Bewertung kultureller Ökosystemleistungen von Berliner Stadtgrün entlang eines urbanen-periurbanen Gradienten

Stadtgrün steht unter hohem Nutzungsdruck. Gerade Erholungsfunktionen werden von An-wohner unterschiedlich wahrgenommen. Eine Möglichkeit, Bewertungen für Grünflächen zu erheben, sind kulturelle Ökosystemleistungen. In dieser Studie vereinen wir qualitative und quantitative Methoden, um Informationen zu kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen und Besuchs-verhalten zu Grünflächen in Berlin zu erhalten. Quaitative Bewertungen von kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen wurden durch semi-strukturierte Interviews mit Berliner Einwohnern (Problemzentrierte Interviews, n = 22) und Experten (Experteninterviews, n = 19) erhalten. Kategorien kultureller Ökosystemleistungen wurden an den urbanen Kontext Berlins angepasst, um detaillierte Informationen über die Bedeutung von Stadtgrün zu erhalten. Zusätzlich wurden quantitative Bewertungen durch direkte Umfragen, basierend auf proportionalem Klumpenauswahlverfahren erhalten. Daten (n = 558) wurden in zwei Runden in fier Ortsteilen Berlins erhoben. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass sich Nutzung und Bewertung von Stadtgrün je nach Popula-tionsdichte des Berliner Ortsteils unterscheidet. Außerdem werden kulturelle Ökosystemleis-tungen zwischen sozialen Gruppen - jüngere im urbanen Ballungsraum lebende Befragte und ältere in weniger eng besiedelten Gegenden - unterschiedlich bewertet. Unsere Resultate zeigen räumliche, zeitliche und soziale Faktoren auf, die der Bewertung von kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen unterliegen. Kulturelle Ökosystemleistungen haben einen heterogenen Charakter und das Verständnis dessen ist von großer Bedeutung für Grünflächenmanage-ment und Forschung im Bereich der Ökosystemleistung.Urban green experiences high use-pressures. Especially recreation is perceived differently by inhabitants. One possibility to assess values for green spaces are cultural ecosystem services. In the paper at hand we combine qualitative and quantitative valuations to gain information on cultural ecosystem services and visiting behavior towards urban green spaces in Berlin. Qualitative values of cultural ecosystem services were assessed through semi-structured interviews with Berlin inhabitants (problem-centered interviews, n = 22) and experts (expert interviews, n = 19). Categories of cultural ecosystem services were uniquely adjusted to fit to the urban context and detailed information on the benefits of urban green for local inhabit-ants gained. Additionally, quantitative values were assessed using a face-to-face survey, based on proportioned stratified sampling. Data (n = 558) were collected in two sampling rounds in four districts of Berlin. Results show that green space utilization and valuation of cultural ecosystem services differs by population density of the sampled district of Berlin. Additionally, different social groups - in Berlin, younger urban dwellers versus older residents in less densely populated areas - perceive cultural ecosystem services differently. We uncovered spatial, temporal and social factors which underlie cultural ecosystem service valuation. Cultural ecosystem services have a heterogeneous character and their understanding is of great importance for green space management, spatial planning and ecosystem service research

Key advantages of the leverage points perspective to shape human-nature relations

This perspective paper synthesises the special issue 'Human-nature connectedness as a leverage point for sustainability transformation'. Based on the articles in this special issue, we aim to foster the operationalisation of the leverage points perspective to shape human-nature relations to enable sustainability transformations. Specifically, we draw on four key advantages of the leverage points perspective: (i) the explicit recognition of deep leverage points; (ii) the ability to examine the interactions between shallow and deep system changes; (iii) the combination of causal and teleological modes of research; and (iv) the ability to function as a methodological boundary object. The contributions to this special issue revealed three deep leverage points addressing paradigm shifts in research and beyond: relational thinking and values, stewardship philosophy and shifting the economic growth paradigm to focus on human well-being. We highlight interlinkages between leverage points to further strengthen the transformative potential of interventions that aim at triggering shifts in our understanding about human-nature relations. Further, we show a way to bridge causal and teleological approaches by envisioning desired futures. Lastly, we emphasise the potential of arts-based methodologies, including participatory, transdisciplinary research to foster sustainability transformation and how this can be combined within the leverage points perspective.Peer reviewe

Leverage points for sustainability transformation: a review on interventions in food and energy systems

© 2019 Elsevier B.V. There is increasing recognition that sustainability science should be solutions orientated and that such solutions will often require transformative change. However, the concrete sustainability interventions are often not clearly communicated, especially when it comes to the transformative change being created. Using food and energy systems as illustrative examples we performed a quantitative systematic review of empirical research addressing sustainability interventions. We use a modified version of Donella Meadows' notion of ‘leverage points’ – places in complex systems where relatively small changes can lead to potentially transformative systemic changes – to classify different interventions according to their potential for system wide change and sustainability transformation. Our results indicate that the type of interventions studied in the literature are partially driven by research methods and problem framings and that ‘deep leverage points’ related to changing the system's rules, values and paradigms are rarely addressed. We propose that for initiating system wide transformative change, deep leverage points – the goals of a system, its intent, and rules – need to be addressed more directly. This, in turn, requires an explicit consideration of how scientific approaches shape and constrain our understanding of where we can intervene in complex systems

Working Group on Social Indicators (WGSOCIAL; outputs from 2023 meeting)

