Search

Securing well-being and building resilience in response to shocks are often viewed as key goals of sustainable development. Here, we present an overview of the latest published evidence, as well as the consensus of a diverse group of scientists and practitioners drawn from a structured analytical review and deliberative workshop process. We argue that resilience and well-being are related in complex ways, but in their applications in practice they are often assumed to be synergistic. Although theoretically compatible, evidence we present here shows that they may in fact work against each other. This has important implications for policy.

Many ecosystem services (ES) models exist to support sustainable development decisions. However, most ES studies use only a single modelling framework and, because of a lack of validation data, rarely assess model accuracy for the study area. In line with other research themes which have high model uncertainty, such as climate change, ensembles of ES models may better serve decision-makers by providing more robust and accurate estimates, as well as provide indications of uncertainty when validation data are not available. To illustrate the benefits of an ensemble approach, we highlight the variation between alternative models, demonstrating that there are large geographic regions where decisions based on individual models are not robust. We test if ensembles are more accurate by comparing the ensemble accuracy of multiple models for six ES against validation data across sub-Saharan Africa with the accuracy of individual models. We find that ensembles are better predictors of ES, being 5.0 6.1% more accurate than individual models. We also find that the uncertainty (i.e. variation among constituent models) of the model ensemble is negatively correlated with accuracy and so can be used as a proxy for accuracy when validation is not possible (e.g. in data-deficient areas or when developing scenarios). Since ensembles are more robust, accurate and convey uncertainty, we recommend that ensemble modelling should be more widely implemented within ES science to better support policy choices and implementation. © 2020 The Authors

no abstract

Contains fulltext : 214511.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Faced with environmental degradation, governments worldwide are developing policies to safeguard ecosystem services (ES). Many ES models exist to support these policies, but they are generally poorly validated, especially at large scales, which undermines their credibility. To address this gap, we describe a study of multiple models of five ES, which we validate at an unprecedented scale against 1675 data points across sub-Saharan Africa. We find that potential ES (biophysical supply of carbon and water) are reasonably well predicted by the existing models. These potential ES models can also be used as inputs to new models for realised ES (use of charcoal, firewood, grazing resources and water), by adding information on human population density. We find that increasing model complexity can improve estimates of both potential and realised ES, suggesting that developing more detailed models of ES will be beneficial. Furthermore, in 85% of cases, human population density alone was as good or a better predictor of realised ES than ES models, suggesting that it is demand, rather than supply that is predominantly determining current patterns of ES use. Our study demonstrates the feasibility of ES model validation, even in data-deficient locations such as sub-Saharan Africa. Our work also shows the clear need for more work on the demand side of ES models, and the importance of model validation in providing a stronger base to support policies which seek to achieve sustainable development in support of human well-being. © 2019, The Author(s).

IPBES ist ein unabhängiges zwischenstaatliches Gremium, dem über 130 Mitgliedsregierungen angehören. IPBES wurde 2012 von den Regierungen gegründet und bietet politischen Entscheidungsträgern objektive wissenschaftliche Beurteilungen über den Stand des Wissens über die biologische Vielfalt des Planeten, die Ökosysteme und die Beiträge, die sie für die Menschen leisten sowie über Optionen und Maßnahmen zum Schutz und zur nachhaltigen Nutzung dieser lebenswichtigen natürlichen Ressourcen. Dieses globale Assessment der biologischen Vielfalt und Ökosystemleistungen stellt das bahnbrechende Produkt des ersten Arbeitsprogramms des IPBES (2014-2018) dar. Das Assessment wurde nach einem Beschluss des IPBES-Plenums auf seiner vierten Sitzung (IPBES 4, Kuala Lumpur, 2016) initiiert und vom IPBES-Plenum auf seiner siebten Sitzung (IPBES 7, Paris, 2019) beraten. Es besteht aus einer Zusammenfassung für politische Entscheidungsträger, die auf der IPBES 7 angenommen wurde, und sechs Kapiteln, die auf der IPBES 7 angenommen wurden.

