Biodiversity and ecosystem services in quarries

Although covering less than 1% of the land surface, extraction activities have long‐lasting impacts on local ecosystems, inevitably damaging biological diversity and depleting ecosystem services. Many extractive companies are now aware of their impacts and, while pressured by society, demand concrete solutions from researchers to reverse the effects of exploitation and restore biodiversity and ecosystems services. In this article, we compile and synthesize the contributions of the latest available research on quarry restoration. We depict and discuss some of the most pressing issues regarding (1) the challenges of restoring quarries; (2) the opportunities for biodiversity and ecosystem services delivery; and (3) outline further research addressing current gaps. We conclude that quarries pose different abiotic and biotic constraints that act interdependently, hampering the attainment of effective restoration if considered solely. Such constraints need to be addressed holistically to lastly encourage the self‐sustainability of the system by reinstating ecological processes. However, a restored site does not have to specifically mimic the pristine situation, as under certain conditions alternative approaches may uphold valuable natural assets contributing to the conservation of rare, restricted, or protected species and habitats.Czech Grant Agency by the project no. 20-06065Sinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Integrated climate sensitive restoration framework for transformative changes to sustainable land restoration

Sustainable land restoration is the key to restore degraded land, halt biodiversity loss and reinstate ecosystem services for human well‐being. Restoration needs to be planned and conducted with due recognition to growing climate uncertainty with an evolved understanding about the future restoration targets. Present opinion article attempts to provide an overview on Integrated Climate Sensitive Restoration Framework that recognizes the local participation in mapping degraded lands, identification of species for supporting species modelling to better understand climate uncertainty. Involvement of citizen science based restoration monitoring tools can contribute to big data analytics for ecological monitoring and policy support. The Framework potentially helps in sustainable land restoration by transformative changes for achieving UN decade on Ecosystems Restoration (2021–2030), SDGs 15 and addressing the post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. However, to realize the success, climate finance mechanisms to drive restoration should be seriously considered for reducing bias and enhancing opportunities of equitable sharing in the era of corruption, authoritarianism and regulatory capture

Making real progress toward more sustainable societies using decision support models and tools: Introduction to the special volume

Academics, politicians, professionals and the general public are aware that without stewarding our planet’s natural resources, man is on the pathway towards a global collapse. Over the next three decades mankind is expected to consume an estimated 140 billion tons of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and biomass per year – three times current consumption. Social welfare and human wellbeing are threatened with the scarcity of natural resources; consequently, nations and their societies are also at risk of collapse. The readers of this special volume will find a compilation of scholarly research papers with real-life applications that take the challenge of proposing decision-making models and tools to address sustainability challenges in integrative ways. The main focus of this special volume is integration of sustainability dimensions (economic, social, environmental, ethical and time) into decision-support models and to identify pathways to achieve more sustainable societies. The majority of the research in this special volume, 74 percent, focuses on environmental and economic dimensions. Only 26 percent integrated social dimensions with them. Methodologically, a range of mathematical models and tools are presented to support prescriptive decision-making, with some descriptive models integrated, to support decision-makers in solving practical problems across a variety of industries and scenarios. The breadth and complexity of issues facing organizations and society requires innovative applications of these methodologies. The concerns cover a spectrum ranging from energy to solid waste management. A multitude of levels from broad-based policy concerns to strategic inter-organizational sustainable supply chain management and significantly, shop floor operational issues are also covered. The variety of problems and solutions exemplifies the potential for modelling and operations research for addressing some of our world’s most pressing concerns

Risk propensity in the foreign direct investment location decision of emerging multinationals

A distinguishing feature of emerging economy multinationals is their apparent tolerance for host country institutional risk. Employing behavioral decision theory and quasi-experimental data, we find that managers’ domestic experience satisfaction increases their relative risk propensity regarding controllable risk (legally protectable loss), but decreases their tendency to accept non-controllable risk (e.g., political instability). In contrast, firms’ potential slack reduces relative risk propensity regarding controllable risk, yet amplifies the tendency to take non-controllable risk. We suggest that these counterbalancing effects might help explain observation that risk-taking in FDI location decisions is influenced by firm experience and context. The study provides a new understanding of why firms exhibit heterogeneous responses to host country risks, and the varying effects of institutions

Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability

Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre-emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision-making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non-substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling-up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.Fil: Chan, Kai M. A.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Boyd, David R.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Gould, Rachelle. University of Vermont; Estados UnidosFil: Jetzkowitz, Jens. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; AlemaniaFil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Muraca, Bárbara. University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Naidoo, Robin. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Beck, Paige. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Satterfield, Terre. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Singh, Gerald G.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Sumaila, Rashid. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Ngo, Hien T.. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; AlemaniaFil: Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Agard, John. The University Of The West Indies; Trinidad y TobagoFil: de Aguiar, Ana Paula D.. Stockholms Universitet; SueciaFil: Armenteras, Dolors. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Balint, Lenke. BirdLife International; Reino UnidoFil: Barrington-Leigh, Christopher. Mcgill University; CanadáFil: Cheung, William W. L.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Driscoll, John. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Esler, Karen. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Eyster, Harold. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Gregr, Edward J.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Hashimoto, Shizuka. The University Of Tokyo; JapónFil: Hernández Pedraza, Gladys Cecilia. The World Economy Research Center; CubaFil: Hickler, Thomas. Goethe Universitat Frankfurt; AlemaniaFil: Kok, Marcel. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países BajosFil: Lazarova, Tanya. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países BajosFil: Mohamed, Assem A. A.. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; EgiptoFil: Murray-Hudson, Mike. University Of Botswana; BotsuanaFil: O'Farrell, Patrick. University of Cape Town; SudáfricaFil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; EspañaFil: Saysel, Ali Kerem. Boğaziçi University; TurquíaFil: Seppelt, Ralf. Martin-universität Halle-wittenberg; AlemaniaFil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research-iDiv; AlemaniaFil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina; BrasilFil: Xue, Dayuan. Minzu University Of China; ChinaFil: Brondízio, Eduardo S.. Indiana University; Estados Unido

Trust Between International Joint Venture Partners: Effects of Home Countries

Trust is an important factor in interorganizational relations. Interorganizational trust in cross-border relationships is likely to be influenced by the home countries of both partners. Using data on 165 international joint ventures (IJVs), we show that the perceived trustworthiness of an IJV partner is influenced by the general propensity to trust in the trustor's home country. Moreover, the trustworthiness perceived by a focal parent firm is also affected by the home country of the other IJV partner. This second effect is mitigated by experience between the partners