Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2018, Science (New York, N.Y.)
…
11 pages
1 file
Nature contributes significantly to people's quality of life, and the concept of nature's contributions to people (NCP) expands upon traditional ecosystem services by incorporating diverse knowledge systems and acknowledging both positive and negative impacts. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) serves to evaluate and promote this concept, aiming for inclusivity among various stakeholders. Challenges regarding the integration of NCP in policy and decision-making persist, particularly due to historical frameworks that may not fully capture the complexities of human-nature interactions.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Ecology and Society
The Routledge Handbook of Indigenous Environmental Knowledge, 2020
This chapter makes a strong case for greater inclusion of Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK) in global environmental policy fora and in science-policy interfaces. The chapter specifically looks at the IPBES Global Assessment, which has developed one of the first global-scale mechanisms for operationalizing ILK in assessments leading to informed decision-making processes. We outline the conceptual framework, ILK approach, and specific steps taken to ensure ILK was represented and included in the assessment. The findings of the assessment show the importance of ILK in several ways: (1) to assess ecosystem change and associated human vulnerability; (2) to inform the achievement of global goals like the Sustainable Development Goals and Aichi Targets; and (3) to inform policy-relevant options for decision-makers. It is argued that other global initiatives seeking to engage ILK in their endeavours can learn from the ILK approach of the IPBES Global Assessment.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2019
The designations employed and the presentation of material on the maps used in the present report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. These maps have been prepared for the sole purpose of facilitating the assessment of the broad biogeographical areas represented therein. 2 Key messages A. Nature and its vital contributions to people, which together embody biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are deteriorating worldwide. Nature embodies different concepts for different people, including biodiversity, ecosystems, Mother Earth, systems of life and other analogous concepts. Nature's contributions to people embody different concepts such as ecosystem goods and services, and nature's gifts. Both nature and nature's contributions to people are vital for human existence and good quality of life (human well-being, living in harmony with nature, living well in balance and harmony with Mother Earth, and other analogous concepts).While more food, energy and materials than ever before are now being supplied to people in most places, this is increasingly at the expense of nature's ability to provide such contributions in the future and frequently undermines nature's many other contributions, which range from water quality regulation to sense of place. The biosphere, upon which humanity as a whole depends, is being altered to an unparalleled degree across all spatial scales. Biodiversity-the diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems-is declining faster than at any time in human history. A1 Nature is essential for human existence and good quality of life. Most of nature's contributions to people are not fully replaceable, and some are irreplaceable. Nature plays a critical role in providing food and feed, energy, medicines and genetic resources and a variety of materials fundamental for people's physical well-being and for maintaining culture. For example, more than 2 billion people rely on wood fuel to meet their primary energy needs, an estimated 4 billion people rely primarily on natural medicines for their health care and some 70 per cent of drugs used for cancer are natural or are synthetic products inspired by nature. Nature, through its ecological and evolutionary processes, sustains the quality of the air, fresh water and soils on which humanity depends, distributes fresh water, regulates the climate, provides pollination and pest control and reduces the impact of natural hazards. For example, more than 75 per cent of global food crop types, including fruits and vegetables and some of the most important cash crops such as coffee, cocoa and almonds, rely on animal pollination. Marine and terrestrial ecosystems are the sole sinks for anthropogenic carbon emissions, with a gross sequestration of 5.6 gigatons of carbon per year (the equivalent of some 60 per cent of global anthropogenic emissions). Nature underpins all dimensions of human health and contributes to non-material aspects of quality of life-inspiration and learning, physical and psychological experiences, and supporting identities-that are central to quality of life and cultural integrity, even if their aggregated value is difficult to quantify. Most of nature's contributions are co-produced with people, but while anthropogenic assets-knowledge and institutions, technology infrastructure and financial capital-can enhance or partially replace some of those contributions, some are irreplaceable. The diversity of nature maintains humanity's ability to choose alternatives in the face of an uncertain future. A2 Nature's contributions to people are often distributed unequally across space and time and among different segments of society. There are often trade-offs in the production and use of nature's contributions. Benefits and burdens associated with co-production and use of nature's contributions are distributed and experienced differently among social groups, countries and regions. Giving priority to one of nature's contributions to people, such as food production, can result in ecological changes that reduce other contributions. Some of these changes may benefit some people at the expense of others, particularly the most vulnerable, as may changes in technological and institutional arrangements. For example, although food production today is sufficient to satisfy global needs, approximately 11 per cent of the world's population is undernourished, and diet-related disease drives 20 per cent of premature mortality, related both to undernourishment and to obesity. The great expansion in the production of food, feed, fibre and bioenergy has occurred at the cost of many other contributions of nature to quality of life, including regulation of air and water quality, climate regulation and habitat provision. Synergies also exist, such as sustainable agricultural practices that enhance soil quality, thereby improving productivity and other ecosystem functions and services such as carbon sequestration and water quality regulation. A3 Since 1970, trends in agricultural production, fish harvest, bioenergy production and harvest of materials have increased, but 14 of the 18 categories of contributions of nature that were assessed, mostly regulating and non-material contributions, have declined. The value of agricultural crop production ($2.6 trillion in 2016) has increased approximately threefold since 1970, and raw timber harvest has increased by 45 per cent, reaching some 4 billion cubic metres in 2017, with the forestry industry providing about 13.2 million jobs. However, indicators of regulating contributions, such as soil organic carbon and pollinator diversity, have declined, indicating that gains in material contributions are often not sustainable. Currently, land degradation has reduced productivity in 23 per cent of the global terrestrial area,
Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 2011
Biodiversity and the services ecosystems provide have built the foundation of human civilization and provide for the welfare of people. With the increase of the human population it has become clearer than ever that the human exploitation of our natural resources leads to detrimental interactions between ecological and sociological systems. Only concerted and global actions will be able to reverse ongoing biodiversity loss. In response to these needs, the United Nations agreed the establishment of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) in 2010. Here, we report on the progress IPBES has made since its inception, and suggest how the scientific community can engage with this important science-policy interface. Keywords Convention on biological diversity Á Science-policy Á Assessments Á IPBES Communicated by David Hawksworth.
IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2019
Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, 2016
For the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), established in 2012, under the auspices of four United Nations entities (FAO, UNDP, UNEP and UNESCO), there is an urgent need to engage scholars in social sciences and humanities in assessing the state of the planet's biodiversity. This article addresses the fundaments for involving scientists from these fields of science in IPBES, and reflects on the existing barriers. It builds on previous research on IPBES from various perspectives, as well as on the author's insights from work in the organization. A fundamental condition recognized is that there needs to be a qualified understanding of what it means to integrate natural sciences and social sciences/humanities, and also that the latter have to be accepted on their own terms. Other barriers are related to the contextualisation of biodiversity issues and the more politically sensitive character of research carried out in social sciences and humanities. In the conclusions it is emphasized that the deliverables of the first round of IPBES assessments have to be solid enough from the perspectives of social sciences and humanities, in order to attract more of these scholars to work for the platform in the future.
As a Co authour : The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework. This conceptual and analytical tool, presented here in detail, will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that IPBES will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions. Salient innovative aspects of the IPBES Conceptual Framework are its transparent and participatory construction process and its explicit consideration of diverse scientific disciplines, stakeholders, and knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge. Because the focus on co-construction of integrative knowledge is shared by an increasing number of initiatives worldwide, this framework should be useful beyond IPBES, for the wider research and knowledge-policy communities working on the links between nature and people, such as natural, social and engineering scientists, policy-makers at different levels, and decisionmakers in different sectors of society.
PLOS Biology, 2015
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.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.