Abstract
AbstractTrade-offs in nature’s contributions to people (NCP), particularly in material NCP versus regulating and non-material NCP, continue to rise. Socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes (SEPLS) represent harmonious human–nature interactions resulting in positive outcomes for both biodiversity and human well-being, thus implying synergies among multiple NCP are possible. In case studies of ten projects selected from biodiversity hotspots under the GEF-Satoyama Project, we investigated whether and how synergies in NCP exist within SEPLS and explored management interventions that enhanced these synergies. Using the responses to an online survey completed by project managers from each project and drawing on project reports, we identified a wide array of NCP deriving from various ecosystems within the project SEPLS. Habitat and food provisions, both attributed to multiple ecosystem types, were key components of the NCP bundles present in the project SEPLS. Among the management options that enhanced NCP in SEPLS were food-centred approaches entailing organic agriculture, eco-labelling, branding and improved agricultural practices. Habitat-centred approaches included participatory biodiversity monitoring, ecosystem restoration, co-management and conservation agreements with landowners. Synergies in NCP were generated by integrating these interventions with enabling governance structures and through community empowerment. If combined with mapping and modelling techniques, identifying NCP bundles in SEPLS from local people’s perspectives as we outlined in this study, would help to better contextualise the analysis of NCP bundles. Such contextualised NCP bundle analyses will help field practitioners understand how to enhance synergies between multiple NCP and the broader conservation community could access untapped NCP knowledge.
Funder
Ministry of the Environment
The Global Environment Facility
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Nature and Landscape Conservation,Sociology and Political Science,Ecology,Geography, Planning and Development,Health(social science),Global and Planetary Change
Reference45 articles.
1. Ament JM, Moore CA, Herbst M, Cumming GS (2017) Cultural ecosystem services in protected areas: understanding bundles, trade-offs, and synergies. Conserv Lett 10:440–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12283
2. CBD (2018) Scientific and technical advice on other effective area-based conservation measures. In: Decision 14/8. Protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures. Convention on Biological Diversity, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt
3. OECD (2002) Glossary of key terms in evaluation and results based management. Development Assistance Committee Working Party on Aid Evaluation, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris
4. Darvill R, Lindo Z (2016) The inclusion of stakeholders and cultural ecosystem services in land management trade-off decisions using an ecosystem services approach. Landsc Ecol 31:533–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0260-y
5. Daw T, Brown K, Rosendo S, Pomeroy R (2011) Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being. Environ Conserv 38:370–379. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000506
Cited by
13 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献