Plural valuation of nature for equity and sustainability: Insights from the Global South

Plural valuation is about eliciting the diverse values of nature articulated by different stakeholders in order to inform decision making and thus achieve more equitable and sustainable outcomes. We explore what approaches align with plural valuation on the ground, as well as how different social-ecological contexts play a role in translating plural valuation into decisions and outcomes. Based on a co-constructed analytical approach relying on empirical information from ten cases from the Global South, we find that plural valuation contributes to equitable and sustainable outcomes if the valuation process: 1) is based on participatory value elicitation approaches; 2) is framed with a clear action-oriented purpose; 3) provides space for marginalized stakeholders to articulate their values in ways that can be included in decisions; 4) is used as a tool to identify and help reconcile different cognitive models about human-nature relations; and 5) fosters open communication and collaboration among stakeholders. We also find that power asymmetries can hinder plural valuation. As interest and support for undertaking plural valuation grows, a deeper understanding is needed regarding how it can be adapted to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability

Whose values count? A review of the nature valuation studies with a focus on justice

Data Availability: All data on which this perspective is based are available in the IPBES methodological assessment on diverse values and valuation of nature.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. The Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services shows that multiple valuation methods and approaches exist to assess diverse value types. The evidence is based on the largest review of academic valuation studies on nature to date, developed for the Values Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). We evaluate studies according to environmental justice criteria. The results suggest that although diverse value types and indicators are assessed across studies, few individual studies are plural, and studies fail to provide evidence on distributive justice and score low on procedural justice indicators. We provide a set of recommendations for incorporating issues of justice in the design of valuation studies

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Data availability: All the data are freely available online. The supplementary information provides links to Zenodo with specific DOIs where the data are stored for free use.Supplementary information is available online at https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06406-9/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6406_MOESM1_ESM.docx . The Supplementary Information includes three parts. Part A explains how the paper is associated with the IPBES Values Assessment. Part B provides details about each of the 29 review protocols. Part C offers information about the case study of Chilika Lagoon, India, that is used in the main paper.Copyright © The Author(s) 2023. Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.We received no specific funding for this work; all authors involved in IPBES do so on a voluntary basis. The IPBES Values Assessment was made possible thanks to many generous contributions, including non-earmarked contributions to the IPBES trust fund from governments. All donors are listed on the IPBES website www.ipbes.net/donors. U.P. acknowledges BC3’s Maria de Maeztu excellence accreditation 2023–2026 (reference no. CEX2021-001201-M) provided by grant no. MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033

Challenges encountered when doing research back home: Perspectives from African conservation scientists in the diaspora

African conservation scientists in the diaspora are still a largely untapped resource for conservation efforts in Africa. Institutions that harbor diaspora scientists from Africa should view their presence, motivation, and skills as an excellent opportunity to build strong bridges with the continent and undercut parachute science. Yet, parachute science is still the prominent way of doing conservation science in Africa and it can be difficult to escape, even for Africans working abroad and conducting research in their home countries. Espousing an alternative model to parachute science is possible, but it requires conscious effort and systemic changes at all scales (individual, departmental, universities). In this perspective, we describe six situations that help illuminate the layers of factors that diaspora African researchers must navigate while building cross-continental collaborations in the absence of adequate institutional support. They include the questioning of our “local-ness,” accusations of nepotism, over-explaining our intentions and dealing with the demand for “ground-breaking and globally relevant research.” We propose actions and best practices for harnessing the potential of diaspora faculty to build meaningful, equitable and long-term research collaborations with partners in Africa