Delivering access to sufficient food, energy and water resources to ensure human wellbeing is a major concern for governments worldwide. However, it is crucial to account for the 'nexus' of interactions between these natural resources and the consequent implications for human wellbeing. The private sector has a critical role in driving positive change towards more sustainable nexus management and could reap considerable benefits from collaboration with researchers to devise solutions to some of the foremost sustainability challenges of today. Yet opportunities are missed because the private sector is rarely involved in the formulation of deliverable research priorities. We convened senior research scientists and influential business leaders to collaboratively identify the top forty questions that, if answered, would best help companies understand and manage their food-energy-water-environment nexus dependencies and impacts. Codification of the top order nexus themes highlighted research priorities around development of pragmatic yet credible tools that allow businesses to incorporate nexus interactions into their decision-making; demonstration of the business case for more sustainable nexus management; identification of the most effective levers for behaviour change; and understanding incentives or circumstances that allow individuals and businesses to take a leadership stance. Greater investment in the complex but productive relations between the private sector and research community will create deeper and more meaningful collaboration and cooperation.

Humankind has never been so populous, technically equipped, and economically and culturally integrated as it is today. In the twenty-first century, societies are confronted with a multitude of challenges in their efforts to manage the Earth system.

The planetary boundaries framework defines a safe operating space for humanity based on the intrinsic biophysical processes that regulate the stability of the Earth system. Here, we revise and update the planetary boundary framework, with a focus on the underpinning biophysical science, based on targeted input from expert research communities and on more general scientific advances over the past 5 years. Several of the boundaries now have a two-tier approach, reflecting the importance of cross-scale interactions and the regional-level heterogeneity of the processes that underpin the boundaries. Two core boundaries—climate change and biosphere integrity—have been identified, each of which has the potential on its own to drive the Earth system into a new state should they be substantially and persistently transgressed.

Ecosystem services have become a mainstream concept for the expression of values assigned by people to various functions of ecosystems. Even though the introduction of the concept has initiated a vast amount of research, progress in using this knowledge for sustainable resource use remains insufficient. We see a need to broaden the scope of research to answer three key questions that we believe will improve incorporation of ecosystem service research into decision-making for the sustainable use of natural resources to improve human well-being: (i) how are ecosystem services co-produced by social–ecological systems, (ii) who benefits from the provision of ecosystem services, and (iii) what are the best practices for the governance of ecosystem services? Here, we present these key questions, the rationale behind them, and their related scientific challenges in a globally coordinated research programme aimed towards improving sustainable ecosystem management. These questions will frame the activities of ecoSERVICES, formerly a DIVERSITAS project and now a project of Future Earth, in its role as a platform to foster global coordination of multidisciplinary sustainability science through the lens of ecosystem services.

The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework. This conceptual and analytical tool, presented here in detail, will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that IPBES will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions. Salient innovative aspects of the IPBES Conceptual Framework are its transparent and participatory construction process and its explicit consideration of diverse scientific disciplines, stakeholders, and knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge. Because the focus on co-construction of integrative knowledge is shared by an increasing number of initiatives worldwide, this framework should be useful beyond IPBES, for the wider research and knowledge-policy communities working on the links between nature and people, such as natural, social and engineering scientists, policy-makers at different levels, and decision-makers in different sectors of society

Contains fulltext : 160443.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), It is often either undesirable or unfeasible to conduct an assessment of ecological or social systems, independently or jointly, at a single scale and resolution in time and space. This paper outlines the alternatives, which include 'multi-scale assessments' (conducting the assessment at two or more discrete scales) and 'cross-scale assessments' (multi-scale assessments which deliberately look for cross-scale interactions), and points to some methods which may be useful in conducting them. The additional work and complexity that result from taking a multi-scale or cross-scale approach, while necessary and realistic, needs to be managed. This can be achieved by the informed choice of scales, a priori consideration of the scale-related properties of the phenomena being assessed, and paying attention to the ways in which information and control pass between scales. The conceptual issues associated with choosing the scales and resolutions at which to work are discussed, as are strategies for aggregation and disaggregation and for linking studies at different scales.

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 160465.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)

The potential for conservation of individual species has been greatly advanced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) development of objective, repeatable, and transparent criteria for assessing extinction risk that explicitly separate risk assessment from priority setting. At the IV World Conservation Congress in 2008, the process began to develop and implement comparable global standards for ecosystems. A working group established by the IUCN has begun formulating a system of quantitative categories and criteria, analogous to those used for species, for assigning levels of threat to ecosystems at local, regional, and global levels. A final system will require definitions of ecosystems; quantification of ecosystem status; identification of the stages of degradation and loss of ecosystems; proxy measures of risk (criteria); classification thresholds for these criteria; and standardized methods for performing assessments. The system will need to reflect the degree and rate of change in an ecosystem's extent, composition, structure, and function, and have its conceptual roots in ecological theory and empirical research. On the basis of these requirements and the hypothesis that ecosystem risk is a function of the risk of its component species, we propose a set of four criteria: recent declines in distribution or ecological function, historical total loss in distribution or ecological function, small distribution combined with decline, or very small distribution. Most work has focused on terrestrial ecosystems, but comparable thresholds and criteria for freshwater and marine ecosystems are also needed. These are the first steps in an international consultation process that will lead to a unified proposal to be presented at the next World Conservation Congress in 2012.

