Search

Plural valuation is about eliciting the diverse values of nature articulated by different stakeholders in order to inform decision making and thus achieve more equitable and sustainable outcomes. We explore what approaches align with plural valuation on the ground, as well as how different social-ecological contexts play a role in translating plural valuation into decisions and outcomes. Based on a co-constructed analytical approach relying on empirical information from ten cases from the Global South, we find that plural valuation contributes to equitable and sustainable outcomes if the valuation process: 1) is based on participatory value elicitation approaches; 2) is framed with a clear action-oriented purpose; 3) provides space for marginalized stakeholders to articulate their values in ways that can be included in decisions; 4) is used as a tool to identify and help reconcile different cognitive models about human-nature relations; and 5) fosters open communication and collaboration among stakeholders. We also find that power asymmetries can hinder plural valuation. As interest and support for undertaking plural valuation grows, a deeper understanding is needed regarding how it can be adapted to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures. © 2023, The Author(s).

The urgent global reduction of greenhouse gas emissions depends on political commitments to common but differentiated responsibility. Carbon footprints as a metric of attributable emissions reflect individually determined contributions within, and aggregated national contributions between, countries. Footprints per unit product (e.g., of food, feed, fuel, or fiber) require a lifecycle analysis and support individual decisions on consumption and lifestyles. This perspective presents a framework for analysis that connects the various operationalizations and their use in informing consumer and policy decisions. Footprints show geographical variation and are changing as part of political-economic and social-ecological systems. Articulation of footprints may trigger further change. Carbon footprints partially correlate with water and biodiversity footprints as related ecological footprint concepts. The multifunctionality of land use, as a solution pathway, can be reflected in aggregated footprint metrics. Credible footprint metrics can contribute to change but only if political commitments and social-cultural values and responsibilities align.

More than 500 lakes in Indonesia have been recognized as important parts of local economies and, at least in some cases, identity, but there is little literature on resource management and collective action. By reviewing literature and using a 'serious game', this paper aims to (1) review some of the currently used generic frameworks for understanding collective action in natural resource management, (2) recount some experiences in supporting collective action in Lake Singkarak, Sumatra and (3) describe early steps in using 'serious games' developed elsewhere to increase stakeholder understanding of how upstream land management affects lake quality and functions. Some important findings are that collective action is an important key to sustainable natural resources management and the lake as a complex social-ecological system also requires collective action of multi-stakeholders from upstream to downstream. We recommend the use of DPSIR and Javanese 'gunungan' frameworks together with 'serious game' to identify socio-ecological problems and build multi-stakeholder collective action. Based on our initial research experience in Lake Singkarak, this combination of methods has succeeded in finding various problems, especially different types of knowledge, ways of knowing, and learning styles from multi-stakeholders. These problems are then used as a basis for finding and forming a common understanding which is then transformed into collective action in lake management.

During a workshop held in Oaxaca, Mexico, a shared vision, mission and strategies to foster a more plural valuation of nature were developed. The participants represent a wide range of backgrounds and are active in science, policy and practitioner networks and activities. Their common ground is the recognition of the need to change the prevailing culture of how nature is valued and subsequently managed as an essential step towards a more just and sustainable world. After an open plenary session in which the goal of the workshop was determined and the diverse perspectives and backgrounds of the participants were heard, breakout groups developed the components of a shared vision, mission and strategies for plural valuation of nature. Consequently, these components were discussed back in plenary and consolidated into a consensus text, which was further debated and its main building blocks agreed upon. The compilation of our shared views converged into a normative call and perspective to share with our peers. The information generated throughout the workshop was collaboratively synthesized, amended, reviewed and validated by all workshop participants/co-authors. Our message aims to contribute to advancing plural valuation approaches as a science-policy field, as well as to raise personal awareness among researchers and practitioners on implicit inequality and power issues.

