Aletta Bonn

Anticipating and managing future trade-offs and complementarities between ecosystem services

This paper shows how, with the aid of computer models developed in close collaboration with decision makers and other stakeholders, it is possible to quantify and map how policy decisions are likely to affect multiple ecosystem services in future. In this way, potential trade-offs and complementarities between different ecosystem services can be identified, so that policies can be designed to avoid the worst trade-offs, and where possible, enhance multiple services. The paper brings together evidence from across the Rural Economy and Land Use Programmes Sustainable Uplands project for the first time, with previously unpublished model outputs relating to runoff, agricultural suitability, biomass, heather cover, age, and utility for Red Grouse (Lagopus scotica), grass cover, and accompanying scenario narratives and video. Two contrasting scenarios, based on policies to extensify or intensify land management up to 2030, were developed through a combination of interviews and discussions during site visits with stakeholders, literature review, conceptual modeling, and process-based computer models, using the Dark Peak of the Peak District National Park in the UK as a case study. Where extensification leads to a significant reduction in managed burning and grazing or land abandonment, changes in vegetation type and structure could compromise a range of species that are important for conservation, while compromising provisioning services, amenity value, and increasing wildfire risk. However, where extensification leads to the restoration of peatlands damaged by former intensive management, there would be an increase in carbon sequestration and storage, with a number of cobenefits, which could counter the loss of habitats and species elsewhere in the landscape. In the second scenario, land use and management was significantly intensified to boost UK self-sufficiency in food. This would benefit certain provisioning services but would have negative consequences for carbon storage and water quality and would lead to a reduction in the abundance of certain species of conservation concern. The paper emphasizes the need for spatially explicit models that can track how ecosystem services might change over time, in response to policy or environmental drivers, and in response to the changing demands and preferences of society, which are far harder to anticipate. By developing such models in close collaboration with decision makers and other stakeholders, it is possible to depict scenarios of real concern to those who need to use the research findings. By engaging these collaborators with the research findings through film, it was possible to discuss adaptive options to minimize trade-offs and enhance the provision of multiple ecosystem services under the very different future conditions depicted by each scenario. By preparing for as wide a range of futures as possible in this way, it may be possible for decision makers to act rapidly and effectively to protect and enhance the provision of ecosystem services in the face of unpredictable future change.

Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban areas: perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action

textabstractNature-based solutions promoting green and blue urban areas have significant potential to decrease the vulnerability and enhance the resilience of cities in light of climatic change. They can thereby help to mitigate climate change-induced impacts and serve as proactive adaptation options for municipalities. We explore the various contexts in which nature-based solutions are relevant for climate mitigation and adaptation in urban areas, identify indicators for assessing the effectiveness of nature-based solutions and related knowledge gaps. In addition, we explore existing barriers and potential opportunities for increasing the scale and effectiveness of nature-based solution implementation. The results were derived from an inter- and transdisciplinary workshop with experts from research, municipalities, policy, and society. As an outcome of the workshop discussions and building on existing evidence, we highlight three main needs for future science and policy agendas when dealing with nature-based solutions: (i) produce stronger evidence on nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and mitigation and raise awareness by increasing implementation; (ii) adapt for governance challenges in implementing nature-based solutions by using reflexive approaches, which implies bringing together new networks of society, nature-based solution ambassadors, and practitioners; (iii) consider socio-environmental justice and social cohesion when implementing nature-based solutions by using integrated governance approaches that take into account an integrative and transdisciplinary participation of diverse actors. Taking these needs into account, nature-based solutions can serve as climate mitigation and adaptation tools that produce additional cobenefits for societal well-being, thereby serving as strong investment options for sustainable urban planning.

