The draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework commits to achievement of equity and justice outcomes and represents a “relational turn” in how we understand inclusive conservation. Although “inclusivity” is drawn on as a means to engage diverse stakeholders, widening the framing of inclusivity can create new tensions with regard to how to manage protected areas. We first offer a set of tensions that emerge in the light of the relational turn in biodiversity conservation. Drawing on global case examples applying multiple methods of inclusive conservation, we then demonstrate that, by actively engaging in the interdependent phases of recognizing hybridity, enabling conditions for reflexivity and partnership building, tensions can not only be acknowledged but softened and, in some cases, reframed when managing for biodiversity, equity, and justice goals. The results can improve stakeholder engagement in protected area management, ultimately supporting better implementation of global biodiversity targets.
Country: Sweden
Sweden
Nature-based adaptation planning is a challenging endeavor, not least because it requires transdisciplinary approaches to unite different actors’ efforts and capacities. However, empirical knowledge on associated governance processes is scarce and fragmented. Against this background, this paper examines the integration of nature-based approaches for climate change adaptation into municipalities’ daily planning practices and associated governance. A city-to-city learning lab was established to systematically analyze selected urban development projects step-by-step, from the initial idea, to comprehensive and detailed planning, procurement, implementation, maintenance and follow-up. The results show the numerous constraints municipal staff face and how they use targeted strategies to overcome them and tap into existing drivers. We identify five, complementary strategies: i) targeted stakeholder collaboration; ii) strategic citizen involvement; iii) outsourcing; iv) the alteration of internal working structures; and v) concealed science–policy integration. Importantly, these strategies reveal an increasing need for relational approaches that, in turn, require individuals to develop the cognitive/emotional capacity to establish trust, communicate inclusively and promote social learning, while at the same time dealing with an increasingly complex and uncertain working environment. We conclude that tapping into the potential of nature-based solutions for climate adaptation governance requires more financial and human resources, and capacity development to support personal development, systematic mainstreaming and, ultimately, more sustainable development.
Scholars and practitioners are increasingly promoting so-called nature-based approaches for urban climate change adaptation. There is widespread consensus that they both support and require transdisciplinary approaches, notably by involving citizens in the change process and finding innovative ways to unite different actors’ efforts and capacities. However, there is little empirical evidence regarding the actual value of citizen involvement to sustainability in this field. Against this background, this paper examines whether (or not) current forms and conditions of citizen involvement help to create a platform to support nature-based solutions and ensure a transformative adaptation process. The results show that under current conditions, citizen engagement often hampers sustainable outcomes. In fact, current structures and mechanisms for mainstreaming nature and climate considerations into sectoral planning are limited and, furthermore, neglect citizen involvement. In addition, there is a blind spot with respect to personal spheres of transformation toward sustainability regarding citizens, civil servants, and decision-makers. Key constraints are power structures and the lack of cognitive/ emotional and relational capacities required for improved democratic governance. If we are to tap into the potential of nature-based solutions to increase climate adaptation governance, we need targeted financial and human resources, and greater capacity to overcome current constraints and support all levels and phases of mainstreaming, notably planning, implementation, monitoring, and learning.
The rehabilitation and restoration of land is a key strategy to recover services -goods and resources- ecosystems offer to the humankind. This paper reviews key examples to understand the superior effect of nature-based solutions to enhance the sustainability of catchment systems by promoting desirable soil and landscape functions. The use of concepts such as connectivity and the theory of system thinking framework allowed to review coastal and river management as a guide to evaluate other strategies to achieve sustainability. In land management, NBSs are not mainstream management. Through a set of case studies: organic farming in Spain; rewilding in Slovenia; land restoration in Iceland, sediment trapping in Ethiopia and wetland construction in Sweden, we show the potential of nature-based solutions (NBSs) as a cost-effective long term solution for hydrological risks and land degradation. NBSs can be divided into two main groups of strategies: soil solutions and landscape solutions. Soil solutions aim to enhance the soil health and soil functions through which local ecosystem services will be maintained or restored. Landscape solutions mainly focus on the concept of connectivity. Making the landscape less connected, facilitating less rainfall to be transformed into runoff and therefore reducing flood risk, increasing soil moisture and reducing droughts and soil erosion we can achieve the sustainability. The enhanced ecosystem services directly feed into the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations.
We investigated and compared management practices for dealing with uncertainty in agroecosystem dynamics in two cases of smallholder farming in different parts of the world: northeast Tanzania and east-central Sweden. Qualitative research methods were applied to map farmers’ practices related to agroecosystem management. The practices are clustered according to a framework of ecosystem services relevant for agricultural production and discussed using a theoretical model of ecosystem dynamics. Almost half of the identified practices were found to be similar in both cases, with similar approaches for adjusting to and dealing with local variability and disturbance. Practices that embraced the ecological roles of wild as well as domesticated flora and fauna and the use of qualitative biological indicators are identified as tools that built insurance capital for change and enhanced the capacity to respond to changing agroecosystem dynamics. Diversification in time and space, as well as more specific practices for mitigating pest outbreaks and temporary droughts, can limit the effects of disturbance. In both Sweden and Tanzania, we identified social mechanisms for the protection of species that served important functions in the agroecosystem. We also found examples of how old practices served as a source of adaptations for dealing with new conditions and that new knowledge was adjusted to local conditions. The study shows that comparing management practices across scales and in different cultural settings can reveal insights into the capacity of farmers to adjust, respond to, and shape ecosystem dynamics. We emphasize the importance of continuous learning for developing the sustainable management of complex agroecosystems and securing agricultural production for the future.
Ecosystem-based approaches for climate change adaptation are promoted at international, national, and local levels by both scholars and practitioners. However, local planning practices that support these approaches are scattered, and measures are neither systematically implemented nor comprehensively reviewed. Against this background, this paper advances the operationalization of ecosystem-based adaptation by improving our knowledge of how ecosystem-based approaches can be considered in local planning (operational governance level). We review current research on ecosystem services in urban areas and examine four Swedish coastal municipalities to identify the key characteristics of both implemented and planned measures that support ecosystem-based adaptation. The results show that many of the measures that have been implemented focus on biodiversity rather than climate change adaptation, which is an important factor in only around half of all measures. Furthermore, existing measures are limited in their focus regarding the ecological structures and the ecosystem services they support, and the hazards and risk factors they address. We conclude that a more comprehensive approach to sustainable ecosystem-based adaptation planning and its systematic mainstreaming is required. Our framework for the analysis of ecosystem-based adaptation measures proved to be useful in identifying how ecosystem-related matters are addressed in current practice and strategic planning, and in providing knowledge on how ecosystem-based adaptation can further be considered in urban planning practice. Such a systematic analysis framework can reveal the ecological structures, related ecosystem services, and risk-reducing approaches that are missing and why. This informs the discussion about why specific measures are not considered and provides pathways for alternate measures/designs, related operations, and policy processes at different scales that can foster sustainable adaptation and transformation in municipal governance and planning.