There is a growing need for coastal and marine restoration, but it is not clear how to pay for it given that environmental funding is low, and national budgets are stretched in response to natural hazards. We use risk-industry methods and find that coral reef and mangrove restoration could yield strong Return on Investment (ROI) for flood risk reduction on shorelines across more than 20 Caribbean countries. These results are robust to changes in discount rates and the timing of restoration benefits. Data on restoration costs are sparse, but the Present Value (PV) of restored natural infrastructure shows that ROI would be positive in many locations even if restoration costs are in the hundreds of thousand per hectare for mangroves and millions per km for reefs. Based on these benefits, we identify significant sources of funding for restoring these natural defenses.
NbS Approach: OTH
Other
This study examines how residents of nature-based tourism destinations become supportive of sustainable tourism development based on an integrated theoretical framework that combines social exchange theory and bottom-up spillover theory. A survey of 364 residents in Jechon City, South Korea measured their perceptions of tourism impacts using a neutral-phrase questionnaire (non-forced approach). Results from structural equation modeling showed that residents perceive tourism as having a significant positive impact on material and non-material aspects of their lives, which leads to overall quality of life and support for sustainable tourism development. The integration of social exchange theory and bottom-up spillover theory proved to be a useful framework in predicting residents’ support for sustainable tourism development. The study results suggest that to foster local residents’ support for sustainable tourism development, planners should consider the impact of tourism on material and non-material aspects of residents’ lives, emphasize environmental considerations, and focus on long-term benefits.
The coming decades will define whether the
Amazon – home to more than 28 million inhabitants,
198 indigenous peoples, and harbouring the most
biodiverse forest, the largest freshwater reservoir
and the largest tropical bloc for climate regulation
on the planet – will become the great catalyst
for Brazil’s low-carbon economy. Or whether, in
the opposite direction, the Amazon will reach an
irreversible point of degradation, deepening current
inequalities and jeopardizing the stability and
competitiveness of the country’s entire economy.
How to guide the Legal Amazon towards a
decarbonization trajectory, transforming the region’s
economy so that it grows, generates opportunities,
values local cultures and environmental assets,
while fighting inequality and deforestation? This
question motivated the 76 researchers who signed
the New Economy for the Amazon report.
The study combines different techniques and
knowledge to present a unique depiction of the
Legal Amazon’s current economy, bringing to
light the region’s economic and environmental
relations with the rest of Brazil and the world.
The study focuses on carbon-intensive sectors
that must change course in order to become
a relevant part of a standing forest economy,
more suited to the challenges of this century.
The study further explores the role of the
bioeconomy, revealing a vigorous activity hitherto
invisible to conventional instruments used
to measure economic activity. Although it is
based on the secular form of production of the
original peoples, constantly innovated by local
technologies developed in Amazonian villages,
rural areas and cities, the bioeconomy remains
underestimated in terms of its current impact
and future potential. The work provides visibility
to these activities, demonstrating their relevance
as a solution for the region’s future economy.
The report also assesses the economic performance
of the Legal Amazon under different scenarios,
comparing the current trajectory, which has
been driving degradation, with alternative
decarbonization scenarios, especially in the
agricultural, livestock and energy sectors.
More than comparing GDP and job creation results,
as economic performance is traditionally assessed,
the New Economy for the Amazon gives shape to a
qualitative analysis of that which is wanted for the
future – and there is no future for Brazil without
the Amazon. The results show that it is impossible
for the country to reach its Paris Agreement
targets and contribute to curbing global warming
without eliminating deforestation in the Amazon.
Even assuming that deforestation is eliminated,
it will still be necessary to restore large areas of
the forest and adopt new ways of generating and
consuming energy, whether in rural or urban areas.
This report proposes a transition that generates
quality jobs and opportunities for the region’s
citizens, while driving important changes in the rest
of the country. The New Economy for the Amazon
can be the great catalyst for the decarbonization
of the entire Brazilian economy and the greatest
opportunity for economic and social development
in the country’s contemporary history.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework envisages an increasing reliance on large-scale private finance to fund biodiversity targets. We warn that this may pose contradictions in delivering conservation outcomes and propose a critical ongoing role for direct public funding of conservation and public oversight of private nature-related financial mechanisms.
