Search

This panel discussion session explores some of the central dimensions of the Crisis in the Anthropocene that constitute global social challenges in the context of development studies The conference theme highlighted the profound human impact on our blue green brown planet that is already breaching planetary boundaries and pushing us beyond the roughly 1 5 C tipping point This threatens liveability and sustainability in many localities and regions and may well rapidly be off the scale of imaginability and survivability Inevitably as mounting empirical evidence and increasingly clear projections by the IPCC and other authoritative bodies show these impacts are unevenly spread both socially and spatially both now and over the coming decades The urgency of appropriate action is undeniable and we already know many dimensions of the required adaptations and transformations Yet progress mostly remains too slow These challenges are vital to the development studies community heterogenous as it is with our concerns for tackling poverty inequality deprivation and environmental degradation globally and locally Hence this symposium asks what the crisis means for development theory policy and practice and what development studies can and should be contributing to and indeed whether it is capable of addressing some key dimensions that warrant greater attention

Technology is transforming societies worldwide. A major innovation is the emergence of robotics and autonomous systems (RAS), which have the potential to revolutionize cities for both people and nature. Nonetheless, the opportunities and challenges associated with RAS for urban ecosystems have yet to be considered systematically. Here, we report the findings of an online horizon scan involving 170 expert participants from 35 countries. We conclude that RAS are likely to transform land use, transport systems and human-nature interactions. The prioritized opportunities were primarily centred on the deployment of RAS for the monitoring and management of biodiversity and ecosystems. Fewer challenges were prioritized. Those that were emphasized concerns surrounding waste from unrecovered RAS, and the quality and interpretation of RAS-collected data. Although the future impacts of RAS for urban ecosystems are difficult to predict, examining potentially important developments early is essential if we are to avoid detrimental consequences but fully realize the benefits.

Editorial call for submissions to UCL Open: Environment Special Series

The growth of data within, about, and from cities has been one of the fundamental trends in contemporary urban governance. Yet who knows what about cities? A desire for urban knowledge based on the collection, analysis and interpretation of large, complex datasets innately requires platform(s) capable of performing these operations. Furthermore, data needs to become the basis for decisions about how cities are managed. There are organisations that are designed to ‘bridge’ and navigate this ‘knowledge transition zone’ between research and decision-making. ‘Urban observatories’ – urban research organisations that work across policymaking and academia – have emerged as a visible, if broadly defined, class of institutions operating within this knowledge transition zone. Produced jointly with UCL and UN-Habitat, this scoping study aims to understand the role of urban observatories, their institutional organisation, capacity and value proposition as drivers of more informed city leadership.

Along with disastrous health and economic implications, COVID-19 has also been an epidemic of misinformation and rumours - an 'infodemic'. The desire for robust, evidence-based policymaking in this time of disruption has been at the heart of the multilateral response to the crisis, not least in terms of supporting a continuing agenda for global sustainable development. The role of boundary-spanning knowledge institutions in this context could be pivotal, not least in cities, where much of the pandemic has struck. 'Urban observatories' have emerged as an example of such institutions; harbouring great potential to produce and share knowledge supporting sustainable and equitable processes of recovery. Building on four 'live' case studies during the crisis of institutions based in Johannesburg, Karachi, Freetown and Bangalore, our research note aims to capture the role of these institutions, and what it means to span knowledge boundaries in the current crisis. We do so with an eye towards a better understanding of their knowledge mobilisation practices in contributing towards sustainable urban development. We highlight that the crisis offers a key window for urban observatories to play a progressive and effective role for sustainable and inclusive development. However, we also underline continuing challenges in these boundary knowledge dynamics: including issues of institutional trust, inequality of voices, collective memory, and the balance between normative and advisory roles for observatories.

Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.

The end of the first working program of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) provided an opportunity to draw lessons from its work. This perspective paper captures insights from ecosystem services (ES) researchers and practitioners, largely drawing from the Europeancontext (referred to herein as ES community ), on this key science policy interface. We synthesize reflections from a workshop on how (i) IPBES can engage the ES community; (ii) the ES community can engage with IPBES; and (iii) individual scientists can contribute. We note that IPBES constitutes a great advancement towards multidisciplinarity and inclusivity in ES research and practice. Key reflections for IPBES are that funding and visibility at ES research events could be improved, the contribution and selection processes could be more transparent, and communication with experts improved. Key reflections for the ES community include a need to improvepolicy-relevance by integrating more social scientists, researchers from developing countries, early-career scientists and policy-makers. Key reflections directed towards individual scientists include contributing (pro)actively to science policy inter-face initiatives such as IPBES and increasing transdisciplinary research. These reflections intend to contribute to the awareness of challenges and opportunities for institutions, groups and individuals working on ES. © 2020, © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor and Francis Group.

The complex links and feedbacks between ecosystems and people are now sharply in focus. Our growing understandings of the complex relations between ecosystems and people, the social and ecological drivers of changes in nature, and the different dimensions of a good quality of life, from local to global scales, have made these interdependencies ever more visible (IPBES 2019; Díaz et al. 2019). Furthermore, recent studies have revealed how dramatically unsustainable and inequitable the interactions between ecosystems and people are, as a result of a long legacy of consumerism and utilitarianism, patriarchy and colonialism, and the global expansion of production-oriented relationships with nature. In embracing the new name and scope of the Journal Ecosystems and People (Martín-López et al. 2019) a special issue was launched in 2018 to gather and synthesize the findings, insights and experiences gained in science-policy interfaces regarding ecosystems and people, with a special emphasis on the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). We invited scientific contributions and contributions from non-academic authors, on the process, theory, and outcomes of IPBES as well as on other science-policy interfaces. Following the approach of the journal, the special issue aimed for a diverse distributionof authors based on gender, region, ethnicity and seniority as contributors. In this introductory paper, we synthesize the insights gained through this special issue. We identify four key challenges, as well as opportunities and strategies to overcome them, which are presented below. These challenges and exemplary strategies were drawn from a series of collaborative contributions from authors around the world, involving work at different science-policy interfaces, and including a range of professional and disciplinary backgroundsamong scientists, sectors of society, types of knowledge and spatial and temporal scales. Close to 100autho

We are increasingly confronted with severe social and economic impacts of environmental degradation all over the world. From a valuation perspective, environmental problems and conflicts originate from trade-offs between values. The urgency and importance to integrate nature's diverse values in decisions and actions stand out more than ever.Valuation, in its broad sense of ‘assigning importance’, is inherently part of most decisions on natural resource and land use. Scholars from different traditions -while moving from heuristic interdisciplinary debate to applied transdisciplinary science- now acknowledge the need for combining multiple disciplines and methods to represent the diverse set of values of nature. This growing group of scientists and practitioners share the ambition to explore how combinations of ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation tools can support real-life resource and land use decision-making.The current sustainability challenges and the ineffectiveness of single-value approaches to offer relief demonstrate that continuing along a single path is no option. We advocate for the adherence of a plural valuation culture and its establishment as a common practice, by contesting and complementing ineffective and discriminatory single-value approaches. In policy and decision contexts with a willingness to improve sustainability, integrated valuation approaches can be blended in existing processes, whereas in contexts of power asymmetries or environmental conflicts, integrated valuation can promote the inclusion of diverse values through action research and support the struggle for social and environmental justice.The special issue and this editorial synthesis paper bring together lessons from pioneer case studies and research papers, synthesizing main challenges and setting out priorities for the years to come for the field of integrated valuation.