Sustainability assessment as an ex ante tool for directing decision-making towards sustainability has emerged in a diverse range of forms across the world over the past decade or so. This broad ...practice of sustainability assessment embraces a wide and continually evolving range of processes, making the field potentially conceptually confusing and difficult to navigate. In recognition of this, there have been numerous attempts to develop conceptual frameworks to make sense of the diversity of practice. Through a process of literature review and reflection upon practice, this paper builds on earlier work, including our own, to develop a new descriptive conceptual framework for sustainability assessment. The conceptual framework distinguishes two dimensions of sustainability assessment, each with several sub-dimensions: sustainability concept (with sub-dimensions of underpinning sustainability discourse and representation of sustainability) and decision-making context (with sub-dimensions of subject of assessment, decision-question and responsible party). Drawing upon further literature, several examples of different approaches are then identified for each sub-dimension, demonstrating the range of approaches evident within current and emerging global practice. Within the ‘sustainability concept’ dimension, the first sub-dimension calls for critical reflection upon what the normative goal of the sustainability assessment is, while the second refers to how the concept of sustainability is represented in the decision-making process through the use of indicators. Although these two sub-dimensions are closely related their distinction is a key feature of the conceptual framework. The second dimension describes the practical context of a sustainability assessment. The proposed new conceptual framework enables a particular body of practice to be located within the broader field, as we demonstrate by categorising five examples of sustainability assessment according to the framework. We believe this framework has value to both researchers and practitioners, as a structure to guide sustainability assessment research and analysis and as the basis for comparing bodies of sustainability assessment practice within the range of possibilities defined by the contours of the framework. The framework encourages reflective practice, particularly in relation to how the concept of sustainability is understood and embedded within the process, and what the practice might deliver. This new conceptual framework is presented as a relatively simple road map and guide as sustainability assessment theorising and practice enters its second decade.
•A new, descriptive conceptual framework for sustainability assessment is proposed.•It reflects the diversity of ex ante sustainability assessment practice.•It enables meaningful comparison of different processes.•It distinguishes sustainability discourse from representation within the process.•It encourages practitioners to reflect upon their practice and its contribution.
During the last two decades, many higher education institutions have become involved in embedding sustainable development into their academic systems. The research for this paper was built upon ...discussions on declarations, charters, and other initiatives designed to commit their institutions to education for sustainable development. It analyses if such commitment leads to more sustainable development implementation within the academic institution. The research was performed using a survey, based upon a literature review of 60 peer-reviewed papers. The survey was divided into eight categories: background; institutional framework; campus operations; education; research; outreach and collaboration; on-campus experiences; and assessment and reporting. The survey was answered by 84 respondents from 70 institutions, worldwide. The responses were analysed via descriptive analysis, grounded theory, and inferential statistics. The results revealed that there were many examples of sustainable development implementation throughout the system; however, generally the efforts tended to be compartmentalised. The analyses also highlighted strong linkages between the institution's commitment to sustainability, implementation, and signing a declaration, charter, or initiative. The findings suggested that academic leadership's commitment was a leading cause for signing a declaration, charter, or initiative, and implementing sustainable development. The research team provided recommendations for higher educational leaders, including acknowledge that the higher education institution system is comprised of several inter-related elements; commit to sustainability by integrating it into policies and strategies; show the commitment by signing a declaration, charter, or initiative; establish short-, medium-, and long-term plans for its institutionalisation; and ensure that sustainable development is implemented throughout the system.
•A literature review was done to explore SD implementation in HEIs.•A survey was developed to explore SD commitment and implementation in practice.•The survey was answered by respondents from 70 HEIs.•The results showed strong links between SD commitment and implementation.•Most SD efforts were not holistically integrated throughout the HEI system.
Recognizing the urgent need for sustainability, we argue that to move beyond the rhetoric and to actually realize sustainable development, it must be considered as a decision-making strategy. We ...demonstrate that sustainability assessment and sustainability indicators can be powerful decision-supporting tools that foster sustainable development by addressing three sustainability decision-making challenges: interpretation, information-structuring, and influence. Particularly, since the 1990s many substantial and often promising sustainability assessment and sustainability indicators efforts are made. However, better practices and a broader shared understanding are still required. We aim to contribute to that objective by adopting a theoretical perspective that frames SA and SI in the context of sustainable development as a decision-making strategy and that introduces both fields along several essential aspects in a structured and comparable manner.
The valuation of ecosystem services is a complex process as it includes several dimensions (ecological, socio-cultural and economic) and not all of these can be quantified in monetary units. The aim ...of this paper is to conduct an ecosystem services valuation study for mangroves ecosystems, the results of which can be used to inform governance and management of mangroves. We used an expert-based participatory approach (the Delphi technique) to identify, categorize and rank the various ecosystem services provided by mangrove ecosystems at a global scale. Subsequently we looked for evidence in the existing ecosystem services literature for monetary valuations of these ecosystem service categories throughout the biogeographic distribution of mangroves. We then compared the relative ranking of ecosystem service categories between the monetary valuations and the expert based analysis. The experts identified 16 ecosystem service categories, six of which are not adequately represented in the literature. There was no significant correlation between the expert based valuation (the Delphi technique) and the economic valuation, indicating that the scope of valuation of ecosystem services needs to be broadened. Acknowledging this diversity in different valuation approaches, and developing methodological frameworks that foster the pluralism of values in ecosystem services research, are crucial for maintaining the credibility of ecosystem services valuation. To conclude, we use the findings of our dual approach to valuation to make recommendations on how to assess and manage the ecosystem services provided by mangrove ecosystems.
