Urbanization affects how people perceive and benefit from ecosystem service bundles in coastal communities of the Global South

Urbanization profoundly transforms ecosystems and the bundles of services they provide to people. The relationship between urbanization and how ecosystem services are produced together to form bundles has received increased research interest. However, there is limited understanding of how people’s perceptions of the benefits they receive from ecosystem service bundles change with urbanization, particularly in the Global South. Addressing this research gap is critical given perceptions influence how people relate to, use and manage their environment. We used a paired sampling design to contrast urban and rural dwellers’ perceptions of ecosystem service bundles associated with local ecosystems in the Solomon Islands, a rapidly urbanizing Small Island Developing State. Interviews from 200 households revealed that urbanization simplified the composition of perceived ecosystem service bundles. Contributions of provisioning and some cultural ecosystem services were reduced in bundles in urban areas, indicating a decrease in the diversity of experiences of nature and ecosystems providing those experiences. Examining changes in perceived ecosystem service bundles offers a valuable perspective on the implications of social-ecological change for ecosystem service demand and human wellbeing. Our approach presents a novel and simple way to identify and analyse bundles, providing insights into how and where people benefit from nature

Comparing Ecosystem Service preferences between urban and rural dwellers

Urbanization can profoundly alter socioecological relationships, but its influence on how people perceive and value ecosystem services (ES) is poorly understood. We reviewed an emerging literature in which sociocultural valuation of ES is compared among urban and rural dwellers. This research suggests that, although regulating and cultural ES were highly valued by both rural and urban dwellers, urban dwellers tended to value provisioning ES less than rural dwellers did. Differences in ES valuation could result from different experiences, uses, and needs for ES of urban and rural dwellers. We also identified two key gaps in the literature that relate to understanding how diverse ES contribute differently to the well-being of rural and urban populations (and the relevance of these differences for environmental education and policy) and the changing roles of ES in developing countries and vulnerable ecosystems, such as small islands, that face pressing environmental, social, and economic challenges

The influence of landscape context on the production of cultural ecosystem services

Recent efforts to apply sustainability concepts to entire landscapes have seen increasing interest in approaches that connect socioeconomic and biophysical systems. Evaluating these connections through a cultural ecosystem services lens clarifies how different spatiotemporal scales and levels of organisation influence the production of cultural benefits. Currently, however, the effects of multi-level and multi-scale ecological variation on the production of cultural benefits have not yet been disentangled. Objectives To quantify the amount of variation in cultural ecosystem service provision by birds to birders that is due to landscape-level attributes. Methods We used data from 293 birding routes and 101 different birders in South African National Parks to explore the general relationships between birder responses to bird species and environmental conditions, bird-related observations, the biophysical attributes of the landscape and their effect on bird-related cultural benefits. Results Biophysical attributes (particularly biome, vegetation type, and variance in elevation) significantly increased the percentage of variance explained in birder benefits from 57 to 65%, demonstrating that birder benefits are derived from multi-level (birds to ecosystems) and multi-scale (site to landscape) social and ecological interactions. Conclusions Landscape attributes influence people's perceptions of cultural ecosystem service provision by individual species. Recognition of the complex, localised and inextricable linkage of cultural ecosystem services to biophysical attributes can improve our understanding of the landscape characteristics that affect the supply and demand of cultural ecosystem services

Charting the value and limits of other effective conservation measures (OECMs) for marine conservation: A Delphi study

