or unnecessary testing, and provide primary care providers with timely and robust information to support clinical decisions for individuals inside and outside of the target screening population.

Engagement with diverse social science disciplines is essential to revealing political, social, and institutional challenges that must be addressed to advance effective biodiversity conservation (Bennett et al. 2017; Teel et al. 2018). One challenge that remains insufficiently investigated is frustration with the lack of impact of innovative information tools and systems of accounts aimed at motivating and guiding ecosystem management. The conservation community invests considerable efforts in their creation and experimentation. However, ecosystem-based tools do not always lead to the changes in decision, action, or policy conser- vation scientists expect (e.g., Ruckelshaus et al. 2015). Often, the inability of such information systems to gen- erate expected changes is not due to technical limitations rather than the too fragile articulation between their de- sign and the complex realities of developing strategies and organizing management of ecosystems in a diversity of contexts. Investigating such articulation between an information system and the organizational details of its systematic use is precisely what characterizes an aca- demic field: accounting, which belongs to management as a discipline and often intersects with social sciences or economics.