Global declines in biodiversity and ecosystem services have triggered national and international agreements to halt and reverse these trends (e.g. the Convention on Biological Diversity's target of achieving a significant reduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss by 2010). These agreements have highlighted the need for monitoring systems which accurately describe the conditions and trends of biodiversity and ecosystem services, as well as the drivers of change. GEOSS aims to contribute to these needs in the ecosystems and biodiversity benefit areas. We demonstrate the benefits of GEOSS in the monitoring and assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services using a case study from a semi-arid biodiversity hotspot in South Africa. Using data poor (non-GEOSS) and data rich (GEOSS) scenarios we highlight the substantial differences found in biodiversity and ecosystem service condition. We link these findings to the need for careful and well informed management of ecosystems in semi-arid regions. We conclude with a summary of the costs and benefits of improved data.

The issues surrounding "Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation" (REDD) have become a major component of continuing negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This paper aims to address two key requirements of any potential REDD mechanism: first, the generation of measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV) REDD credits; and secondly, the sustainable and efficient provision of emission reductions under a robust financing regime. To ensure the supply of MRV credits, we advocate the establishment of an "International Emission Reference Scenario Coordination Centre" (IERSCC). The IERSCC would act as a global clearing house for harmonized data to be used in implementing reference level methodologies. It would be tasked with the collection, reporting and subsequent processing of earth observation, deforestation- and degradation driver information in a globally consistent manner. The IERSCC would also assist, coordinate and supervise the computation of national reference scenarios according to rules negotiated under the UNFCCC. To overcome the threats of "market flooding" on the one hand and insufficient economic incentives for REDD on the other hand, we suggest an "International Investment Reserve" (IIR) as REDD financing framework. In order to distribute the resources of the IIR we propose adopting an auctioning mechanism. Auctioning not only reveals the true emission reduction costs, but might also allow for incentivizing the protection of biodiversity and socio-economic values. The introduced concepts will be vital to ensure robustness, environmental integrity and economic efficiency of the future REDD mechanism.

The aim of the Global Earth Observation System-of-Systems (GEOSS) is to improve the information available to decision makers, at all levels, relating to human health and safety, protection of the global environment, the reduction of losses from natural disasters, and achieving sustainable development. Specifically, GEOSS proposes that better international cooperation in the collection, interpretation, and sharing of Earth observation information is an important and cost-effective mechanism for achieving this aim. While there is a widespread intuition that this proposition is correct, at some point the following question needs to be answered: how much additional investment in Earth observation (and specifically, in its international integration) is enough? This leads directly to some challenging subsidiary questions, such as how can the benefits of Earth observation be assessed? What are the incremental costs of GEOSS? Are there societal benefit areas where the return on investment is higher than in others? The Geo-Bene Project has developed a ldquobenefit chainrdquo concept as a framework for addressing these questions. The basic idea is that an incremental improvement in the observing system (including its data collection, interpretation and information-sharing aspects) will result in an improvement in the quality of decisions based on that information. In turn, this will lead to better societal outcomes, which have a value. This incremental value must be judged against the incremental cost of the improved observation system. Since in many cases there will be large uncertainties in the estimation of both the costs and the benefits, and it may not be possible to express them in comparable monetary terms, we show how order-of-magnitude approaches and a qualitative understanding of the shape of the cost and benefit curves can help guide rational investment decisions in Earth Observation Systems.

Conservation priority-setting schemes have not yet combined geographic priorities with a framework that can guide the allocation of funds among alternate conservation actions that address specific threats. We develop such a framework, and apply it to 17 of the world's 39 Mediterranean ecoregions. This framework offers an improvement over approaches that only focus on land purchase or species richness and do not account for threats. We discover that one could protect many more plant and vertebrate species by investing in a sequence of conservation actions targeted towards specific threats, such as invasive species control, land acquisition, and off-reserve management, than by relying solely on acquiring land for protected areas. Applying this new framework will ensure investment in actions that provide the most cost-effective outcomes for biodiversity conservation. This will help to minimise the misallocation of scarce conservation resources. © 2007 Wilson et al.