From crisis to context: Reviewing the future of sustainable charcoal in Africa

Is charcoal a sustainable energy source in Africa? This is a crucial question, given charcoal's key importance to urban energy. In today's dominant policy narrative – the charcoal-crisis narrative – charcoal is deemed incompatible with sustainable and modern energy, blamed for looming ecological catastrophe, and demanding replacement. However, an emerging sustainability-through-formalization narrative posits that charcoal can be made sustainable – specifically, through formalization of production, trade, markets, and consumption technologies. This represents an important opportunity to go beyond the crisis narrative and to engage productively with charcoal. However, this ascendent narrative also risks misrepresenting the reality of charcoal on the continent and leading to inappropriate policies. The narrative's designation of the African charcoal sector as unsustainable at present obscures charcoal production's diverse and uncertain impacts across the continent; moreover, the association of informality with unsustainability obscures a similarly complex and diverse social reality as well as the ways that social processes and relations of power and inequality determine charcoal's sustainability. We argue that charcoal needs to be considered within its historical, social, and environmental contexts to better understand its present and the emergent pathways to sustainable energy futures. We draw upon research that is raising questions about both the charcoal-crisis and the sustainability-through-formalization narratives to argue for a new narrative of charcoal in context. This approaches charcoal as a politically, ecologically, and historically embedded resource, entailing significant socio-ecological complexity across diverse historical and geographical conjunctures, and calling for new agendas of interdisciplinary research with an orientation towards sustainability and justice.British Academ

Understanding the multidimensionality of climate-smartness: Examples from agroforestry in Tanzania

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) has three goals—productivity, resilience and mitigation. Rarely are these accounted for in CSA programming or the scientific evidence that supports it. Here, we evaluate the climate smartness of CSA-based agroforestry practices in Tabora and Dodoma, Tanzania using unpublished data from earlier studies. Firstly, a study of on-farm wood production and its use with the improved cook stove (ICS) was used to ascertain the productivity and mitigation effects of CSA. Next, intercropping experiments of maize or cassava with pigeonpea and/or G. sepium provided information on the production and resilience benefits of CSA. It was found that agroforestry practices (shelterbelt, trees on contours and intercropping) supplied up eight tons per hectare (t ha−1) of wood—enough to support a five-member family for up to 6 years when using ICS. Employing ICS also reduced the time spent in cooking (20%) and fuelwood collection (32%), and reduced gas emissions by 62%. Generally, intercropping pigeonpea or G. sepium enhanced farm production (as noted by a land equivalent ratio greater than 1) and agroecosystem resilience through crop diversification by using suitable intercropping arrangements and including a drought-resistant crop. Using the latter two in semi-arid Dodoma enhanced crop production across seasons and sites. Our analysis shows that adopting CSA-based agroforestry and intercropping practices is beneficial. However, these benefits are not universal. It also illustrates other key principles for understanding multidimensionality of CSA objectives, including the need to: select appropriate indicators, ensure designs are robust for heterogeneity, examine trade-offs, and conduct participatory evaluation of CSA

Implementation and opportunity costs of reducing deforestation and forest degradation in Tanzania

The Cancún Agreements provide strong backing for a REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism whereby developed countries pay developing ones for forest conservation1. REDD+ has potential to simultaneously deliver cost-effective climate change mitigation and human development2, 3, 4, 5. However, most REDD+ analysis has used coarse-scale data, overlooked important opportunity costs to tropical forest users4, 5 and failed to consider how to best invest funds to limit leakage, that is, merely displacing deforestation6. Here we examine these issues for Tanzania, a REDD+ country, by comparing district-scale carbon losses from deforestation with the opportunity costs of carbon conservation. Opportunity costs are estimated as rents from both agriculture and charcoal production (the most important proximate causes of regional forest conversion7, 8, 9). As an alternative we also calculate the implementation costs of alleviating the demand for forest conversion—thereby addressing the problem of leakage—by raising agricultural yields on existing cropland and increasing charcoal fuel-use efficiency. The implementation costs exceed the opportunity costs of carbon conservation (medians of US$6.50 versus US$3.90 per Mg CO2), so effective REDD+ policies may cost more than simpler estimates suggest. However, even if agricultural yields are doubled, implementation is possible at the competitive price of ~US$12 per Mg CO