Search

There is increasing recognition of the wicked nature of the intertwined climate, biodiversity and economic crises, and the need for adaptive, multi-scale approaches to understanding the complexity of both the problems and potential responses. Most science underpinning policy responses to sustainability issues, however, remains overtly apolitical and focussed on technical innovation; at odds with a critical body of literatures insisting on the recognition of systemic problem framing when supporting policy processes. This paper documents the experience of implementing a mixed method approach called quantitative story-telling (QST) to policy analysis that explicitly recognises this normative dimension, as the methodology is part of a post-normal science (PNS) toolkit. The authors reflect on what was learnt when considering how QST fared as a tool for science-policy interaction, working with European Union (EU) level policy actors interested in sustainable agriculture and sustainable development goal 2. These goals-also known as UN Agenda 2030-are the latest institutionalisation of the pursuit of sustainable development and the EU has positioned itself as taking a lead in its implementation. Thus, the paper illustrates our experience of using PNS as an approach to science policy interfaces in a strategic policy context; and illustrates how the challenges identified in the science-policy literature are amplified when working across multiple policy domains and taking a complex systems approach. Our discussion on lessons learnt may be of interest to researchers seeking to work with policy-makers on complex sustainability issues., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is often thought to hinder adaptive management of socio-ecological systems. A key influence on environmental management practices are environmental policies: however, their consequences for M&E practices have not been well-examined. We examine three policy areas - the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 Directives, and the Agri-Environment Schemes of the Common Agricultural Policy - whose statutory requirements influence how the environment is managed and monitored across Europe. We use a comparative approach to examine what is monitored, how monitoring is carried out, and how results are used to update management, based on publicly available documentation across nine regional and national cases. The requirements and guidelines of these policies have provided significant impetus for monitoring: however, we find this policy-driven M&E usually does not match the ideals of what is needed to inform adaptive management. There is a tendency to focus on understanding state and trends rather than tracking the effect of interventions; a focus on specific biotic and abiotic indicators at the expense of understanding system functions and processes, especially social components; and limited attention to how context affects systems, though this is sometimes considered via secondary data. The resulting data are sometimes publicly-accessible, but it is rarely clear if and how these influence decisions at any level, whether this be in the original policy itself or at the level of measures such as site management plans. Adjustments to policy-driven M&E could better enable learning for adaptive management, by reconsidering what supports a balanced understanding of socio-ecological systems and decision-making. Useful strategies include making more use of secondary data, and more transparency in data-sharing and decision-making. Several countries and policy areas already offer useful examples. Such changes are essential given the influence of policy, and the urgency of enabling adaptive management to safeguard socio-ecological systems., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The data presented in this DiB article provide an overview of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) carried out for 3 European environmental policies (the Water Framework Directive, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, and Agri-Environment Schemes implemented under the Common Agricultural Policy), as implemented in 9 cases (Catalonia (Spain), Estonia, Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Scotland (UK), Sweden). These data are derived from reports and documents about monitoring programs that were publicly-available online in 2017. The literature on M&E to support adaptive management structured the issues that have been extracted and summarized. The data is related to the research article entitled "Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation: does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems?" [Stem et al., 2005] . The information provides a first overview of monitoring and evaluation that has been implemented in response to key European environmental policies. It provides a structured overview that permits a comparison of cases and policies and can assist other scholars and practitioners working on monitoring and evaluation.