Biodiversity offsetting is a globally influential policy mechanism for reconciling trade-offs between development and biodiversity loss. However, there is little robust evidence of its effectiveness. We evaluated the outcomes of a jurisdictional offsetting policy (Victoria, Australia). Offsets under Victoria’s Native Vegetation Framework (2002–2013) aimed to prevent loss and degradation of remnant vegetation, and generate gains in vegetation extent and quality. We categorised offsets into those with near-complete baseline woody vegetation cover (“avoided loss”, 2702 ha) and with incomplete cover (“regeneration”, 501 ha), and evaluated impacts on woody vegetation extent from 2008 to 2018. We used two approaches to estimate the counterfactual. First, we used statistical matching on biophysical covariates: a common approach in conservation impact evaluation, but which risks ignoring potentially important psychosocial confounders. Second, we compared changes in offsets with changes in sites that were not offsets for the study duration but were later enrolled as offsets, to partially account for self-selection bias (where landholders enrolling land may have shared characteristics affecting how they manage land). Matching on biophysical covariates, we estimated that regeneration offsets increased woody vegetation extent by 1.9%–3.6%/year more than non-offset sites (138–180 ha from 2008 to 2018) but this effect weakened with the second approach (0.3%–1.9%/year more than non-offset sites; 19–97 ha from 2008 to 2018) and disappeared when a single outlier land parcel was removed. Neither approach detected any impact of avoided loss offsets. We cannot conclusively demonstrate whether the policy goal of ‘net gain’ (NG) was achieved because of data limitations. However, given our evidence that the majority of increases in woody vegetation extent were not additional (would have happened without the scheme), a NG outcome seems unlikely. The results highlight the importance of considering self-selection bias in the design and evaluation of regulatory biodiversity offsetting policy, and the challenges of conducting robust impact evaluations of jurisdictional biodiversity offsetting policies.
Focused on forest management and governance, this book examines two decades of experience with Adaptive Collaborative Management (ACM), assessing both its uses and improvements needed to address global environmental issues.
The volume argues that the activation and the empowerment of local peoples are critical to addressing current environmental challenges and that this must be enhanced by linking and extending such stewardship to global and national policymakers and actors on a broader scale. This can be achieved by employing ACM’s participatory approach, characterized by conscious efforts among stakeholders to communicate, collaborate, negotiate and seek out opportunities to learn collectively about the impacts of their action. The case studies presented here reflect decades of experience working with forest communities in three Indonesian Islands and four African countries. Researchers and practitioners who participated in CIFOR’s early ACM work had the rare opportunity to return to their research sites decades later to see what has happened. These authors reflect critically on their own experience and local site conditions to glean insights that guide us in more effectively addressing climate change and other forest-related challenges. They showcase how global and regional actors will have to work more closely with smallholders, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, recognizing the key local roles in forest stewardship.
This book will be of great interest to students, scholars and practitioners working in the fields of conservation, forest management, community development, natural resource management and development studies more broadly.
Forest restoration requires monitoring to assess above- and belowground communities, which is challenging due to practical and resource limitations. Ecological acoustic survey methods––also known as “ecoacoustics”––are increasingly available and provide a rapid, effective, and non-intrusive means of monitoring biodiversity. Aboveground ecoacoustics is widespread, but soil ecoacoustics has yet to be utilized in restoration despite its demonstrable effectiveness at detecting soniferous soil meso- and macrofauna. This study applied ecoacoustic tools and indices (Acoustic Complexity Index, Normalized Difference Soundscape Index, and Bioacoustic Index) to measure belowground (and aboveground as secondary) biodiversity in a forest restoration site spanning two age classes. We collected n = 198 belowground acoustic samples and n = 180 aboveground samples from three recently deforested (felled <3 years ago) and three deciduous forest plots undergoing restoration (for the last 30–51 years) across three monthly visits in South Yorkshire, U.K. We used a belowground sampling device and sound-attenuation chamber to record soil communities and passive acoustic monitoring to record aboveground sounds. We found that restored plot acoustic complexity and diversity were significantly higher than deforested plots in the sound-attenuation chamber, but there were no inter-plot differences in in-situ soil or aboveground samples. We also found that restored plots had a significantly greater high-frequency to low-frequency ratio (suggesting higher biophony to anthrophony ratios) for in-situ and sound chamber soil but no association for aboveground samples. Our results suggest that ecoacoustics has immense potential to monitor belowground biodiversity, adding to the restoration ecologist’s toolkit and supporting global ecosystem recovery.