Other effective conservation measures (OECMs) will play an important role in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework as a way for governments to achieve “30 × 30” (30% protection of land and oceans by 2030). However, the policy tool remains relatively new, is expanding from multiple perspectives, and requires clarification. We conducted a Delphi study – a structured technique designed to elicit the insights of a panel of experts – to chart the value and limits of OECMs for marine conservation. Results of the Delphi reveal a high degree of consensus on several core areas of this emerging policy tool. Experts agreed that OECMs can advance equitable and effective conservation. Realizing these opportunities will require strengthening local and Indigenous rights and prioritizing principles of social equity. The panel also agreed on five key challenges, ranging from ensuring that the burden to prove effectiveness does not fall to local communities to securing adequate resources to support OECMs. In contrast, no consensus was reached on how to measure the effectiveness of OECMs, highlighting the need to develop shared monitoring guidelines. Taken together, these findings outline a clear policy and research agenda to support the contributions of OECMs towards equitable, effective, and enduring conservation

The role of socio-demographic characteristics in mediating relationships between people and nature

Research on ecosystem services has focused on their availability or supply and often takes a socially-aggregated approach that assumes a single human community of identical beneficiaries. However, people's ability to derive benefits from ecosystem services can differ strongly across societal groups. Access to ecosystem services can be related to socio-demographic characteristics such as material wealth, gender, education and age. Developing environmental management that does not have unequal impacts on different groups thus depends on taking a socially-disaggregated approach to assessing perceptions of ecosystem services. We explored how socio-demographic characteristics relate to cultural functional groups based on perceived bird traits. Using perception data on 491 bird species from 401 respondents along urban-rural gradients in South Africa, we found that socio-demographic characteristics are strongly associated with cultural functional groups based on perceived bird traits. Our results provide a starting point for understanding heterogeneity in the benefits from avian ecosystem services and how perceptions of cultural functional groups vary across societal groups

Ecosystem services, well‐being benefits and urbanization associations in a Small Island Developing State

1. Urbanization is a key driver of social and environmental change world‐wide. However, our understanding of its impacts on the multidimensional well‐being benefits that people obtain from ecosystems remains limited. 2. We explored how the well‐being contributions from land‐ and seascapes varied with urbanization level in the Solomon Islands, a fast‐urbanizing Small Island Developing State. Drawing on the social well‐being framework, we compared perceived well‐being benefits derived from ecosystem services in paired urban and rural sites. 3. Our analysis of 200 semi‐structured interviews revealed complex associations between provisioning, regulating and cultural services and well‐being benefits, with all ecosystem services contributing to material, relational and subjective well‐being dimensions. 4. Although patterns of associations between ecosystem services and well‐being benefits were similar between urban and rural dwellers, urban dwellers reported significantly fewer material, relational and subjective well‐being benefits. The most important differences between urban and rural dwellers were in terms of meeting basic material needs (e.g. income and material comfort), feeling connected to nature and feeling happy and satisfied. 5. With urbanization, livelihood activities transition from being subsistence‐based to income‐generating, which is also associated with increased wealth in urban areas. Similar to the relationship between ecosystem service well‐being benefits and urbanization, material wealth was negatively associated with perceptions of well‐being benefits. People with less material wealth appeared more reliant on nature for their multidimensional well‐being. 6. Our findings demonstrate that the altered human–nature relationships in urban areas are associated with decreases in multidimensional well‐being that people derive from nature. Improving access to particular ecosystem services, which make clear contributions to multidimensional well‐being, could be a focus for urban planners and environmental management where enhanced human–nature relationships and poverty alleviation are central goals

Why human rights matter for marine conservation

Human rights matter for marine conservation because people and nature are inextricably linked. A thriving planet cannot be one that contains widespread human suffering or stifles human potential; and a thriving humanity cannot exist on a dying planet. While the field of marine conservation is increasingly considering human well-being, it retains a legacy in some places of protectionism, colonialism, and fortress conservation. Here, we i) provide an overview of human rights principles and how they relate to marine conservation, ii) document cases where tensions have occurred between marine conservation goals and human rights, iii) review the legal and ethical obligations, and practical benefits, for marine conservation to support human rights, and iv) provide practical guidance on integrating human rights principles into marine conservation. We argue that adopting a human rights-based approach to marine conservation, that is integrating equity as a rights-based condition rather than a charitable principle, will not only help meet legal and ethical obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, but will also result in greater and more enduring conservation impact