Participatory scenario development for environmental management: A methodological framework illustrated with experience from the UK uplands

A methodological framework is proposed for participatory scenario development on the basis of evidence from the literature, and is tested and refined through the development of scenarios for the future of UK uplands. The paper uses a review of previous work to justify a framework based around the following steps: i) define context and establish whether there is a basis for stakeholder engagement in scenario development; ii) systematically identify and represent relevant stakeholders in the process; iii) define clear objectives for scenario development with stakeholders including spatial and temporal boundaries; iv) select relevant participatory methods for scenario development, during initial scenario construction, evaluation and to support decision-making based on scenarios; and v) integrate local and scientific knowledge throughout the process. The application of this framework in case study research suggests that participatory scenario development has the potential to: i) make scenarios more relevant to stakeholder needs and priorities; ii) extend the range of scenarios developed; iii) develop more detailed and precise scenarios through the integration of local and scientific knowledge; and iv) move beyond scenario development to facilitate adaptation to future change. It is argued that participatory scenario development can empower stakeholders and lead to more consistent and robust scenarios that can help people prepare more effectively for future change.

The alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies in the European Union

Europe is a region of relatively high population density and productive agriculture subject to substantial government intervention under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Many habitats and species of high conservation interest have been created by the maintenance of agricultural practices over long periods. These practices are often no longer profitable, and nature conservation initiatives require government support to cover the cost for them to be continued. The CAP has been reformed both to reduce production of agricultural commodities at costs in excess of world prices and to establish incentives for landholders to adopt voluntary conservation measures. A separate nature conservation policy has established an extensive series of protected sites (Natura 2000) that has, as yet, failed to halt the loss of biodiversity. Additional broader scale approaches have been advocated for conservation in the wider landscape matrix, including the alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies, which remains a challenge. Possibilities for alignment include further shifting of funds from general support for farmers toward targeted payments for biodiversity goals at larger scales and adoption of an ecosystem approach. The European response to the competing demands for land resources may offer lessons globally as demands on rural land increase.

Learning and the transformative potential of citizen science.

The number of collaborative initiatives between scientists and volunteers (i.e., citizen science) is increasing across many research fields. The promise of societal transformation together with scientific breakthroughs contributes to the current popularity of citizen science (CS) in the policy domain. We examined the transformative capacity of citizen science in particular learning through environmental CS as conservation tool. We reviewed the CS and social-learning literature and examined 14 conservation projects across Europe that involved collaborative CS. We also developed a template that can be used to explore learning arrangements (i.e., learning events and materials) in CS projects and to explain how the desired outcomes can be achieved through CS learning. We found that recent studies aiming to define CS for analytical purposes often fail to improve the conceptual clarity of CS; CS programs may have transformative potential, especially for the development of individual skills, but such transformation is not necessarily occurring at the organizational and institutional levels; empirical evidence on simple learning outcomes, but the assertion of transformative effects of CS learning is often based on assumptions rather than empirical observation; and it is unanimous that learning in CS is considered important, but in practice it often goes unreported or unevaluated. In conclusion, we point to the need for reliable and transparent measurement of transformative effects for democratization of knowledge production.

National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review

Abstract National ecosystem assessments form an essential knowledge base for safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem services. We analyze eight European (sub-)national ecosystem assessments (Portugal, United Kingdom, Spain, Norway, Flanders, Netherlands, Finland, and Germany) and compare their objectives, political context, methods, and operationalization. We observed remarkable differences in breadth of the assessment, methods employed, variety of services considered, policy mandates, and funding mechanisms. Biodiversity and ecosystem services are mainly assessed independently, with biodiversity conceptualized as underpinning services, as a source of conflict with services, or as a service in itself. Recommendations derived from our analysis for future ecosystem assessments include the needs to improve the common evidence base, to advance the mapping of services, to consider international flows of services, and to connect more strongly to policy questions. Although the context specificity of national ecosystem assessments is acknowledged as important, a greater harmonization across assessments could help to better inform common European policies and future pan-regional assessments.

