- M. Blicharska (1)
- M.M.B. Bogers (1)
- C.J.F. Braak ter (2)
- C.E. Buck (1)
- M. Bucur (1)
- R.J.F. Bugter (3)
- Rob Bugter (2)
- T.P. Dawson (1)
- S. Diaz (1)
- R. Dunford (1)
- B. Egoh (1)
- C.K. Feld (2)
- M. Garcia-llorente (1)
- N. Geamănă (1)
- W. Geertsema (1)
- I.C. Gormley (1)
- U. Grandin (1)
- R. Harrington (2)
- Paula Harrison (2)
- P.A. Harrison(older publications) (1)
- P.A. Harrison (2)
- John Haslett (2)
- J.R. Haslett (4)
- J. Haslett (1)
- D. Hering (1)
- S. Hove van den (1)
- Pekka Jokinen (1)
- R.H.G. Jongman (2)
- R.W. Katz (1)
- A. Kontogianni (1)
- C. Kremen (1)
- S. Lavorel (1)
- E. Lommelen (1)
- G.W. Luck (2)
- K.V. Mardia (1)
- P. Martins da Silva (1)
- Laurence Mathieu (1)
- L. Meiresonne (1)
- A.R. Millard (1)
- M. Moora (1)
- T.B. Murphy (1)
- A. O'Hagan (1)
- G. Pataki (1)
- Eeva Primmer (1)
- J. Rougier (1)
- M. Rounsevell (1)
- S.K. Sahu (1)
- M.J. Samways (2)
- L. Sandin (1)
- E.M. Scott (1)
- J. Settele (2)
- G. Simpson (1)
- J.P. Sousa (1)
- M.T. Sykes (2)
- R. Telford (1)
- Rob Tinch (2)
- R. Tinch (1)
- F. Turkelboom (1)
- M. Vandewalle (2)
- M. Zobel (3)
Arguments for biodiversity conservation : factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies
Tinch, Rob ; Bugter, Rob ; Blicharska, Malgorzata ; Harrison, Paula ; Haslett, John ; Jokinen, Pekka ; Mathieu, Laurence ; Primmer, Eeva - \ 2018
Biodiversity and Conservation 27 (2018). - ISSN 0960-3115 - p. 1763 - 1788.
Argument framing - Arguments for biodiversity conservation - Biodiversity policy - Ecosystem services - Science policy interfaces
Making a strong case for biodiversity protection is central to meeting the biodiversity targets in international agreements such as the CBD and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Effective arguments are needed to convince diverse actors that protection is worthwhile, and can play a crucial role in closing the implementation gap between biodiversity policy targets and outcomes. Drawing on a database of arguments from 11 European case studies, along with additional interview and case study material from all 13 case studies of the BESAFE project, we analysed relationships between potential and observed effectiveness of arguments. Our results show that strong logic, robustness, and timing of arguments are necessary but not sufficient conditions for arguments to be effective. We find that use of multiple and diverse arguments can enhance effectiveness by broadening the appeal to wider audiences, especially when arguments are repeated and refined through constructive dialogue. We discuss the role of framing, bundling and tailoring arguments to audiences in increasing effectiveness. Our results provide further support for the current shift towards recognition of value pluralism in biodiversity science and decision-making. We hope our results will help to demonstrate more convincingly the value of biodiversity to stakeholders in decision processes and thus build better cases for its conservation.
Making a better case for biodiversity conservation : the BESAFE project
Bugter, Rob ; Harrison, Paula ; Haslett, John ; Tinch, Rob - \ 2018
Biodiversity and Conservation 27 (2018)7. - ISSN 0960-3115 - p. 1549 - 1560.
Arguments for biodiversity conservation - Ecosystem services - Science policy interfaces
This Editorial to the BESAFE special issue introduces the project and its approach and case studies. The BESAFE (EC 7th Framework programme) project investigated how the effectiveness of different types of arguments for biodiversity conservation depends on the context in which they are used. Our results show that tailoring of argumentation to audience within the course of decision processes is the main factor determining effectiveness. We consistently found arguments linked to intrinsic value (e.g. moral or ethical obligation arguments) as shared and supported widely, and thus offering common ground between parties. Economic arguments are effective as additional ones, but not as replacements. Next generation biodiversity conservation strategies can probably improve their effectiveness by emphasizing and better explaining the synergies between traditional conservation and especially regulating and cultural services.
Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review
Harrison, P.A. ; Berry, P.M. ; Simpson, G. ; Haslett, J.R. ; Blicharska, M. ; Bucur, M. ; Dunford, R. ; Egoh, B. ; Garcia-llorente, M. ; Geamănă, N. ; Geertsema, W. ; Lommelen, E. ; Meiresonne, L. ; Turkelboom, F. - \ 2014
Ecosystem Services 9 (2014). - ISSN 2212-0416 - p. 191 - 203.
A systematic literature review was undertaken to analyse the linkages between different biodiversity attributes and 11 ecosystem services. The majority of relationships between attributes and ecosystem services cited in the 530 studies were positive. For example, the services of water quality regulation, water flow regulation, mass flow regulation and landscape aesthetics were improved by increases in community and habitat area. Functional traits, such as richness and diversity, also displayed a predominantly positive relationship across the services, most commonly discussed for atmospheric regulation, pest regulation and pollination. A number of studies also discussed a positive correlation with stand age, particularly for atmospheric regulation. Species level traits were found to benefit a number of ecosystem services, with species abundance being particularly important for pest regulation, pollination and recreation, and species richness for timber production and freshwater fishing. Instances of biodiversity negatively affecting the examined ecosystem services were few in number for all ecosystem services, except freshwater provision. The review showed that ecosystem services are generated from numerous interactions occurring in complex systems. However, improving understanding of at least some of the key relationships between biodiversity and service provision will help guide effective management and protection strategies.
|WS2 evaluation of synthesis and arguments framework with stakeholder recommendations
Tinch, R. ; Haslett, J. ; Bugter, R.J.F. ; Bogers, M.M.B. - \ 2014
BESAFE (Deliverable 5.1) - 32 p.
Stakeholder consultation and involvement remain central to BESAFE’s success. The BESAFE project organised its second stakeholder workshop in Brussels on 13 and 14 May 2014. Building upon the feedback obtained from stakeholders at the first workshop (reported in D2.2), the central aim of this second workshop was to consult with stakeholders to obtain their further opinions and suggestions about how the synthesis of results and the development of the arguments framework can be best tailored for practical application and ease of access by a wide variety of future users. Accordingly, BESAFE partners gave presentations on the initial results from the case studies and the effectiveness of arguments (WP2), an overview of arguments surrounding the European Biodiversity Strategy at EU and Member State levels (WP3), links between biodiversity and ecosystem services (WP4) and design and content of the synthesis tool kit and web tool (WP5). Stakeholders were asked to comment and make suggestions during break-out group, plenary and round table discussions. Resulting important recommendations, that also take account of additional comments from the project Advisory Board, include: • Design of the toolkit and the briefs that it comprises should put emphasis on the arguments involved, on how they are used, and on their effectiveness in different situations, in keeping with the overall focus of BESAFE. • The information should be presented in a style and format that will maximise knowledge transfer to a variety of audiences. • The web tool should be designed to be user-friendly for a range of stakeholder types to enable them to access appropriate information efficiently. • A clear strategy should be developed for the afterlife of the project results – a “bequeathing strategy” to ensure longevity of the toolkit and web tool beyond the end of the project. • There was some reiteration of recommendations made at the first workshop (see BESAFE Deliverable 2.2), particularly that language and contextual framing should be tailored to the different user groups, and that the overall framework of project outputs should focus on the use of arguments and combinations of arguments in practical situations. The stakeholders welcomed and accepted the invitation to assist with the further development of the toolkit and web tool through opportunities for consultation and contribution during the final phase of the project (including, but not limited to, the final stakeholder workshop).
