| 1. |
- Coscieme, Luca, et al.
(författare)
-
Multiple conceptualizations of nature are key to inclusivity and legitimacy in global environmental governance
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Environmental Science and Policy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1462-9011 .- 1873-6416. ; 104, s. 36-42
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite increasing scientific understanding of the global environmental crisis, we struggle to adopt the policies science suggests would be effective. One of the reasons for that is the lack of inclusive engagement and dialogue among a wide range of different actors. Furthermore, there is a lack of consideration of differences between languages, worldviews and cultures. In this paper, we propose that engagement across the science-policy interface can be strengthened by being mindful of the breadth and depth of the diverse human-nature relations found around the globe. By examining diverse conceptualizations of nature in more than 60 languages, we identify three clusters: inclusive conceptualizations where humans are viewed as an integral component of nature; non-inclusive conceptualizations where humans are separate from nature; and deifying conceptualizations where nature is understood and experienced within a spiritual dimension. Considering and respecting this rich repertoire of ways of describing, thinking about and relating to nature can help us communicate in ways that resonate across cultures and worldviews. This repertoire also provides a resource we can draw on when defining policies and sustainability scenarios for the future, offering opportunities for finding solutions to global environmental challenges.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ring, Irene, et al.
(författare)
-
Chapter 6: Options for governance and decision-making across scales and sectors
- 2018
-
Ingår i: IPBES. - Bonn : Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem services. - 9783947851089 ; , s. 661-802
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Within the generic scope of the Regional Assessments of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the key policy‑relevant questions of the Europe and Central Asia Assessment concern options and opportunities with regard to biodiversity and ecosystem services and their role for human well-being. The assessment examines the opportunities for sectoral policies and policy instruments; managing production, consumption and economic development; and ecological infrastructures and ecological technologies. It explores opportunities to promote food security, economic development and equality while avoiding land and aquatic degradation and conserving cultural landscapes.
|
|
| 3. |
- Ring, Irene, et al.
(författare)
-
Options for governance and decision-making across scales and sectors
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia. - Bonn : Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). - 9783947851089 ; , s. 661-802
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
- Ryu, Hyeonju, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing Nature’s Contributions to People
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Frontiers for Young Minds. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 2296-6846. ; 08
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Do the misty mountains, fast-flowing rivers, and sandy beaches leave you in awe and fill you with insatiable wonder? Does nature bring you a jubilant feeling? Nature contributes to our quality of life in multiple ways. Some of these gifts are easily visible, like the clothes you wear, the food you eat, and the water your drink. However, some contributions, such as flood protection and pollination of food crops are hardly ever seen. Scientists warn that we are now losing many of these gifts from nature, and this is why in this article we want to talk about it. In fact, one of the things we need to conserve nature is to understand why and how it is important for our lives. In this article, we introduce you to nature’s contributions to people and why it is important to assess them.
|
|
| 5. |
- Vadovics, Edina, et al.
(författare)
-
Preferences, enablers, and barriers for 1.5° C lifestyle options: Findings from Citizen Thinking Labs in five European Union countries
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy. - 1548-7733. ; 20:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Horizon 2020 project EU 1.5°C Lifestyles aims to mainstream lifestyles aligned with the aspirational target of the Paris Agreement. The project analyzes lifestyle perspectives at the household level and links them to studies of relevant political and socio-economic structures at various levels of government. Within this project, Citizen Thinking Labs were organized in five EU countries to explore the acceptance of and motivations and barriers to changes that could lead to lifestyles compatible with the 1.5°C target. Through a unique mixed-methods approach, including an exploratory board game (the Climate Puzzle), this research generated insights into citizen acceptance by exploring motivations and barriers associated with the acceptance of key lifestyle changes toward 1.5°C. The results confirm previous research in that citizens are more accepting of lower-impact lifestyle options requiring financial investment (e.g., changing lighting and using efficient devices) than higher-impact options that require more substantial behavior changes. Citizens were also motivated by perceived co-benefits for example, concerning health. The research developed insight into the conditions underlying the acceptance of the least preferred options that included plant-based eating and smaller housing. The results also indicated that citizens’ acceptance could be shaped by discussing options with other citizens. Thus, we note the important role citizens may play in devising solutions for overcoming barriers to the acceptance of less-preferred lifestyle options in various contexts. While this study focused on individuals, the findings also underscore the limitations of individual and household agency and the importance of modifying the socio-technical context that shapes behavioral patterns and environmental impacts.
|
|
