Search

Participatory ecosystem services scenarios can be used to inform decision making on the sustainable or wise use of biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). To establish the plausibility and coherency of the recently constructed Biscay participatory scenarios, and to analyze policy options for improving sustainability of land use and the supply of ecosystem services, a spatially explicit analysis of land cover change was carried out. The modelling used an innovative methodology which included feedback from key stakeholders. Our study showed that scenario mapping can be a way of testing the credibility and internal consistency of scenarios, and a methodology for making them more coherent; it was also useful for highlighting land use trade-offs. The sustainability analysis for the ES supply side showed the benefits of promoting two land use/cover trends in the Biscay region: (i) an increase of sustainable arable land in the valley zones to reinforce biocapacity and self-provisioning while preserving agroecosystems’ ES flow; and (ii) natural forest regeneration in mountainous and other zones to increase carbon storage and sequestration while enhancing biodiversity and other ES flows. We argue that even if already protected public agro-forest lands may be the best places to start promoting these changes, additional measures are needed to involve private landowners and guarantee changes at a landscape level. Finally, we reflect on the need to make complementary analyses of ES supply and demand as a way of contributing to a broad sustainability agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ecosystem approach is used to analyse four case studies from England to determine what kind of ecosystem knowledge was used by people, and how it shaped their arguments. The results are reported across decision-making venues concerned with: innovation, conflict management, maintenance of ecosystem function, and recognising the environment as an asset. In each area we identify the sources and uses of conceptual, instrumental, political, and social knowledge. We found that the use of these knowledges can benefit the process as well as the quality of outcomes, and so 'add value' to the decision-making process. However, the case studies did not exhibit any simple linear- rational model of knowledge use. Ecosystems thinking took many forms and depended on different institutional settings. As an argument-making device, the ecosystem approach must be seen in the context of a wider set of social and political processes, which involves a range of complex strategies and motives that explain the apparent 'messiness' of environmental decision making. The paper demonstrates that as a conceptual framework, the ecosystem approach provides a valuable theoretical template to help us discover how and what knowledge is used in deliberative styles of decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is currently, widespread interest in the assessment of ecosystem services, and the new insights that the concept provides in understanding the ecology of landscapes and the science of sustainability. Three major assessment frameworks can be identified in the contemporary literature, namely one based on habitats, one based on the identification of the system elements that delivers the service, and one based on the understanding of places. Although all are useful for supporting decision making in relation to sustainable development, different situations require different perspectives, and so it is important to understand their advantages and drawbacks. Moreover, it is important to determine how they relate to other approaches used, for example, in landscape planning, so that the contribution that ecosystem assessments can make to sustainability debates can be better understood. The aim of this paper is to describe the strengths of the place-based approach because it is more easily overlooked as an assessment option. In particular we will argue that a place-based approach can help us better understand issues of multi-functionality, the valuation of natural capital and the role of landscape in framing debates about ecosystem services and sustainability. An appreciation of these issues will enable researchers interested in landscape to key questions and priorities in relation to questions of sustainability. Although it is useful to consider different assessment perspectives separately, we conclude that in practice, the habitat and systems approaches can form part of a place-based assessment, just as a better understanding of place can enrich assessments that spring from these more natural science approaches. Nevertheless, in designing analytical strategies to take the ecosystem approach forward, we suggest that it is vital to consider these different perspectives in order to build assessments that are relevant, legitimate and credible, and which can effectively address the problems of sustainability that emerge at the landscape scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The analysis of the relationships between people and nature is complex, because it involves bringing together insights from a range of disciplines, and, when stakeholders are involved, the perspectives and values of different interest groups. Although it has been suggested that analytical-deliberate approaches may be useful in dealing with some of this complexity, the development of methods is still at an early stage. This is particularly so in relation to debates around the concept of ecosystem services where biophysical, social and economic insights need to be integrated in ways that can be accessed by decision-makers. The paper draws on case studies to examine the use of Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) as a means of implementing analytical-deliberative approaches in relation to mapping ecosystem services and modelling scenario outcomes. It also explores their use as a tool for representing individual and group values. It is argued that when linked with GIS techniques BBNs allow mapping and modelling approaches rapidly to be developed and tested in an efficient and transparent way, and that they are a valuable scenario-building tool. The case-study materials also show that BBNs can support multicriteria forms of deliberative analysis that can be used to capture stakeholder opinions so that different perspectives can be compared and shared social values identified. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: Reviewing landscape developments in the last decades evidently shows that in the future most pressing changes can be expected for the land surface. This indispensably calls for strategic approaches based on visions and transdisciplinary creativity. Hence, this paper critically reviews the Leitbild concept, an idea on spatial planning which has been widely discussed in the German-speaking planning literature but which has received scant attention elsewhere. Although the term has been translated as a ‘vision’, this paper shows that the concept is far richer in its content than these casual translations suggest. The paper shows that it defines a particular paradigm for landscape planning that embodies a transdisciplinary approach in which lay-people and experts develop both goals and strategies for realising their joint visions. A systematic overview of the key characteristics that make up the Leitbild approach is provided and set in relation to already available approaches for decision makers. Although there are similarities between the Leitbild approach and other planning and decision-support tools, such as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Strategic Impact Assessment (SEA) and Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA-sust), the paper shows that the particular combination of issues considered when developing a Leitbild makes it distinctive. Through an iterative process, the development of a Leitbild allows new approaches to spatial planning in which space and place can be considered as a social construct, and in which the values and understandings of local actors can be better represented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The relationships between land use and biodiversity are fundamental to understanding the links between people and their environment. Biodiversity can be measured in many ways. The concept covers not only the overall richness of species present in a particular area but also the diversity of genotypes, functional groups, communities, habitats and ecosystems there. As a result, the relationships between biodiversity in its broadest sense and land use can be complex and highly context dependent. Moreover, the relationships between them are often two-way, so that simple relationships between cause and effect can be difficult to identify. In some places, specific land uses or land management practices may be important in sustaining particular patterns of biodiversity. Elsewhere, the uses to which land can be put are highly dependent on the biodiversity resources present. The review will consider how changes in the quantity, quality and spatial configuration of different aspects of land use can impact on different components of biodiversity, and what direct and indirect factors might drive these changes. The need to distinguish between land cover and land use will be discussed in relation to the economic and social drivers of land use change. The review will also consider whether framing biodiversity objectives involves society in placing constraints upon the types of land use and management practice that are possible, and will consider such arguments in relation to assessments of the costs of biodiversity loss. It would seem that while considerable progress has been made in mapping out plausible futures for land use and biodiversity at global and regional scales, closer integration of modelling, scenario and field-based monitoring is needed to strengthen the evidence base available to decision makers. Challenges that face us include how we take account of the qualitative changes in land cover, and the impacts of such modifications on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Broader perspectives on the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services are also needed as the basis for developing adaptive and flexible approaches to policy and management. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]