Issues and challenges in spatio-temporal application of an ecosystem services framework to UK seas
In: Marine policy, Band 45, S. 359-367
ISSN: 0308-597X
9 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Marine policy, Band 45, S. 359-367
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 45, S. 359-367
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Science and public policy: journal of the Science Policy Foundation, Band 41, Heft 2
ISSN: 1471-5430
Influence of valuations of ecosystem goods and services on Atlantic marine spatial planning. Executive Summary • The identification of services, in particular their values and conflict areas, is important for marine/ maritime spatial planning (MSP). • Monetary valuation for improving decision making is promoted by global and EU policies. • Ecosystem valuation should be an integral part of marine management decision models and can encourage investment and Blue Growth. • Valuation could have additional specific uses in deep-sea contexts where governance structures are weak or incomplete. • Changes in well-being for different stakeholder groups, as expressed by economic valuation, can feed into MSP. • The EU ATLAS project has undertaken a spatial assessment of the relative values of 12 ecosystem services in selected case study areas.
BASE
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 54, S. 505-512
ISSN: 1462-9011
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 113, S. 21-30
ISSN: 1462-9011
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.
BASE
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
BASE
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.
BASE