Testing the orthodoxies of land degradation policy in Swaziland

This paper explores Swaziland's National Action Programme (NAP) to combat desertification; the country's main strategy for implementing the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). It considers whether this policy tackles real problems supported by micro-level scientific evidence and local experiences, or whether it further reinforces popular orthodoxies about land degradation. Data from one case study chiefdom in Swaziland are used to test two key orthodoxies identified within the country's NAP: (1) the presentation of degradation as a neo-Malthusian problem resulting from population pressure and (2) the assumption that the poor are responsible for degradation of their environment, in particular, the over-use of forest areas and the degradation of soils. It is found that diverse rural livelihoods inherently deliver patches of degradation at the micro-level but it is not necessarily population pressure or poor people that cause the degradation. Households with varying assets simultaneously degrade and conserve different parts of the land resource through pursuing different livelihood activities. The data indicate that while the NAP focuses on mythical problems grounded in the orthodoxies, policy attention is directed away from the more serious land degradation issues affecting rural livelihoods. The findings of this study provide a more nuanced understanding of the gaps between land degradation policy, local conservation practice and environmental and livelihood outcomes, and suggest that policymakers need to evaluate more critically the outdated and simplistic degradation orthodoxies on which much current policy is based. Stronger links need to be made between scientific and policymaking communities, while more credence should be given to land users’ own knowledges, perspectives, concepts and categories surrounding issues of soil conservation and degradation. It is suggested that steps need to be taken towards the development of broadly applicable benchmarks and indicators that bring together local and scientific knowledges across levels. Without this, popularised orthodoxies will continue to provide a basis for inappropriate land policy

Perspectives on contextual vulnerability in discourses of climate conflict

The science of climate security and conflict is replete with controversies. Yet the increasing vulnerability of politically fragile countries to the security consequences of climate change is widely acknowledged. Although climate conflict reflects a continuum of conditional forces that coalesce around the notion of vulnerability, how different portrayals of vulnerability influence the discursive formation of climate conflict relations remains an exceptional but under-researched issue. This paper combines a systematic discourse analysis with a vulnerability interpretation diagnostic tool to explore (i) how discourses of climate conflict are constructed and represented, (ii) how vulnerability is communicated across discourse lines, and (iii) the strength of contextual vulnerability against a deterministic narrative of scarcity-induced conflict, such as that pertaining to land. Systematically characterising climate conflict discourses based on the central issues constructed, assumptions about mechanistic relationships, implicit normative judgements and vulnerability portrayals, provides a useful way of understanding where discourses differ. While discourses show a wide range of opinions “for” and “against” climate conflict relations, engagement with vulnerability has been less pronounced – except for the dominant context centrism discourse concerned about human security (particularly in Africa). In exploring this discourse, we observe an increasing sense of contextual vulnerability that is oriented towards a concern for complexity rather than predictability. The article concludes by illustrating that a turn towards contextual vulnerability thinking will help advance a constructivist theory informed climate conflict scholarship that recognises historicity, specificity, and variability as crucial elements of contextual totalities of any area affected by climate conflict

A new dryland development paradigm grounded in empirical analysis of dryland systems science

Global drylands face a host of urgent human and environmental challenges with far-reaching impacts. Improving smallholder agriculture remains a key development pathway to tackle these challenges. The Dryland Development Paradigm (DDP), introduced in 2007, presented a highly influential framework for dryland development based on systems research. This paper empirically derives a new, updated DDP. It assesses recent, cutting-edge dryland science, combining literature review with qualitative and quantitative analysis of research published by the world's largest dryland science and development research initiative. The new DDP comprises eight characteristics that are distilled into three integrative principles: Unpack, Traverse and Share. The new DDP is applied and tested to identify key dryland knowledge and development gaps. A future research agenda is then elucidated, grounded in a research in development approach, in which research anchored in the three integrative principles is embedded within the context it seeks to improve. Supported by greater transdisciplinarity and knowledge co-production, operationalization of the new DDP can deliver both novel scientific insights and development impact in line with the aspirations of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals

Reviewing the International Year of Deserts and Desertification 2006: What contribution towards combating global desertification and implementing the united nations convention to combat desertification?

