Search

After a long incubation period, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is now underway. Underpinning all its activities is the IPBES Conceptual Framework (CF), a simplified model of the interactions between nature and people. Drawing on the legacy of previous large-scale environmental assessments, the CF goes further in explicitly embracing different disciplines and knowledge systems (including indigenous and local knowledge) in the co-construction of assessments of the state of the world’s biodiversity and the benefits it provides to humans. The CF can be thought of as a kind of “Rosetta Stone” that highlights commonalities between diverse value sets and seeks to facilitate crossdisciplinary and crosscultural understanding. We argue that the CF will contribute to the increasing trend towards interdisciplinarity in understanding and managing the environment. Rather than displacing disciplinary science, however, we believe that the CF will provide new contexts of discovery and policy applications for it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interactions between the abiotic and biotic components of topsoil and subsoil provide different ecosystem services key to human wellbeing. However, in many cases mining activity avoids the ecological structure as an opportunity and tool to strengthen land use planning strategies, resulting in socioenvironmental conflicts. This situation makes evident the need to take actions to define and harmonize the different instruments on land use planning, in order to take actions for the conservation, restoration, knowledge, sustainable use and risk management of biodiversity and ecosystem services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Developments in ecological theory indicate that ecological processes have major implications for sustaining biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. Consequently, conservation actions that focus solely on particular species, vegetation communities, habitats or sites ('assets') are unlikely to be effective over the long term unless the ecological processes that support them continue to function. Efforts to sustain biodiversity must embrace both 'assets' and 'process-oriented' approaches. Existing knowledge about ecological processes, incomplete though it is, has not been adequately considered in government decision making. It is, therefore, necessary to consider how to build consideration of ecological processes into legislative and institutional frameworks, policy and planning processes, and on-ground environmental management. Drawing on insights from interviews, a facilitated workshop, and a literature review, this paper identifies a suite of policy priorities and associated reforms which should assist in ensuring that ecological processes are given more attention in policy-making processes. It is concluded that a multi-pronged approach is required, because there are no 'silver bullets' for sustaining ecological processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]