Operationalizing Network Theory for Ecosystem Service Assessments

Managing ecosystems to provide ecosystem services in the face of global change is a pressing challenge for policy and science. Predicting how alternative management actions and changing future conditions will alter services is complicated by interactions among components in ecological and socioeconomic systems. Failure to understand those interactions can lead to detrimental outcomes from management decisions. Network theory that integrates ecological and socioeconomic systems may provide a path to meeting this challenge. While network theory offers promising approaches to examine ecosystem services, few studies have identified how to operationalize networks for managing and assessing diverse ecosystem services. We propose a framework for how to use networks to assess how drivers and management actions will directly and indirectly alter ecosystem services.

Peatland Restoration and Ecosystem Services: Science, Policy and Practice

Peatlands provide globally important ecosystem services through climate and water regulation or biodiversity conservation. While covering only 0.4 per cent of the Earth’s surface, degrading peatlands are responsible for nearly a quarter of carbon emissions from the land-use sector. Bringing together world-class experts from science, policy and practice to highlight and debate the importance of peatlands from an ecological, social and economic perspective, this book focuses on how peatland restoration can foster climate change mitigation. Featuring a range of global case studies, opportunities for reclamation and sustainable management are illustrated throughout against the challenges faced by conservation biologists. Written for a global audience of environmental scientists, practitioners and policy makers, as well as graduate students from natural and social sciences, this interdisciplinary book provides vital pointers towards managing peatland conservation in a changing environment.

When, Where, and How Nature Matters for Ecosystem Services: Challenges for the Next Generation of Ecosystem Service Models

&NA; Many decision‐makers are looking to science to clarify how nature supports human well‐being. Scientists’ responses have typically focused on empirical models of the provision of ecosystem services (ES) and resulting decision‐support tools. Although such tools have captured some of the complexities of ES, they can be difficult to adapt to new situations. Globally useful tools that predict the provision of multiple ES under different decision scenarios have proven challenging to develop. Questions from decision‐makers and limitations of existing decision‐support tools indicate three crucial research frontiers for incorporating cutting‐edge ES science into decision‐support tools: (1) understanding the complex dynamics of ES in space and time, (2) linking ES provision to human well‐being, and (3) determining the potential for technology to substitute for or enhance ES. We explore these frontiers in‐depth, explaining why each is important and how existing knowledge at their cutting edges can be incorporated to improve ES decision‐making tools.

Using stakeholder and social network analysis to support participatory processes

There is growing awareness that effective manage-ment of socio-ecological systems requires closecollaboration between research disciplines, policy-makers and stakeholders at all levels to strike abalance between different (potentially conflicting)perspectives and objectives. To facilitate this, arange of participatory research methods haveemerged in recent years that have gained main-stream acceptance in many policy and researchcircles. However, the limitations of participatoryresearch are increasingly being recognised. Forexample,participatoryresearchcanreinforceexist-ing privileges, and group dynamics can discourageminority perspectives from being expressed, thuscreating a ‘dysfunctional consensus’.Appropriate stakeholder selection is a keychallenge for participatory research. Participatoryapproaches to conflict management must be asinclusive as possible to avoid marginalising stake-holdergroups,andthisisachallengewiththesmallsample sizes that are usually used to attain depthof understanding in participatory research. Thelimitations of statistically representative surveyswith large sample populations are widely recog-nised, but a participatory process can only be legiti-mate and effective if it represents all sides of thedebate. The participatory literature proposes avariety of ways to select representative participants,but few of these are without problems. To addressthese challenges, this paper proposes an approachto select participants who are: (i) representative ofthe wider stakeholder community; (ii) likely toengage constructively in dialogue; and (iii) are wellknown and respected enough to diffuse ideas fromthis dialogue to a wide social network. By targetingthe involvement of these individuals in a participa-tory process, it may be possible to attain ‘better’quality land management strategies, ones whichreflectthemultiple valuesandknowledges ofstake-holders. This approach is illustrated through a casestudy of a land management conflict in the UK’sPeak District National Park (PDNP).