During the United Nations General Assembly's 58th Ordinary Session in 2003, a decision was adopted declaring 2006 the International Year of Deserts and Desertification (IYDD). This paper critically reviews this International Year. It draws on the key outputs from IYDD events from across the globe to highlight the challenges and ways forward in both combating desertification and implementing the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). The paper considers what the IYDD outputs mean for the current and historical controversies surrounding the desertification issue and presents an overall evaluation of the successes of IYDD for the different stakeholder groups within the desertification regime. It is concluded that while the International Year can be considered to have met the United Nations's four objectives: to address the long-term oriented implementation of the UNCCD; raise awareness of the implications of desertification; facilitate networking with all stakeholders; and disseminate information relating to the UNCCD, the real challenge lies in moving the IYDD outcomes away from the conferences, meetings and networks that contributed to their generation, towards a more concrete, tangible effort to conserve deserts and effectively monitor and control desertification and land degradation on the ground

Integrating biocultural conservation and sociocultural valuation in the management of sacred forests: What values are important to the public?

1. The need to recognise plural values and integrate these into policy design has long been of interest in nature conservation. However, we also need to understand whether and how different values are prioritised among diverse stakeholders. This is particularly important when indigenous and traditional cultures play a role in how land is managed and protected. 2. Working in the sacred forests of Nigeria, we applied the principles of biocultural conservation and sociocultural valuation to understand the values that underpin people's relationship with nature and with other users of nature. We operationalised this by employing participatory workshop methods to identify multiple values of sacred forests, and conjoint analysis to elicit local people's value priorities and preferences for conserving sacred forests. 3. We identified multiple values attributed to sacred forests, but the strongest preferences were for improved provision of medicinal values. However, preference heterogeneity analysis showed that sacred forests are valued differently among clusters of people with distinct sociodemographic profiles. 4. Our findings also showed that the current management strategy for the conservation of sacred forests is inadequate to galvanise shared and collective responsibility from diverse stakeholders. Using a value-based approach, more robust management strategies that will yield high utility to the public were determined and recommended for implementation. 5. Policy implications. Overall, our study demonstrates that sacred forests are valued in multiple ways above and beyond their role in a cultural belief system. New strategies are therefore needed to effectively manage and conserve them. We recommend a plural approach to the conservation of sacred forests that will incorporate multiple values. This can be achieved by integrating biocultural conservation and sociocultural valuation

Five principles for the practice of knowledge exchange in environmental management

This paper outlines five principles for effective practice of knowledge exchange, which when applied, have the potential to significantly enhance the impact of environmental management research, policy and practice. The paper is based on an empirical analysis of interviews with 32 researchers and stakeholders across 13 environmental management research projects, each of which included elements of knowledge co-creation and sharing in their design. The projects focused on a range of upland and catchment management issues across the UK, and included Research Council, Government and NGO funded projects. Preliminary findings were discussed with knowledge exchange professionals and academic experts to ensure the emerging principles were as broadly applicable as possible across multiple disciplines. The principles suggest that: knowledge exchange needs to be designed into research; the needs of likely research users and other stakeholders should be systematically represented in the research where possible; and long-term relationships must be built on trust and two-way dialogue between researchers and stakeholders in order to ensure effective co-generation of new knowledge. We found that the delivery of tangible benefits early on in the research process helps to ensure continued motivation and engagement of likely research users. Knowledge exchange is a flexible process that must be monitored, reflected on and continuously refined, and where possible, steps should be taken to ensure a legacy of ongoing knowledge exchange beyond initial research funding. The principles have been used to inform the design of knowledge exchange and stakeholder engagement guidelines for two international research programmes. They are able to assist researchers, decision-makers and other stakeholders working in contrasting environmental management settings to work together to co-produce new knowledge, and more effectively share and apply existing knowledge to manage environmental change

Climate change research and action must look beyond 2100

Anthropogenic activity is changing Earth's climate and ecosystems in ways that are potentially dangerous and disruptive to humans. Greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere continue to rise, ensuring that these changes will be felt for centuries beyond 2100, the current benchmark for projection. Estimating the effects of past, current, and potential future emissions to only 2100 is therefore short-sighted. Critical problems for food production and climate-forced human migration are projected to arise well before 2100, raising questions regarding the habitability of some regions of the Earth after the turn of the century. To highlight the need for more distant horizon scanning, we model climate change to 2500 under a suite of emission scenarios and quantify associated projections of crop viability and heat stress. Together, our projections show global climate impacts increase significantly after 2100 without rapid mitigation. As a result, we argue that projections of climate and its effects on human well-being and associated governance and policy must be framed beyond 2100