A Rosetta Stone for nature’s benefits to people

After a long incubation period, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is now underway. Underpinning all its activities is the IPBES Conceptual Framework (CF), a simplified model of the interactions between nature and people. Drawing on the legacy of previous large-scale environmental assessments, the CF goes further in explicitly embracing different disciplines and knowledge systems (including indigenous and local knowledge) in the co-construction of assessments of the state of the world's biodiversity and the benefits it provides to humans. The CF can be thought of as a kind of "Rosetta Stone" that highlights commonalities between diverse value sets and seeks to facilitate crossdisciplinary and crosscultural understanding. We argue that the CF will contribute to the increasing trend towards interdisciplinarity in understanding and managing the environment. Rather than displacing disciplinary science, however, we believe that the CF will provide new contexts of discovery and policy applications for it131sem informaçã

Biodiversity and ecosystem services science for a sustainable planet: the DIVERSITAS vision for 2012–20

DIVERSITAS, the international programme on biodiversity science, is releasing a strategic vision presenting scientific challenges for the next decade of research on biodiversity and ecosystem services: “Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Science for a Sustainable Planet”. This new vision is a response of the biodiversity and ecosystem services scientific community to the accelerating loss of the components of biodiversity, as well as to changes in the biodiversity science-policy landscape (establishment of a Biodiversity Observing Network — GEO BON, of an Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services — IPBES, of the new Future Earth initiative; and release of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020). This article presents the vision and its core scientific challenges.Fil: Larigauderie, Anne. DIVERSITAS. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Prieur Richard, Anne Helene. DIVERSITAS. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Mace, Georgina. Imperial College London. Center for Population Biology; Reino UnidoFil: Londsdale, Mark. CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences; AustraliaFil: Mooney, Harold A.. Stanford University. Department of Biological Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Brussaard, Lijbert. Wageningen University, Soil Quality Department; Países BajosFil: Cooper, David. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity; CanadáFil: Wolfgang, Cramer. Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d’Ecologie marine et continentale; FranciaFil: Daszak, Peter. EcoHealth Alliance. Wildlife Trust; Estados UnidosFil: Diaz, 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: Duraiappah, Anantha. International Human Dimensions Programme; AlemaniaFil: Elmqvist, Thomas. University of Stockholm. Department of Systems Ecology and Stockholm Resilience Center; SueciaFil: Faith, Daniel. The Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Jackson, Louise. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Krug, Cornelia. DIVERSITAS. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Leadley, Paul. Université Paris. Laboratoire Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Ecologie des Populations et Communautés; FranciaFil: Le Prestre, Philippe. Laval University; CanadáFil: Matsuda, Hiroyuki. Yokohama National University; JapónFil: Palmer, Margaret. University of Maryland; Estados UnidosFil: Perrings, Charles. Arizona State University; Estados UnidosFil: Pulleman, Mirjam. Wageningen University; Países BajosFil: Reyers, Belinda. Natural Resources and Environment; SudáfricaFil: Rosa, Eugene A.. Washington State University; Estados UnidosFil: Scholes, Robert J.. Natural Resources and Environment; SudáfricaFil: Spehn, Eva. Universidad de Basilea; SuizaFil: Turner II, B. L.. Arizona State University; Estados UnidosFil: Yahara, Tetsukazu. Kyushu University; Japó

Developing ecosystem service indicators: experiences and lessons learned from sub-global assessments and other initiatives

People depend upon ecosystems to supply a range of services necessary for their survival and well-being. Ecosystem service indicators are critical for knowing whether or not these essential services are being maintained and used in a sustainable manner, thus enabling policy makers to identify the policies and other interventions needed to better manage them. As a result, ecosystem service indicators are of increasing interest and importance to governmental and inter-governmental processes, including amongst others the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Aichi Targets contained within its strategic plan for 2011-2020, as well as the emerging Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Despite this growing demand, assessing ecosystem service status and trends and developing robust indicators is o!en hindered by a lack of information and data, resulting in few available indicators. In response, the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), together with a wide range of international partners and supported by the Swedish International Biodiversity Programme (SwedBio)*, undertook a project to take stock of the key lessons that have been learnt in developing and using ecosystem service indicators in a range of assessment contexts. The project examined the methodologies, metrics and data sources employed in delivering ecosystem service indicators, so as to inform future indicator development. This report presents the principal results of this project

The IPBES Conceptual Framework - connecting nature and people

The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework. This conceptual and analytical tool, presented here in detail, will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that IPBES will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions. Salient innovative aspects of the IPBES Conceptual Framework are its transparent and participatory construction process and its explicit consideration of diverse scientific disciplines, stakeholders, and knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge. Because the focus on co-construction of integrative knowledge is shared by an increasing number of initiatives worldwide, this framework should be useful beyond IPBES, for the wider research and knowledge-policy communities working on the links between nature and people, such as natural, social and engineering scientists, policy-makers at different levels, and decision-makers in different sectors of society

Ecophysiologie des echanges gazeux chez Eichhornia crassipes Mart. Solms (Jacinthe d'eau) : reponse aux fortes teneurs en CO2

CNRS T 57374 / INIST-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et TechniqueSIGLEFRFranc

La réforme territoriale en Île-de-France : quels enjeux pour la lecture publique ?

Élaborée par le groupe de travail sur la réforme territoriale mis en place en janvier 2015 par les groupes Paris et Île-de-France de l\u27ABF, cette journée visait à aborder positivement sans toutefois nier les difficultés le nouveau contexte créé par la réforme territoriale et permettre ainsi à chacun de devenir acteur dans les mois et années à venir en étant force de propositio

A Rosetta Stone For Nature's Benefits To People.

After a long incubation period, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is now underway. Underpinning all its activities is the IPBES Conceptual Framework (CF), a simplified model of the interactions between nature and people. Drawing on the legacy of previous large-scale environmental assessments, the CF goes further in explicitly embracing different disciplines and knowledge systems (including indigenous and local knowledge) in the co-construction of assessments of the state of the world's biodiversity and the benefits it provides to humans. The CF can be thought of as a kind of Rosetta Stone that highlights commonalities between diverse value sets and seeks to facilitate crossdisciplinary and crosscultural understanding. We argue that the CF will contribute to the increasing trend towards interdisciplinarity in understanding and managing the environment. Rather than displacing disciplinary science, however, we believe that the CF will provide new contexts of discovery and policy applications for it