Identifying and prioritising services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems
Harrison, P.A. ; Vandewalle, M. ; Sykes, M.T. ; Berry, P.M. ; Bugter, R.J.F. ; Bello, F. de; Feld, C.K. ; Grandin, U. ; Harrington, R. ; Haslett, J.R. ; Jongman, R.H.G. ; Luck, G.W. ; Martins da Silva, P. ; Moora, M. ; Settele, J. ; Sousa, J.P. ; Zobel, M. - \ 2010
Biodiversity and Conservation 19 (2010). - ISSN 0960-3115 - p. 2791 - 2821.
land-use - climate-change - agricultural landscapes - calcareous grasslands - species-diversity - seed dispersal - long-term - information-systems - vegetation dynamics - economic valuation
Ecosystems are multifunctional and provide humanity with a broad array of vital services. Effective management of services requires an improved evidence base, identifying the role of ecosystems in delivering multiple services, which can assist policy-makers in maintaining them. Here, information from the literature and scientific experts was used to systematically document the importance of services and identify trends in their use and status over time for the main terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems in Europe. The results from this review show that intensively managed ecosystems contribute mostly to vital provisioning services (e.g. agro-ecosystems provide food via crops and livestock, and forests provide wood), while semi-natural ecosystems (e.g. grasslands and mountains) are key contributors of genetic resources and cultural services (e.g. aesthetic values and sense of place). The most recent European trends in human use of services show increases in demand for crops from agro-ecosystems, timber from forests, water flow regulation from rivers, wetlands and mountains, and recreation and ecotourism in most ecosystems, but decreases in livestock production, freshwater capture fisheries, wild foods and virtually all services associated with ecosystems which have considerably decreased in area (e.g. semi-natural grasslands). The condition of the majority of services show either a degraded or mixed status across Europe with the exception of recent enhancements in timber production in forests and mountains, freshwater provision, water/erosion/natural hazard regulation and recreation/ecotourism in mountains, and climate regulation in forests. Key gaps in knowledge were evident for certain services across all ecosystems, including the provision of biochemicals and natural medicines, genetic resources and the regulating services of seed dispersal, pest/disease regulation and invasion resistance.
Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics
Haslett, J.R. ; Berry, P.M. ; Bela, G. ; Jongman, R.H.G. ; Pataki, G. ; Samways, M.J. ; Zobel, M. - \ 2010
Biodiversity and Conservation 19 (2010). - ISSN 0960-3115 - p. 2963 - 2977.
plant diversity - biodiversity - management - climate - networks - birds
Protecting species and their habitats through the designation and management of protected areas is central to present biodiversity conservation efforts in Europe. Recent awareness of the importance of ecosystem dynamics in changing environments and of human needs for the sustainable provision of ecosystem services expose potential weaknesses in current European conservation management strategies and policy. Here we examine these issues in the light of information gained from reviews, workshops, interviews and discussions undertaken within the RUBICODE project. We present a new conceptual framework that joins conventional biodiversity conservation with new requirements. The framework links cultural and aesthetic values applied in a static environment to the demands of dynamic ecosystems and societal needs within social–ecological systems in a changing Europe. We employ this framework to propose innovative ways in which ecosystem service provision may be used to add value to traditional conservation approaches by supporting and complementing present European biodiversity conservation strategy and policy while remaining within the guidelines of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services
Luck, G.W. ; Harrington, R. ; Harrison, P.A. ; Kremen, C. ; Berry, P.M. ; Bugter, R.J.F. ; Dawson, T.P. ; Bello, F. de; Diaz, S. ; Feld, C.K. ; Haslett, J.R. ; Hering, D. ; Kontogianni, A. ; Lavorel, S. ; Rounsevell, M. ; Samways, M.J. ; Sandin, L. ; Settele, J. ; Sykes, M.T. ; Hove, S. van den; Vandewalle, M. ; Zobel, M. - \ 2009
Bioscience 59 (2009)3. - ISSN 0006-3568 - p. 223 - 235.