Plural valuation is about eliciting the diverse values of nature articulated by different stakeholders in order to inform decision making and thus achieve more equitable and sustainable outcomes. We explore what approaches align with plural valuation on the ground, as well as how different social-ecological contexts play a role in translating plural valuation into decisions and outcomes. Based on a co-constructed analytical approach relying on empirical information from ten cases from the Global South, we find that plural valuation contributes to equitable and sustainable outcomes if the valuation process: 1) is based on participatory value elicitation approaches; 2) is framed with a clear action-oriented purpose; 3) provides space for marginalized stakeholders to articulate their values in ways that can be included in decisions; 4) is used as a tool to identify and help reconcile different cognitive models about human-nature relations; and 5) fosters open communication and collaboration among stakeholders. We also find that power asymmetries can hinder plural valuation. As interest and support for undertaking plural valuation grows, a deeper understanding is needed regarding how it can be adapted to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd

Agroforestry, as platform for harmonizing agriculture and forestry in their interactions with landscapes and rural and peri(urban) livelihoods, offers opportunities to benefit from synergies across sustainable development goals (SDGs), and deal with the unavoidable tradeoffs. Such synergy, however, may only emerge if site-specific analysis of the multiple functions of landscapes leads to a shared understanding among stakeholders, clear commitment to common goals, effective means of implementation and a system that remains open to innovation by monitoring functions rather than form, and regularly re-evaluates effectiveness of policy instruments.

Palm oil expansion in tropical forest margins captures headlines, primarily out of concern that encroachment to tropical forest causes environmental problem and ignites social issues [1]. Sustainability has to be understood in the wider context of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), rather than as primarily a plot-level ecological concern about persistence of production, to make sense of the debate that has become a very polarized and find ways forward. Cascading ecological and social issues have caused a loss of trust, (threats of) consumer boycotts and multiple standards and certification responses. Diverse sustainability issues have come up as part of a public issue-attention cycle with five recognisable stages [2]: A) Agenda setting, B) Better and widely shared understanding of what is at stake, C) Commitment to common principles, D) Details of devils derailing operations, devolved to (newly created or existing) formal institutions that handle implementation and associated budgets, and E) Efforts to monitor and evaluate effects. In Indonesia two phases of new establishment of palm oil coexist within a forest transition gradient: (i) (industry-led) expansion into new forest margins with many social and ecological consequences; and (ii) (often farmer-led) conversion of existing agroforestry and tree crop (often rubber-based) or pasture economies in mosaic landscapes. External consumer concerns refer to the expansion phase, rather than to production sustainability or issues of smallholder concern. However, certification standards are only partially adjusted to the latter. After a 'voluntary industry standards' phase of differentiation with and shifting blame to non-certified others [3], government involvement in Malaysia and Indonesia suggests that standards and certification can trickle down to enforceable good practice standards for all. This can learn from past ineffective policies that did not address the real issues in local context [4]. On the other

If 150 years of continued use counts as a sustainability indicator, the river-bank agroforests in the peat landscapes of Central Kalimantan suggest solutions for current challenges. The 2015 fire season in Indonesian peatlands triggered a fire ban and peatland restoration response, prioritizing canal blocking and rewetting. However, sustainable livelihood options remain elusive. We report local ecological knowledge of soils and vegetation applied in land use choices in swiddens and agroforests in five Dayak Ngaju villages in Jabiren Raya and Kahayan Hilir subdistrict (Pulang Pisau, C. Kalimantan, Indonesia) on the banks of the Kahayan river and discuss impacts of fire-ban policies. Plots accessible from the river with no or shallow peat were traditionally preferred for swiddening, with various indicator plants and soil characteristics underpinning the choices. Without swiddening farmers depend on off-farm jobs and agroforests for income. More policy attention for non-peat riparian-zone agroforestry as part of peat landscape livelihood systems is warranted. HIGHLIGHTS Dayak Ngaju villagers have traditionally combined agroforest and swidden/fallow rotations on riverbanks and shallow peat. Rich ethnobotanical knowledge, local soil quality indicators and ceremonies reflect long-term presence in this landscape. The 2015 fire ban has effectively stopped local rice cultivation as technical alternatives are not attractive. The agroforests, with durian and rubber as marketed products, continue to support livelihoods, but are not sufficient. Temporary jobs on canal blocking for the peatland restoration agency have filled the gap, but are not expected to last. .