Research priorities for the sustainability of coral-rich western Pacific seascapes

Nearly a billion people depend on tropical seascapes. The need to ensure sustainable use of these vital areas is recognised, as one of 17 policy commitments made by world leaders, in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 (‘Life below Water’) of the United Nations. SDG 14 seeks to secure marine sustainability by 2030. In a time of increasing social-ecological unpredictability and risk, scientists and policymakers working towards SDG 14 in the Asia–Pacific region need to know: (1) How are seascapes changing? (2) What can global society do about these changes? and (3) How can science and society together achieve sustainable seascape futures? Through a horizon scan, we identified nine emerging research priorities that clarify potential research contributions to marine sustainability in locations with high coral reef abundance. They include research on seascape geological and biological evolution and adaptation; elucidating drivers and mechanisms of change; understanding how seascape functions and services are produced, and how people depend on them; costs, benefits, and trade-offs to people in changing seascapes; improving seascape technologies and practices; learning to govern and manage seascapes for all; sustainable use, justice, and human well-being; bridging communities and epistemologies for innovative, equitable, and scale-crossing solutions; and informing resilient seascape futures through modelling and synthesis. Researchers can contribute to the sustainability of tropical seascapes by co-developing transdisciplinary understandings of people and ecosystems, emphasising the importance of equity and justice, and improving knowledge of key cross-scale and cross-level processes, feedbacks, and thresholds

Why human rights matter for marine conservation

Human rights matter for marine conservation because people and nature are inextricably linked. A thriving planet cannot be one that contains widespread human suffering or stifles human potential; and a thriving humanity cannot exist on a dying planet. While the field of marine conservation is increasingly considering human well-being, it retains a legacy in some places of protectionism, colonialism, and fortress conservation. Here, we i) provide an overview of human rights principles and how they relate to marine conservation, ii) document cases where tensions have occurred between marine conservation goals and human rights, iii) review the legal and ethical obligations, and practical benefits, for marine conservation to support human rights, and iv) provide practical guidance on integrating human rights principles into marine conservation. We argue that adopting a human rights-based approach to marine conservation, that is integrating equity as a rights-based condition rather than a charitable principle, will not only help meet legal and ethical obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, but will also result in greater and more enduring conservation impact

Limited Progress in Improving Gender and Geographic Representation in Coral Reef Science

Despite increasing recognition of the need for more diverse and equitable representation in the sciences, it is unclear whether measurable progress has been made. Here, we examine trends in authorship in coral reef science from 1,677 articles published over the past 16 years (2003–2018) and find that while representation of authors that are women (from 18 to 33%) and from non-OECD nations (from 4 to 13%) have increased over time, progress is slow in achieving more equitable representation. For example, at the current rate, it would take over two decades for female representation to reach 50%. Given that there are more coral reef non-OECD countries, at the current rate, truly equitable representation of non-OECD countries would take even longer. OECD nations also continue to dominate authorship contributions in coral reef science (89%), in research conducted in both OECD (63%) and non-OECD nations (68%). We identify systemic issues that remain prevalent in coral reef science (i.e., parachute science, gender bias) that likely contribute to observed trends. We provide recommendations to address systemic biases in research to foster a more inclusive global science community. Adoption of these recommendations will lead to more creative, innovative, and impactful scientific approaches urgently needed for coral reefs and contribute to environmental justice efforts.We acknowledge the contributions of the many unrecognized and undervalued individuals in coral reef research whose efforts have made it possible for the field to progress. These scientists have collected data, translated across languages, coordinated field work, welcomed foreign visitors to their countries, shared ideas, trained and mentored students, become friends, inspired, and built the foundation for the discipline we know today. We acknowledge the work of all coral reef scientists who continue day after day to pursue equity, inclusion, and justice in the field and for their colleagues and themselves.Ye