This article is free to read on the publisher website The key biodiversity areas (KBA) approach aims to identify globally important areas for species conservation. Although a similar methodology has been used successfully to identify Important Bird Areas, we have identified five limitations that may apply when considering other taxa: The KBA approach is overly prescriptive in identifying important conservation features, is inflexible when dealing with landscape connectivity, creates errors by applying global criteria without input from local experts, relies on post hoc consideration of implementation opportunities and constraints, and fails to automatically involve implementation agencies in the assessment process. We suggest three modifications to the present approach: (1) Provide training in regional conservation planning for local stakeholders, (2) expand the Alliance for Zero Extinction program to include a broader range of threatened species, and (3) allow local stakeholders to nominate KBAs on the basis of their own regional conservation assessments. These modifications would build on the expertise of those promoting the KBA approach and help maintain the diversity of methods that are needed to conserve biodiversity effectively. © 2007 American Institute of Biological Sciences.

Conservation priority-setting schemes have not yet combined geographic priorities with a framework that can guide the allocation of funds among alternate conservation actions that address specific threats. We develop such a framework, and apply it to 17 of the world's 39 Mediterranean ecoregions. This framework offers an improvement over approaches that only focus on land purchase or species richness and do not account for threats. We discover that one could protect many more plant and vertebrate species by investing in a sequence of conservation actions targeted towards specific threats, such as invasive species control, land acquisition, and off-reserve management, than by relying solely on acquiring land for protected areas. Applying this new framework will ensure investment in actions that provide the most cost-effective outcomes for biodiversity conservation. This will help to minimise the misallocation of scarce conservation resources.

The Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SAfMA) evaluated the relationships between ecosystem services and human well-being at multiple scales, ranging from local through to sub-continental. Trends in ecosystem services (fresh water, food, fuel-wood, cultural and biodiversity) over the period 1990-2000 were mixed across scales. Freshwater resources appear strained across the continent with large numbers of people not securing adequate supplies, especially of good quality water. This translates to high infant mortality patterns across the region. In some areas, the use of water resources for irrigated agriculture and urban-industrial expansion is taking place at considerable cost to the quality and quantity of freshwater available to ecosystems and for domestic use. Staple cereal production across the region has increased but was outstripped by population growth while protein malnutrition is on the rise. The much-anticipated wood-fuel crisis on the subcontinent has not materialized but some areas are experiencing shortages while numerous others remain vulnerable. Cultural benefits of biodiversity are considerable, though hard to quantify or track over time. Biodiversity resources remain at reasonable levels, but are declining faster than reflected in species extinction rates and appear highly sensitive to land-use decisions. The SAfMA sub-global assessment provided an opportunity to experiment with innovative ways to assess ecosystem services including the use of supply-demand surfaces, service sources and sink areas, priority areas for service provision, service "hotspots" and trade-off assessments.

The Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SAfMA) evaluated the relationships between ecosystem services and human well-being at multiple scales, ranging from local through to sub-continental. Trends in ecosystem services (fresh water, food, fuel-wood, cultural and biodiversity) over the period 1990-2000 were mixed across scales. Freshwater resources appear strained across the continent with large numbers of people not securing adequate supplies, especially of good quality water. This translates to high infant mortality patterns across the region. In some areas, the use of water resources for irrigated agriculture and urban-industrial expansion is taking place at considerable cost to the quality and quantity of freshwater available to ecosystems and for domestic use. Staple cereal production across the region has increased but was outstripped by population growth while protein malnutrition is on the rise. The much-anticipated wood-fuel crisis on the subcontinent has not materialized but some areas are experiencing shortages while numerous others remain vulnerable. Cultural benefits of biodiversity are considerable, though hard to quantify or track over time. Biodiversity resources remain at reasonable levels, but are declining faster than reflected in species extinction rates and appear highly sensitive to land-use decisions. The SAfMA sub-global assessment provided an opportunity to experiment with innovative ways to assess ecosystem services including the use of supply-demand surfaces, service sources and sink areas, priority areas for service provision, service "hotspots" and trade-off assessments.