Conflicts of interest often undermine conservation initiatives against biodiversity decline. Effective decision-making requires a deeper understanding of the positions, criteria, concerns, and ...perspectives of stakeholders. However, managing so many perspectives can be difficult, and if not done well, conflicts arise which make it difficult to achieve conservation goals. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that identifying areas of consensus is a good starting point to generate more effective debates and address complex issues. To do this, we investigate the diversity of perspectives regarding biodiversity conservation schemes among stakeholders in the studied ports of Antwerp and Rotterdam. Using Q-methodology, a semi-quantitative technique that enables us to systematically study the subjective views of stakeholders involved in a topic, we identified and organized a range of shared perspectives into three groups, known as factors. A total of 20 participants sorted 45 statements according to their perceptions and objectives, from −4 ‘most disagreeable’ to 4 ‘most agreeable’. Then, respondents explained their rankings in a post-sorting interview. Next, the data was analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative analysis was conducted in two parts:
(i) Dividing respondents into groups based on similar perspectives and (ii) coupling distinguishing statements with one of the factors characteristic of that viewpoint. Finally, in a qualitative analysis, we used the distinguishing statements and insights from interviews to create narratives and titles for the three factors: (1) Ports are key for our economic wealth, hence port development should continue, (2) Nature first, and (3) Multi-actor governance. Our findings confirm consensuses in three areas: policy, land use, and mitigation tactics. Interestingly, all narratives unanimously agreed on the importance of regulating port development and land use changes via legislation and environmental impact assessments. However, they debated the rigidity of legislation and whether offsetting port expansion (and associated land and resource use claims) should take place locally or internationally. We also found that decision-making mostly followed a human-centered perspective, where economic values were more relevant than intrinsic ones. These insights can serve as a baseline for stakeholders to form coalitions around areas of consensus to depolarize debates and avoid decision-making gridlocks.
Display omitted
•Identifying consensus areas of biodiversity conservation can aid decision-making.•Using Q-methodology we identified three shared stakeholder narratives on conservation.•We found three significant consensus areas: policy, land use and mitigation tactics.•Support for regulating port land use changes via legislation was unanimous.•A human centered nature perspective on decision-making was dominant.
•Combination of Delphi and DPSIR framework to retrieve socio-ecological information.•Identification of environmental impacts and their interconnections associated with anthropogenic activities in ...Galapagos.•Identification of indicators representing socio-ecological interactions and ecosystem services in Galapagos.•Generation of effective group consensus through the Delphi method.•Systemic reference for local decision makers for conservation management policies.
In the Galapagos Islands human activities such as fisheries and tourism, have boosted the islands’ economy at the cost of ecological losses and constant pressures to the fragile insular ecosystems. Hence the evaluation of environmental impacts is essential and requires multiple indicators, appropriate for measuring the state and the interactions of the interrelated social and environmental variables and its relation to ecosystem services. The present research proposes a participatory approach to understand the perception of environmental impacts and its relation to ecosystem services to develop responsive impact mitigation strategies in the Galapagos Islands. The Drivers–Pressures–State–Impact–Responses (DPSIR) framework provided an analytical lens, while the Delphi method was chosen to involve selected Galapagos experts in the indicator selection process. The Delphi method consists of an iterative set of questionnaire surveys, interspersed with feedback from earlier response rounds. According to our results, 37/55 statistical consent indicators (qi≥3.5 and Q≤0.5) and 7/28 relevant interactions of environmental impacts (mean≥0.5 and CV≤0.5) explain a cascade of socio-ecological interconnectivity that generates environmental impacts on the Galapagos Islands. Hence, first the socio-economic-cultural and institutional forces (drivers) that include: the increase of tourism and migration, economic growth, continental lifestyles, lack of education and weak management of institutions. These drivers place stress on the environment (pressures). The pressures include: the importation of goods, land clearing for agriculture/abandonment and urban zone extension. Subsequently, these pressures generate changes in the environmental functions (impacts). The identification of impacts and their interactions indicate a close relationship between eight impacts in Galapagos: introduction of species, biodiversity loss, land use change, loss of biological resources, habitat fragmentation, landscape alterations, water basin overexploitation and decrease of water quality. Lastly, scientifically sound solutions and alternatives to deal with the Galapagos’ social, economical, political, managerial and technical problems are also provided (responses). This study is an applicable useful systemic reference for Galapagos’ decision makers to deliver policies in order to move towards proper conservation management.
•Growing consensus on incorporating value pluralism into ES assessment.•Review of 6 review studies of decision-support tools for ES assessment.•Review shows there is little attention for value ...pluralism in decision-support tools.•Indicate three conditions to be fulfilled to incorporate value pluralism in tools.