Image sensing technologies are rapidly increasing the cost-effectiveness of biodiversity monitoring efforts. Species differences in the reflectance of electromagnetic radiation can be used as a surrogate estimate plant biodiversity using multispectral image data. However, these efforts are often hampered by logistical difficulties in broad-scale implementation. Here, we investigate the utility of multispectral imaging technology from commercially available unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or drones) in estimating biodiversity metrics at a fine spatial resolution (0.1–0.5 cm pixel resolution) in a temperate calcareous grassland in Oxfordshire, UK. We calculate a suite of moments (coefficient of variation, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis) for the distribution of radiance from multispectral images at five wavelength bands (Blue 450 ± 16 nm; Green 560 ± 16 nm; Red 650 ± 16 nm; Red Edge 730 ± 16 nm; Near Infrared 840 ± 16 nm) and test their effectiveness at estimating ground-truthed biodiversity metrics from in situ botanical surveys for 37–1 × 1 m quadrats. We find positive associations between the average coefficient of variation in spectral radiance and both the Shannon–Weiner and Simpson’s biodiversity indices. Furthermore, the average coefficient of variation in spectral radiance is consistent and highly repeatable across sampling days and recording heights. Positive associations with biodiversity indices hold irrespective of the image recording height (2–8 m), but we report reductions in estimates of spectral diversity with increases to UAV recording height. UAV imaging reduced sampling time by a factor of 16 relative to in situ botanical surveys. We demonstrate the utility of multispectral radiance moments as an indicator of biodiversity in this temperate calcareous grassland at a fine spatial resolution using a widely available UAV monitoring system with a coarse spectral resolution. The use of UAV technology with multispectral sensors has far-reaching potential to provide cost-effective and high-resolution monitoring of biodiversity.
Justice and fairness have become key considerations in sustainability pathways and nature-based solutions (NBS), following activists and critical scholars who have long argued that the urban environment is an inherently political space that requires an analysis of benefits and burdens associated with its existence, use, and access. However, what justice means and how it is expressed, recognized, or achieved is often implicit in the literature on NBS, even though underlying notions of justice shape the analysis done and actions proposed. This paper starts from the premise that justice knows many different interpretations, therefore warranting scholars and practitioners working on NBS to carefully consider the differences and frictions between competing meanings of justice. Drawing from the history of social and environmental justice theory, we give an account of some key justice dilemmas and discuss their tenets as it relates to the end, means, and participants in the making of justice. From this, we draw out questions and commitments academics and practitioners in the NBS space should grapple with more explicitly. We argue that the emergent tension between pragmatic policy approaches and critical theoretical engagement is hindering a version of NBS that goes beyond a reflection of the justice implications of NBS to ensuring that NBS contributes to the furthering of justice. We advocate for the inclusion of critical social sciences and humanities perspectives and approaches beyond tokenism to instead encourage ontological, epistemological, and political reflection of the work academics and practitioners do in the NBS space.
Tropical deforestation continues at alarming rates with profound impacts on ecosystems, climate, and livelihoods, prompting renewed commitments to halt its continuation. Although it is well established that agriculture is a dominant driver of deforestation, rates and mechanisms remain disputed and often lack a clear evidence base. We synthesize the best available pantropical evidence to provide clarity on how agriculture drives deforestation. Although most (90 to 99%) deforestation across the tropics 2011 to 2015 was driven by agriculture, only 45 to 65% of deforested land became productive agriculture within a few years. Therefore, ending deforestation likely requires combining measures to create deforestation-free supply chains with landscape governance interventions. We highlight key remaining evidence gaps including deforestation trends, commodity-specific land-use dynamics, and data from tropical dry forests and forests across Africa.
Transformative governance is key to addressing the global environmental crisis. We explore how transformative governance of complex biodiversity–climate–society interactions can be achieved, drawing on the first joint report between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to reflect on the current opportunities, barriers, and challenges for transformative governance. We identify principles for transformative governance under a biodiversity–climate–society nexus frame using four case studies: forest ecosystems, marine ecosystems, urban environments, and the Arctic. The principles are focused on creating conditions to build multifunctional interventions, integration, and innovation across scales; coalitions of support; equitable approaches; and positive social tipping dynamics. We posit that building on such transformative governance principles is not only possible but essential to effectively keep climate change within the desired 1.5 degrees Celsius global mean temperature increase, halt the ongoing accelerated decline of global biodiversity, and promote human well-being.
During December 2020, a crowdsourcing campaign to understand what has been driving tropical forest loss during the past decade was undertaken. For 2 weeks, 58 participants from several countries reviewed almost 115 K unique locations in the tropics, identifying drivers of forest loss (derived from the Global Forest Watch map) between 2008 and 2019. Previous studies have produced global maps of drivers of forest loss, but the current campaign increased the resolution and the sample size across the tropics to provide a more accurate mapping of crucial factors leading to forest loss. The data were collected using the Geo-Wiki platform (www.geo-wiki.org) where the participants were asked to select the predominant and secondary forest loss drivers amongst a list of potential factors indicating evidence of visible human impact such as roads, trails, or buildings. The data described here are openly available and can be employed to produce updated maps of tropical drivers of forest loss, which in turn can be used to support policy makers in their decision-making and inform the public.
