5 research outputs found
How pragmatism in environmental science and policy can undermine sustainability transformations:the case of marginalized mountain areas under climate and land-use change
Abstract
Global warming, land-use change, mass tourism and a deteriorating socio-economic situation pose serious threats to the sustainability of mountain areas. The future development of these areas could be an example of the Great Transition scenario. Based on iterative and collaborative discussions with 60 treeline experts, we (1) envisioned plausible futures of treeline ecosystems in Europe and (2) explored the role of pragmatism in scenario development and use. The three global change scenario classes (Conventional Worlds, Barbarization, and Great Transitions) and four European scenarios (Economy First, Fortress Europe, Policy Rules, and Sustainability Eventually) were downscaled using the drivers-pressures-state-impact-response (DPSIR) framework. The scenarios that emerged, i.e., Global Markets, Self-sufficient Economies, Tyranny of Climate Governance, and Sustainable Use of Ecosystem Services, show that pragmatism can have either a propitious role or pernicious role in scenario analysis. Instead of being truly honest brokers, scenario producers are likely to manipulate, reconstruct, and change scientific knowledge to avoid socially and politically undesired trajectories. We showed by mathematical optimization that scenario users are likely to miss the Sustainable Use of Ecosystem Services scenario if they search within the pragmatic decision space which optimally justifies the two pre-existing global policies: climate policy and economic growth. We conclude that pernicious pragmatism leads to “the trap of the day”—a tendency of both users and producers of scenarios to use pre-existing policy agendas and scientific narratives as a pretext to promote their own objectives instead of being open to transformation in science and policy
Chamomile and Anise Cultivation in Olive Agroforestry Systems
Agroforestry systems have been practiced for hundreds of years with multiple benefits both environmentally and economically in terms of productivity. Olive cultivation is widespread in the countries of the Mediterranean basin, including Greece. Agroforestry practices are common in olive groves, but little research has been conducted on the productivity of such systems, especially with medicinal–aromatic plants (MAPs) as understory crops. Natural populations of MAPs can be found in various ecosystems, while some of them are cultivated. The purpose of this research was to study the effects of fertilization and shading both on yield and chemical composition of essential oils derived from chamomile (Matricaria recutita L.) and anise (Pimpinella anisum L.), grown in olive silvoarable systems. Fertilization and shading increased the plant height of chamomile and delayed the flowering. In addition, fertilization increased the concentration of α-bisabolol oxide A and (Z)–spiroether, and reduced the α-bisabolone oxide A and hamazulen. Shade also reduced α-bisabolone oxide A and hamazulen but increased the α-bisabolol oxide B. In the case of anise, fertilization increased plant height, decreased the concentration of limonene, and increased the concentration of E-anethole. Shading reduced plant height. Intercropping of olive trees with chamomile and anise yielded essential oils rich in the substances defined by the commercial specifications
Barriers to ecological restoration in Europe:expert perspectives
Abstract
Ecological restoration is key to counteracting anthropogenic degradation of biodiversity and to reducing disaster risk. However, there is limited knowledge of barriers hindering the wider implementation of restoration practices, despite high-level political priority to halt the loss of biodiversity. In Europe, progress on ecological restoration has been slow and insufficient to meet international agreements and comply with European Union Nature Directives. We assessed European restoration experts' perceptions on barriers to restoration in Europe, and their relative importance, through a multiple expert consultation using a Delphi process. We found that experts share a common multi-dimensional concept of ecological restoration. Experts identified a large number of barriers (33) to the advancement of ecological restoration in Europe. Major barriers pertained to the socio-economic, not the environmental, domain. The three most important being insufficient funding, conflicting interests among different stakeholders, and low political priority given to restoration. Our results emphasize the need to increase political commitment at all levels, comply with existing nature laws, and optimize the use of financial resources by increasing funds for ecological restoration and eradicate environmentally harmful subsidies. The experts also call for the integration of ecological restoration into land-use planning and facilitating stakeholders' collaboration. Our study identifies key barriers, discusses ways to overcome the main barriers to ER in Europe, and contributes knowledge to support the implementation of the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the EU 2030 Restoration Plan in particular
Social equity in governance of ecosystem services:synthesis from European treeline areas
Abstract
Achieving social equity among local stakeholders should be a key objective for ecosystem service (ES) governance in Europe’s ecologically fragile treeline areas. The ES literature tends to be biased towards distributional equity and market-based instruments when assessing social equity of ES governance. In this study, we analyze a wide range of social equity procedures that have been applied in Europe, using 11 synthesized case studies of governance-related challenges and 75 proposals for governance enhancement from 8 European countries provided by researchers with expertise on treeline area governance. The proposals were grouped by inductive clustering into 10 procedural or distributional equity-related policy recommendations: (1) increase stakeholder collaboration, (2) balance interactions between horizontal and vertical governance levels, (3) increase ES education, (4) use science to guide decisions, (5) start collaboration at an early stage, (6) enhance transparency, (7) aim to mitigate negative impacts, (8) use an ES approach to identify synergistic goals for governance, (9) enhance balanced multi-functional land use, and (10) use market-based instruments to balance benefits and costs deriving from governance decisions. Finally, we discuss 5 more general proposals on how regulatory and market-based approaches could be linked to enhance both procedural and distributional equity of treeline area governance