There have been several pleas for more inclusive ecosystem services assessments in recent years. This is partially due to a growing consensus about the importance of incorporating value pluralism into ecosystem services assessments. While there is increasingly attention for such value pluralism in academia and at the IPBES science policy interface, this concern barely reached many conservation practitioners, as indicated in studies reviewing decision support tools for ecosystem services. We examined six review studies of such tools and this revealed there is indeed little attention for value pluralism and only a part of the tools provides the conceptual space to incorporate value pluralism. The growing scientific and science-policy consensus that recognizing value pluralism is key for inclusive assessments can only be translated in actions if there is a connection to the field. Users of ecosystem services assessment tools should have the opportunity to select value-inclusive tools, as this can lead to a stronger support base for conservation actions, prevent conflict, and lead to more comprehensive ecosystem services assessments. This does not imply that all tools need to focus on values; the actual goal of a specific ecosystem services assessment tool is context-specific. If scientists want the plural valuation debate to have an impact on conservation practices, three conditions need to be fulfilled: (i) developing value-inclusive decision-support tools; (ii) clarifying when to use value inclusive tools; and (iii) learning from and sharing of value-inclusive tools.
Summary
Many areas of science, including conservation and environmental management, regularly require engaging stakeholders or experts to produce consensus or technical inputs. The Delphi technique ...is an iterative and anonymous participatory method used for gathering and evaluating such expert‐based knowledge.
We outline the methodology of the Delphi technique and provide a taxonomy of its main variants. In addition, we refine the technique by providing suggestions to address common limitations (e.g. time consumption, attrition rate) in order to make the method more suitable for application in ecology and conservation.
A comprehensive search for studies that have applied the Delphi technique in conservation and environmental management resulted in 36 papers. The Delphi technique has been applied to a range of issues, including developing decision support systems and predicting ecological impacts of climate change.
The papers reviewed suggest that the Delphi technique is an efficient, inclusive, systematic and structured approach that can be used to address complex issues. A major strength compared to other group‐based techniques is the reduced influence of social pressures among respondents.
The Delphi technique is relatively little used and seems undervalued. Given its wide range of possible applications, it could be applied more widely in evaluating evidence and providing expert judgments.
•Local stakeholders are willing to get involved in the decision making process of Matang mangrove management.•The main disagreement towards the current management discourse was regarding the economic ...aspects.•Local stakeholders perceive the ecotourism as an important source of income, and refuse shrimp culture.•Diversification of economic activities is supported by the majority of the local stakeholders.•Stakeholder’s perception is influenced by their work situation and environment.
Effective management of a socio-ecological system (SES) requires a good understanding of: (i) ecosystem functionality, (ii) interactions between social and ecological units, and (iii) stakeholder perceptions and activities. Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve (MMFR) covering 40,200 ha in Peninsular Malaysia is under silvicultural management (with a 30-year forest rotation cycle) for charcoal and timber production since 1902.
The aim of this study is to assess the perceptions of (select) local stakeholders on the ongoing mangrove management of MMFR. Earlier, Huge et al. (2016), using Q methodology, identified three main shared perceptions, called discourses: (1) Optimization- ‘keep up the good work, but keep improving’, (2) Change for the better- ‘ecotourism & participatory management for sustainability’, and (3) Continuity – ‘business as usual is the way to go’. The current study is a follow-up to Huge et al. (2016) and reports on a survey which assessed the degree of support of the local stakeholders towards those three management discourses. The core statements of each discourse were presented as questions and then ranked by the participants.
Based on the findings of the survey, the local stakeholders were clustered into three main working categories: (i) charcoal and timber workers, (ii) fishermen and (iii) service providers. The interviews held with 114 stakeholders indicated that discourse (2) ‘change for the better’ is the most popular (supported by 72% of the participants) regardless of the stakeholders’ working category. This discourse voices the involvement of local people in decision making, adopts participatory management, and encourages diverse mangrove-based economic activities beyond mere charcoal and timber production.
Single-use management (focusing only on maximising charcoal and timber yields) was perceived as not equitably benefiting all local stakeholders.
The insights of this study can guide the managers of Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve to improve the sustainability and the local support base for the existing mangrove management regime, e.g. by promoting diverse livelihood options for the local stakeholders.
The nominal group technique (NGT) is a qualitative method to elicit judgement from stakeholders.
This paper reviews its application in the field of ecology and conservation. We aim to identify ...patterns in methodological variants, topics covered, scope, advantages and limitations of the technique.
Although still not widely used, NGT has been used in ecology and conservation to achieve four main goals: to support biodiversity management, to identify stakeholder preferences and attitudes, to prioritize in capacity‐building exercises and to explore novel concepts.
Most NGT studies have been applied at local level. NGT is quite flexible and has been used in combination with a range of techniques (surveys, with the Delphi method and with multi‐criteria analysis, as well as with the collection of ecological data).
The amalgamation of individual and collective reflection and the coproduction of knowledge among participants in NGT allows for a depolarizing approach to the study and management of conservation issues.
PDF