Natural climate solutions (NCS)—actions to conserve, restore, and modify natural and modified ecosystems to increase carbon storage or avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions—are increasingly regarded as important pathways for climate change mitigation, while contributing to our global conservation efforts, overall planetary resilience, and sustainable development goals. Recently, projections posit that terrestrial-based NCS can potentially capture or avoid the emission of at least 11 Gt (gigatons) of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, or roughly encompassing one third of the emissions reductions needed to meet the Paris Climate Agreement goals by 2030. NCS interventions also purport to provide co-benefits such as improved productivity and livelihoods from sustainable natural resource management, protection of locally and culturally important natural areas, and downstream climate adaptation benefits. Attention on implementing NCS to address climate change across global and national agendas has grown—however, clear understanding of which types of NCS interventions have undergone substantial study versus those that require additional evidence is still lacking. This study aims to conduct a systematic map to collate and describe the current state, distribution, and methods used for evidence on the links between NCS interventions and climate change mitigation outcomes within tropical and sub-tropical terrestrial ecosystems. Results of this study can be used to inform program and policy design and highlight critical knowledge gaps where future evaluation, research, and syntheses are needed.
This paper expands the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) values framing about nature and its contributions to people by exploring the notion of ‘disvalues’, which pertains to aspects of nature that reduce well being (instrumental disvalues), relationships that are detrimental to a dignified and flourishing life (relational disvalues), or the perception of badness in an absolute sense, regardless of the impact on people (intrinsic disvalues). Shedding light on how people express disvalues helps to better capture their preferences and subjective perspectives, as well as account for the socioenvironmental positions from which they speak. Considering the full spectrum of disvalues opens up new ways to better identify social–ecological trade-offs, a necessary step for seeking solutions and finding common ground on sustainability and justice.
Remote sensing has transformed the monitoring of life on Earth by revealing spatial and temporal dimensions of biological diversity through structural, compositional and functional measurements of ecosystems. Yet, many aspects of Earth’s biodiversity are not directly quantified by reflected or emitted photons. Inclusive integration of remote sensing with field-based ecology and evolution is needed to fully understand and preserve Earth’s biodiversity. In this Perspective, we argue that multiple data types are necessary for almost all draft targets set by the Convention on Biological Diversity. We examine five key topics in biodiversity science that can be advanced by integrating remote sensing with in situ data collection from field sampling, experiments and laboratory studies to benefit conservation. Lowering the barriers for bringing these approaches together will require global-scale collaboration.
The concept of NbS bridges between researchers and practitioners who search for innovative solutions to a wide range of societal problems and challenges, mostly related to ecological issues. Our conceptual paper aims at grounding the concept in theorizing NbS as a variant of ‘co-evolutionary technology’ CET, informed by ecological and institutional economics, and contextualized in recent Anthropocene research. This results in a new definition of NbS. NbS mediate between technosphere and biosphere evolution. We formulate four principles of CET, with the pivot of CET meeting both human needs and enhancing biospheric evolutionary potential, which feeds back on CET in co-creative design. The paper introduces core theoretical concepts, such as distributed agency and affordances, and proceeds in detailing CET along the standard tripartite view of technology, that is, design, production and use. We conclude in arguing that CET are inherently ethical since their design requires equal recognition of various human and non-human actors, both in terms of functions and ways of world-making.
Nature-based solutions (NbS) provide direct benefits to people who live in areas where these approaches are present. The degree of direct benefits (thermal comfort, reduced flood risk, and mental health) varies across temporal and spatial scales, and it can be modelled and quantified. Less clear are the indirect benefits related to opportunities to learn about the environment and its influence on personal behaviour and action. The present study, based on survey data from 1955 participants across 17 cities worldwide, addressed whether participation in NbS through two types of interactions (a passive learning experience about NbS and a more active experience based on Citizen Science) stimulates motivation and willingness to be more environmentally sustainable. Over 75% of participants improved their understanding of environmental sustainability and were highly motivated and more confident in their ability to improve sustainability in their local environment/nature. Similar percentage improvements arose from both types of activity across all cities. Those NbS that had elements of both blue and green infrastructure rated higher than those that had predominantly green NbS. Interestingly, a large percentage of the participants did not live near the NbS that were the focus of these activities. This indicated that expected spatial limitations between benefit and recipient may be overcome when dedicated programmes involve people in learning or monitoring NbS. Therefore, opportunities have arisen to expand inclusion from the immediately local to the larger community through participation and Citizen Science, with potential benefits to social cohesion and urban sustainability.
This book presents new research on innovative financial instruments and approaches available to implement and mainstream nature-based solutions (NBS) at various scales and in different contexts. This book explores various public, private, and blended financing tools available to develop NBS across terrestrial and marine ecosystems, involving multiple stakeholders and in jurisdictions of varying climates and income levels. Furthermore, the book provides case studies of the innovative application of financing to scale up NBS, with best practices identified.