crop pollination - population diversity - aonidiella-aurantii - natural enemies - economic value - conservation - biodiversity - land - ecology - resilience
Research on ecosystem services has grown rapidly over the last decade. Two conceptual frameworks have been published to guide ecological assessments of organisms that deliver services-the concepts of service-providing units (SPUs) and ecosystem service providers (ESPs). Here, we unite these frameworks and present an SPU-ESP continuum that offers a coherent conceptual approach for synthesizing the latest developments in ecosystem service research, and can direct future studies at all levels of organization. In particular, we show how the service-provider concept call be applied tit the population, functional group, and community levels, We strongly emphasize the need to identify and quantify the organisms and their characteristics (e.g., functional traits) that provide services, and to assess service provision relative to the demands of human beneficiaries. We use key examples from the literature to illustrate the new approach and to highlight gaps in knowledge, particularly in relation to the impact of species interactions and ecosystem dynamics on service provision.
Bayesian palaeoclimate reconstruction - Discussion on the paper by Haslett et al
Buck, C.E. ; Braak, C.J.F. ter; Millard, A.R. ; Rougier, J. ; O'Hagan, A. ; Birks, H.J.B. ; Telford, R. ; Katz, R.W. ; Murphy, T.B. ; Gormley, I.C. ; Sahu, S.K. ; Mardia, K.V. ; Scott, E.M. - \ 2006
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, Statistics in Society 169 (2006)3. - ISSN 0964-1998 - p. 430 - 438.
Summary. We consider the problem of reconstructing prehistoric climates by using fossil data that have been extracted from lake sediment cores. Such reconstructions promise to provide one of the few ways to validate modern models of climate change. A hierarchical Bayesian modelling approach is presented and its use, inversely, is demonstrated in a relatively small but statistically challenging exercise: the reconstruction of prehistoric climate at Glendalough in Ireland from fossil pollen. This computationally intensive method extends current approaches by explicitly modelling uncertainty and reconstructing entire climate histories. The statistical issues that are raised relate to the use of compositional data (pollen) with covariates (climate) which are available at many modern sites but are missing for the fossil data. The compositional data arise as mixtures and the missing covariates have a temporal structure. Novel aspects of the analysis include a spatial process model for compositional data, local modelling of lattice data, the use, as a prior, of a random walk with long-tailed increments, a two-stage implementation of the Markov chain Monte Carlo approach and a fast approximate procedure for cross-validation in inverse problems. We present some details, contrasting its reconstructions with those which have been generated by a method in use in the palaeoclimatology literature. We suggest that the method provides a basis for resolving important challenging issues in palaeoclimate research. We draw attention to several challenging statistical issues that need to be overcome.
|Discussion of 'Bayesian palaeoclimate reconstruction' by J. Haslett et al
Braak, C.J.F. ter - \ 2006
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, Statistics in Society 169 (2006)3. - ISSN 0964-1998 - p. 431 - 432.
last glacial maximum - pollen data - environmental reconstruction - climate-change - time-series - europe - model - vegetation - simulations - temperature
We consider the problem of reconstructing prehistoric climates by using fossil data that have been extracted from lake sediment cores. Such reconstructions promise to provide one of the few ways to validate modern models of climate change. A hierarchical Bayesian modelling approach is presented and its use, inversely, is demonstrated in a relatively small but statistically challenging exercise: the reconstruction of prehistoric climate at Glendalough in Ireland from fossil pollen. This computationally intensive method extends current approaches by explicitly modelling uncertainty and reconstructing entire climate histories. The statistical issues that are raised relate to the use of compositional data (pollen) with covariates (climate) which are available at many modern sites but are missing for the fossil data. The compositional data arise as mixtures and the missing covariates have a temporal structure. Novel aspects of the analysis include a spatial process model for compositional data, local modelling of lattice data, the use, as a prior, of a random walk with long-tailed increments, a two-stage implementation of the Markov chain Monte Carlo approach and a fast approximate procedure for cross-validation in inverse problems. We present some details, contrasting its reconstructions with those which have been generated by a method in use in the palaeoclimatology literature. We suggest that the method provides a basis for resolving important challenging issues in palaeoclimate research. We draw attention to several challenging statistical issues that need to be overcome.