Grasslands, Rangelands, Pastoralists – What Do We Mean?

The terms grasslands and rangelands are often confused, but the terms used to describe the people who live and manage these areas are even more confusing. The myriad of words used about these people includes: pastoralists, farmers, ranchers, herders, transhumants, indigenous peoples, nomads, graziers, gauchos. The terms used vary across the world, and meanings vary across time and space. One definition of pastoralists is “livestock-keepers who specialise in taking advantage of variability, managing grazing itineraries at a variety of scales so that livestock feed better than without a herder” (Krätli 2019). The United Nations Decade of Family Farming defines farmers as “people who own or operate an agricultural enterprise, either commercially or to sustain their families”. “Family farmers” include peasants, indigenous peoples, traditional communities, fisherfolk, mountain farmers, forest users and pastoralists (FAO & IFAD 2019). Excellent glossaries on rangelands and grasslands have been developed by the Society for Range Management (SRM), the International Grassland Congress (IGC) and the International Rangeland Congress (IRC). More recently, another group of scientists developed a complementary glossary of socio-institutional and political terms, the “people” terms. This glossary includes terms for the people who live and manage rangelands, including pastoralists, farmers, ranchers and many others. Also included are terms about the mobility of animals and people, e.g. transhumance, as well as land tenure, property and ownership, land rights, changes in rights to land, and land management and governance. This glossary has a Western focus, even though definitions take terms from various parts of the world into consideration. At this stage, terms are defined only in English, but it is hoped that they will be translated into other languages, and also that more terms will be added that are specific to certain regions of the world

Critical Habitats and Biodiversity: Inventory, Thresholds and Governance

The High Level Panel for Sustainable Ocean Economy (https://oceanpanel.org/) has commissioned a series of “Blue Papers” to explore pressing challenges at the nexus of the ocean and the economy. This paper is part of a series of 16 papers to be published between November 2019 and October 2020. It addresses how multiple human impacts will impact biodiversity underpinning ecosystem services such as marine fisheries, aquaculture, coastal protection and tourism. The paper examines the distribution of marine species and critical marine habitats around the world; analyses trends in drivers, pressures, impacts and response; and establishes thresholds for protecting biodiversity hot spots, and indicators to monitor change. From this scientific base, it assesses the current legal framework and available tools for biodiversity protection, current gaps in ocean governance and management and the implications for achieving a sustainable ocean economy tailored to individual coastal states grouped by social indicators

Inelastic scattering of 9Li and excitation mechanism of its first excited state

The first measurement of inelastic scattering of 9Li from deuterons at the ISAC facility is reported. The measured angular distribution for the first excited state confirms the nature of excitation to be an E2 transition. The quadrupole deformation parameter is extracted from an analysis of the angular distribution.Web of Scienc

Updating known distribution models for forecasting climate change impact on endangered species

To plan endangered species conservation and to design adequate management programmes, it is necessary to predict their distributional response to climate change, especially under the current situation of rapid change. However, these predictions are customarily done by relating de novo the distribution of the species with climatic conditions with no regard of previously available knowledge about the factors affecting the species distribution. We propose to take advantage of known species distribution models, but proceeding to update them with the variables yielded by climatic models before projecting them to the future. To exemplify our proposal, the availability of suitable habitat across Spain for the endangered Bonelli’s Eagle (Aquila fasciata) was modelled by updating a pre-existing model based on current climate and topography to a combination of different general circulation models and Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. Our results suggested that the main threat for this endangered species would not be climate change, since all forecasting models show that its distribution will be maintained and increased in mainland Spain for all the XXI century. We remark on the importance of linking conservation biology with distribution modelling by updating existing models, frequently available for endangered species, considering all the known factors conditioning the species’ distribution, instead of building new models that are based on climate change variables only.Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación and FEDER (project CGL2009-11316/BOS

Bridging the gap between climate scenarios and law - a roadmap for mutual contributions

To bridge the knowledge gap between climate scenarios and law, this presentation is aimed to demonstrate currently demanded mutual contributions by legal professionals and integrated assessment modellers on 1) how legal knowledge can be integrated into climate scenarios and 2) how scientific evidence generated from climate scenarios can better guide climate litigation cases. We expect that this could support judges in making trade-offs in climate-related court cases and could contribute to the acceptance of decisions by judges in such cases. Given the emissions gap and the measures that must be taken to comply with the Paris Agreement, the latter is likely becoming more relevant. Regarding the first part, the results are based on an empirical research project on Improving the Integration of Legal Knowledge and Scholars in Climate Scenario Assessments (https://www.uu.nl/en/research/sustainability/improving-the-integration-of-legal-knowledge-and-scholars-in-climate-scenario-assessments) and a workshop (https://www.uu.nl/en/research/sustainability/workshop-report-promoting-the-mutual-understanding-between-legal-and-governance-scholars-and-climate) resulted from this project held in May 2023. Via interviews and focus-group discussions with 24 experts in climate modelling, climate law and politics, and ethics, our research highlights four legal aspects for integration, which are: 1) implementation end enforcement of climate targets, 2) key normative principles, 3) legal uncertainties, and 4) the applicability of scenarios in regional and local legal contexts. Considering the challenges of integration due to epistemic distinctions between disciplines, experts held different opinions on the feasibility of integrating those four aspects. Regarding actionable steps for the short term, revising narratives and a ‘legal reality check’ are the most agreed ones. The former refers to adding legal obligations that safeguard justice, fairness and fundamental human rights - traceable to various treaties - to narratives of the global futures. The latter refers to scrutinising the ‘shared feasibility space’ between law on the one hand and modelled scenarios and emission reduction pathways on the other: it can be the compatibility of legal principles with modelled scenarios based on different assessment criteria (e.g. fair share of burdens), or to compare scenarios with and without regulatory boundary conditions in a specific jurisdiction on a specific mitigation solution (e.g. BECCS scenarios). Regarding the second part, the currently ongoing research focuses on the adoption of authoritative scientific evidence from climate scenarios - typically the projections referred to in the IPCC reports - in climate litigation cases. First, inspired by the Daubert Criteria, this research explores the possibility of developing guidelines for judges to deal with scientific uncertainties contained in multiple projected futures and determining admissibility of scientific evidence. Second, seeing the increasing reference to ‘open norms’ (e.g. due diligence, fair share) and fundamental human rights (to private life or a healthy environment) in court cases, modelled scenarios could provide information for guiding judges in their interpretation of key concepts such as carbon budgets, fair share, emission gap, appropriate emission reduction obligations, and climate-induced harm and loss and damage. We expect that this could be beneficial to the supportability of judges' decisions in climate cases