Efforts to develop a global understanding of the functioning of the Earth as a system began in the mid-1980s. This effort necessitated linking knowledge from both the physical and biological realms. ...A motivation for this development was the growing impact of humans on the Earth system and need to provide solutions, but the study of the social drivers and their consequences for the changes that were occurring was not incorporated into the Earth System Science movement, despite early attempts to do so. The impediments to integration were many, but they are gradually being overcome, which can be seen in many trends for assessments, such as the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, as well as both basic and applied science programs. In this development, particular people and events have shaped the trajectories that have occurred. The lessons learned should be considered in such emerging research programs as Future Earth , the new global program for sustainability research. The transitioning process to this new program will take time as scientists adjust to new colleagues with different ideologies, methods, and tools and a new way of doing science.
Assessments must provide conditional predictions of the consequences of specific policy options, at well-defined spatial and temporal scales.
In recognition of our inability to halt damaging ...ecosystem change (
1
–
4
), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was asked in December 2010 to convene a meeting “to determine modalities and institutional arrangements” of a new assessment body, akin to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), to track causes and consequences of anthropogenic ecosystem change (
5
). The “blueprint” for this body, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), lies in recommendations of an intergovernmental conference held in the Republic of Korea in June 2010: the Busan outcome (
6
). But it is a blueprint for governance rather than science. Using the experience from past assessments of global biodiversity and ecosystem services change (
1
,
7
,
8
) and from the IPCC (
9
–
11
), we ask what the policy-oriented charges in the Busan outcome imply for the science of the assessment process.
This paper addresses the relationship between equity and efficiency in PES schemes from a conceptual point of view. Emphasis is placed on the role of the institutional setting, social perceptions ...about economic fairness (or distributive justice of the payments), uncertainty and interactions between agents, including power relations. We introduce the heuristic concept of the ‘efficiency–equity interdependency curve’ to illustrate potential combinations between equity and efficiency that may be theoretically possible. The paper argues that different types of institutional factors determine which equity–efficiency combinations may be potentially feasible, influence the actual combination that will be achieved on the ground, and condition possible changes in that combination due to exogenous factors. By stressing the role of institutional aspects in shaping the equity–efficiency relationship, the paper attempts to go beyond the dominant Coasean vision of PES.
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) introduced a new framework for analyzing social-ecological systems that has had wide influence in the policy and scientific communities. Studies after the MA ...are taking up new challenges in the basic science needed to assess, project, and manage flows of ecosystem services and effects on human well-being. Yet, our ability to draw general conclusions remains limited by focus on discipline-bound sectors of the full social-ecological system. At the same time, some polices and practices intended to improve ecosystem services and human well-being are based on untested assumptions and sparse information. The people who are affected and those who provide resources are increasingly asking for evidence that interventions improve ecosystem services and human well-being. New research is needed that considers the full ensemble of processes and feedbacks, for a range of biophysical and social systems, to better understand and manage the dynamics of the relationship between humans and the ecosystems on which they rely. Such research will expand the capacity to address fundamental questions about complex social-ecological systems while evaluating assumptions of policies and practices intended to advance human well-being through improved ecosystem services.
... the rejection of hypothesis one is understandable, but using a different set of indicators, such as the multidimensional poverty index described by Alkire and Santos (2010), may yield different ...outcomes. ... although Raudsepp- Hearne and colleagues (2010) avoided the use of any indicators that include natural capital (to prevent a circular argument), the inclusive wealth indicator developed by Arrow and Dasgupta (2004) clearly shows that inclusive wealth (used as a proxy for well-being) has declined in most countries.