The Working Group on Social Indicators seeks to improve the integration of social sciences in ICES Ecosystem Overviews and Integrated Ecosystem Assessments through the development of culturally relevant social indicators. To advance progress on this, WGSOCIAL has broadly discussed the context of the social di-mension of fishing. This has led to coordination with other working groups within ICES and outside ICES with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries Expert Working Group Social and with the Regional Coordination Group on Economics Issues. WGSOCIAL develops methods for qualitative and quantitative approaches. It has also continued providing input to the updating of ecosystem overviews finalizing those of the Celtic Seas and North Sea. WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the definition and context of trade-offs and trade-off analy sis in the social context of fisheries. To assess social and cultural significance of commercial fishing, WGSOCIAL members have advanced case studies in a number of ICES Member Countries: two regions in Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway. Each case study tackles a different approach with a different context. In addition, WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the topic of what a fishing community is and how the definition can change in different contexts. Lastly, WGSOCIAL has developed a database of social and economic indicators for evaluating fisheries management and identified a comprehensive list of categories and sub-categories of social and economic indicators that could be used to structure the selection of social indicators that inform fisheries managers. As a nest step, WGSOCIAL will identify key social indicators and data gaps for selected ICES Member Countries with recommendations for approaches to close the gaps. To support integrated socio-ecological evaluations in ecosystem-based management, WGSOCIAL has contributed to the development of work on the impacts of wind farms on com-mercial fishing activities. This work will continue in collaboration with WGECON, with whom several parallel terms of reference (ToRs) are shared. WGSOCIAL decided to transfer to the new ICES Human Dimension Steering Group.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations

Co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice by diverse societal actors, is argued to play an important role in sustainability transformations. Yet, there is still poor understanding of how to navigate the tensions that emerge in these processes. Through analyzing 32 initiatives worldwide that co-produced knowledge and action to foster sustainable social-ecological relations, we conceptualize ‘co-productive agility’ as an emergent feature vital for turning tensions into transformations. Co-productive agility refers to the willingness and ability of diverse actors to iteratively engage in reflexive dialogues to grow shared ideas and actions that would not have been possible from the outset. It relies on embedding knowledge production within processes of change to constantly recognize, reposition, and navigate tensions and opportunities. Co-productive agility opens up multiple pathways to transformation through: (1) elevating marginalized agendas in ways that maintain their integrity and broaden struggles for justice; (2) questioning dominant agendas by engaging with power in ways that challenge assumptions, (3) navigating conflicting agendas to actively transform interlinked paradigms, practices, and structures; (4) exploring diverse agendas to foster learning and mutual respect for a plurality of perspectives. We explore six process considerations that vary by these four pathways and provide a framework to enable agility in sustainability transformations. We argue that research and practice spend too much time closing down debate over different agendas for change – thereby avoiding, suppressing, or polarizing tensions, and call for more efforts to facilitate better interactions among different agendas

Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations

Co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice by diverse societal actors, is argued to play an important role in sustainability transformations. Yet, there is still poor understanding of how to navigate the tensions that emerge in these processes. Through analyzing 32 initiatives worldwide that co-produced knowledge and action to foster sustainable social-ecological relations, we conceptualize ‘co-productive agility’ as an emergent feature vital for turning tensions into transformations. Co-productive agility refers to the willingness and ability of diverse actors to iteratively engage in reflexive dialogues to grow shared ideas and actions that would not have been possible from the outset. It relies on embedding knowledge production within processes of change to constantly recognize, reposition, and navigate tensions and opportunities. Co-productive agility opens up multiple pathways to transformation through: (1) elevating marginalized agendas in ways that maintain their integrity and broaden struggles for justice; (2) questioning dominant agendas by engaging with power in ways that challenge assumptions, (3) navigating conflicting agendas to actively transform interlinked paradigms, practices, and structures; (4) exploring diverse agendas to foster learning and mutual respect for a plurality of perspectives. We explore six process considerations that vary by these four pathways and provide a framework to enable agility in sustainability transformations. We argue that research and practice spend too much time closing down debate over different agendas for change – thereby avoiding, suppressing, or polarizing tensions, and call for more efforts to facilitate better interactions among different agendas

Copernicus Ocean State Report, issue 6

The 6th issue of the Copernicus OSR incorporates a large range of topics for the blue, white and green ocean for all European regional seas, and the global ocean over 1993–2020 with a special focus on 2020

A conversion of nature’s value?: A critical analysis of the TEEB as an appropriate tool to valuate ecosystems and biodiversity with an empirical analysis of a Climate Change adaptation project in Falsterbo-Skanör Vellinge

This thesis critically analyzes the appropriateness of The Economics of Ecosystems and Bio-diversity (TEEB) in terms of theoretical and practical implications and limitations. Separated into two parts, this thesis firstly examines the theoretical background and flaws of the frame-work in terms of it stated goal to enhance sustainability. In their regard, nature‟s value is de-fined as benefits to society and is assessed through forms of economic valuation. TEEB uses the intuitive and convincing language of the world‟s dominant economic-political system of capitalism to guide decision-makers and aims to mainstream economic valuation. Among the theoretical problems within the approach, commensurability and silencing of other values are the most striking. The theoretical background of TEEB is assessed critically, and I show that economic valuation could only in some terms be helpful and should be seen as a small part of a broader multi-criteria analysis. To test TEEB‟s practicability, the unique attempt to merge an economic valuation with the topic of local climate change adaptation in Falsterbo-Skanör Vellinge. For this, I dissected the TEEB down to the level of actual valuation and analyzed its practical problems. Statements from regional and local decision-makers on their view upon the impact of economic valuation round the empirical part off