In this paper, we reflect on the implications for science, policy and practice of the recently introduced concept of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS), with a focus on the European context. First, we analyse NBS in relation to similar concepts, and reflect on its relationship to sustainability as an overarching framework. From this, we derive a set of questions to be addressed and propose a general framework for how these might be addressed in NBS projects by funders, researchers, policy-makers and practitioners. We conclude that: To realise their full potential, NBS must be developed by including the experience of all relevant stakeholders such that 'solutions' contribute to achieving all dimensions of sustainability. As NBS are developed, we must also moderate the expectations placed on them since the precedent provided by other initiatives whose aim was to manage nature sustainably demonstrates that we should not expect NBS to be cheap and easy, at least not in the short-term., (Copyright © 2016 British Geological Survey, NERC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The ecosystem approach--as endorsed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) in 2000-is a strategy for holistic, sustainable, and equitable natural resource management, to be implemented via the 12 Malawi Principles. These principles describe the need to manage nature in terms of dynamic ecosystems, while fully engaging with local peoples. It is an ambitious concept. Today, the term is common throughout the research and policy literature on environmental management. However, multiple meanings have been attached to the term, resulting in confusion. We reviewed references to the ecosystem approach from 1957 to 2012 and identified 3 primary uses: as an alternative to ecosystem management or ecosystem-based management; in reference to an integrated and equitable approach to resource management as per the CBD; and as a term signifying a focus on understanding and valuing ecosystem services. Although uses of this term and its variants may overlap in meaning, typically, they do not entirely reflect the ethos of the ecosystem approach as defined by the CBD. For example, there is presently an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services, but focusing on these alone does not promote decentralization of management or use of all forms of knowledge, both of which are integral to the CBD's concept. We highlight that the Malawi Principles are at risk of being forgotten. To better understand these principles, more effort to implement them is required. Such efforts should be evaluated, ideally with comparative approaches, before allowing the CBD's concept of holistic and socially engaged management to be abandoned or superseded. It is possible that attempts to implement all 12 principles together will face many challenges, but they may also offer a unique way to promote holistic and equitable governance of natural resources. Therefore, we believe that the CBD's concept of the ecosystem approach demands more attention., (© 2014 Society for Conservation Biology.)

Many conservation policies advocate engagement with local people, but conservation practice has sometimes been criticised for a simplistic understanding of communities and social context. To counter this, this paper explores social structuring and its influences on conservation-related behaviours at the site of a conservation intervention near Pipar forest, within the Seti Khola valley, Nepal. Qualitative and quantitative data from questionnaires and Rapid Rural Appraisal demonstrate how links between groups directly and indirectly influence behaviours of conservation relevance (including existing and potential resource-use and proconservation activities). For low-status groups the harvesting of resources can be driven by others' preference for wild foods, whilst perceptions of elite benefit-capture may cause reluctance to engage with future conservation interventions. The findings reiterate the need to avoid relying on simple assumptions about 'community' in conservation, and particularly the relevance of understanding relationships between groups, in order to understand natural resource use and implications for conservation.

Community-based conservation (CBC) promotes the idea that conservation success requires engaging with, and providing benefits for, local communities. However, CBC projects are neither consistently successful nor free of controversy. Innovative recent studies evaluating the factors associated with success and failure typically examine only a single resource domain, have limited geographic scope, consider only one outcome, or ignore the nested nature of socioecological systems. To remedy these issues, we use a global comparative database of CBC projects identified by systematic review to evaluate success in four outcome domains (attitudes, behaviors, ecological, economic) and explore synergies and trade-offs among these outcomes. We test hypotheses about how features of the national context, project design, and local community characteristics affect these measures of success. Using bivariate analyses and multivariate proportional odds logistic regressions within a multilevel analysis and model-fitting framework, we show that project design, particularly capacity-building in local communities, is associated with success across all outcomes. In addition, some characteristics of the local community in which projects are conducted, such as tenure regimes and supportive cultural beliefs and institutions, are important for project success. Surprisingly, there is little evidence that national context systematically influences project outcomes. We also find evidence of synergies between pairs of outcomes, particularly between ecological and economic success. We suggest that well-designed and implemented projects can overcome many of the obstacles imposed by local and national conditions to succeed in multiple domains.

Conservation interventions require evaluation to understand what factors predict success or failure. To date, there has been little systematic investigation of the effect of social and cultural context on conservation success, although a large body of literature argues it is important. We investigated whether local cultural context, particularly local institutions and the efforts of interventions to engage with this culture significantly influence conservation outcomes. We also tested the effects of community participation, conservation education, benefit provision, and market integration. We systematically reviewed the literature on community-based conservation and identified 68 interventions suitable for inclusion. We used a protocol to extract and code information and evaluated a range of measures of outcome success (attitudinal, behavioral, ecological, and economic). We also examined the association of each predictor with each outcome measure and the structure of predictor covariance. Local institutional context influenced intervention outcomes, and interventions that engaged with local institutions were more likely to succeed. Nevertheless, there was limited support for the role of community participation, conservation education, benefit provision, and market integration on intervention success. We recommend that conservation interventions seek to understand the societies they work with and tailor their activities accordingly. Systematic reviews are a valuable approach for assessing conservation evidence, although sensitive to the continuing lack of high-quality reporting on conservation interventions.