The central challenge of the 21st century is to develop economic, social, and governance systems capable of ending poverty and achieving sustainable levels of population and consumption while ...securing the life-support systems underpinning current and future human well-being. Essential to meeting this challenge is the incorporation of natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides into decision-making. We explore progress and crucial gaps at this frontier, reflecting upon the 10 y since the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. We focus on three key dimensions of progress and ongoing challenges: raising awareness of the interdependence of ecosystems and human well-being, advancing the fundamental interdisciplinary science of ecosystem services, and implementing this science in decisions to restore natural capital and use it sustainably. Awareness of human dependence on nature is at an all-time high, the science of ecosystem services is rapidly advancing, and talk of natural capital is now common from governments to corporate boardrooms. However, successful implementation is still in early stages. We explore why ecosystem service information has yet to fundamentally change decision-making and suggest a path forward that emphasizes: (i) developing solid evidence linking decisions to impacts on natural capital and ecosystem services, and then to human well-being; (ii) working closely with leaders in government, business, and civil society to develop the knowledge, tools, and practices necessary to integrate natural capital and ecosystem services into everyday decision-making; and (iii) reforming institutions to change policy and practices to better align private short-term goals with societal long-term goals.
•We describe the IPBES Conceptual Framework.•It is a simplified model of interactions between nature and people most relevant to IPBES's focus on sustainability.•It facilitates interoperability among ...disciplines, stakeholders and knowledge systems.
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 decision-makers in different sectors of society.
► Sustainability must address social as well as environmental issues. ► Equity is an essential part of the transition to sustainability. ► Well-being is multi-dimensional and context-specific, not ...‘one-size-fits-all.’ ► We need new metrics to monitor progress towards well-being. ► We need a global focus on growth in well-being rather than consumption.
The world is experiencing urgent and interconnected problems on many social as well as environmental fronts. Resource shortages, demographic realities, and planetary boundaries prevent us from growing our way out of these problems. A redirection towards sustainability and well-being may be the most viable option for further development. Sustainability must be defined to include meeting human physical, emotional and social needs. Equity considerations are primary in order to have the resources to reduce poverty and increase well-being in developing countries. Well-being is multidimensional and context-specific, and must be approached in a way that preserves cultural diversity and societal autonomy while meeting universal human needs. We must go beyond GDP, measuring the various objective and subjective components of well-being to monitor our progress.
Lake Victoria is a crucial ecosystem for over 25 million people in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi who live in the basin, and for the greater Nile river system downstream of the lake. ...Ecosystem management in the Lake Victoria basin has been highly extractive for most of the last 60 years, with the 1990s a period of marked decline in food production, economic contraction, rising poverty, increased burden of human disease, and more frequent floods. Lake Victoria itself is becoming eutrophic, with related problems of species extinctions and invasive species. There is evidence of poverty–environment traps: some households and areas appear to be caught in vicious cycles of low income, low investment in soil management, declines in soil fertility, and soil loss, while other households and areas are able to achieve higher incomes and investments, maintain soil fertility, and conserve soil on their farms.
Concepts and approaches from the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) were applied in a study of ecosystem service tradeoffs, synergies and traps in two of the river basins that flow into Lake Victoria from Kenya (Yala and Nyando). Hydrologic units are the main geographic unit used in the analysis, with predictions of sediment yield serving as the main measure of regulating services. Provisioning services are evaluated through a spatially disaggregated analysis of agricultural production, yield and area that combines spatial data from aerial photographs with division-level price and yield estimates.
The results illustrate considerable year-to-year variation in land use, agricultural production and sediment yield in the two basins. While overall production appears to be relatively stable at the basin level, there have been shifts in the geographic locus of production toward the upper parts of both basins. A spatial overlay of production and sediment yield indicates that different parts of the basins exhibit tradeoffs, synergies and traps. Results from this study have multiple uses in rural planning, agricultural investment, and watershed management. The results also suggest that the poverty traps conceptual framework may help to enrich the interpretative content of the MA approach.
This essay is a commentary on Curren et al., ‘Finding consensus on well-being in education’. It acknowledges a growing international consensus that presents educational systems need to change and ...argues the case for consensus on flourishing as the overall purpose of education can be strengthened by drawing on economists’ work on well-being with respect to the inclusive wealth of nations. It emphasizes the need for tangible and measurable indicators that educators can use when implementing Curren et al.’s recommendations and outlines the International Science and Evidence based Education assessment’s suggestion of a ‘whole brain’ approach to education for flourishing.
PDF
