1
|
Borja A, Berg T, Gundersen H, Hagen AG, Hancke K, Korpinen S, Leal MC, Luisetti T, Menchaca I, Murray C, Piet G, Pitois S, Rodríguez-Ezpeleta N, Sample JE, Talbot E, Uyarra MC. Innovative and practical tools for monitoring and assessing biodiversity status and impacts of multiple human pressures in marine systems. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT 2024; 196:694. [PMID: 38963575 DOI: 10.1007/s10661-024-12861-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2024] [Accepted: 06/22/2024] [Indexed: 07/05/2024]
Abstract
Human activities at sea can produce pressures and cumulative effects on ecosystem components that need to be monitored and assessed in a cost-effective manner. Five Horizon European projects have joined forces to collaboratively increase our knowledge and skills to monitor and assess the ocean in an innovative way, assisting managers and policy-makers in taking decisions to maintain sustainable activities at sea. Here, we present and discuss the status of some methods revised during a summer school, aiming at better management of coasts and seas. We include novel methods to monitor the coastal and ocean waters (e.g. environmental DNA, drones, imaging and artificial intelligence, climate modelling and spatial planning) and innovative tools to assess the status (e.g. cumulative impacts assessment, multiple pressures, Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool (NEAT), ecosystem services assessment or a new unifying approach). As a concluding remark, some of the most important challenges ahead are assessing the pros and cons of novel methods, comparing them with benchmark technologies and integrating these into long-standing time series for data continuity. This requires transition periods and careful planning, which can be covered through an intense collaboration of current and future European projects on marine biodiversity and ecosystem health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angel Borja
- AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Herrera Kaia, Portualdea S/N, 20110, Pasaia, Spain.
| | - Torsten Berg
- MariLim Aquatic Research GmbH, 24232, Schönkirchen, Germany
| | - Hege Gundersen
- Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Kasper Hancke
- Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Oslo, Norway
| | - Samuli Korpinen
- Finnish Environment Institute, Marine Research Centre, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Miguel C Leal
- Science Crunchers, Scitation Lda, TecLabs - Campus da FCUL, 1749-016, Lisbon, Portugal
| | | | - Iratxe Menchaca
- AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Herrera Kaia, Portualdea S/N, 20110, Pasaia, Spain
| | - Ciaran Murray
- NIVA Denmark Water Research, 2300, Copenhagen S, Denmark
| | - GerJan Piet
- Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen Marine Research, P.O. Box 57, 1780 AB, Den Helder, the Netherlands
| | | | - Naiara Rodríguez-Ezpeleta
- AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Txatxarramendi Ugartea Z/G, 48395, Sukarrieta, Spain
| | - James E Sample
- Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Oslo, Norway
| | - Elizabeth Talbot
- Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, Plymouth, PL1 3DH, UK
| | - María C Uyarra
- AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Herrera Kaia, Portualdea S/N, 20110, Pasaia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gong M, Yu K, Xu Z, Xu M, Qu S. Unveiling complementarities between national sustainable development strategies through network analysis. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2024; 350:119531. [PMID: 38011780 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119531] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 11/03/2023] [Indexed: 11/29/2023]
Abstract
The 2030 agenda of the United Nations provides a framework of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 232 indicators for its members to fulfill. The overall achievement critically depends on how nations understand the interactions between these SDGs and set priorities for development pathways. This study provides a comprehensive network analysis of global SDG complementarities, measured by the co-occurrences of SDG pairs' comparative advantages in the same region by adopting the 'product space' concept from economics. We construct the 'SDG space' at goal and indicator levels with the most recently available data and then validate its robustness by comparing it to the commonly used correlation network and confirm its predictive power using historical data. Network analysis reveals a strongly connected socioeconomic-related core and an environmental-related periphery, with 'bridge' indicators connecting different clusters. The goal-level space identifies the 'bridge' goals as SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 15 (Life on Hand) in the environmental-related cluster, while identifying SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 6 (Clean water and Sanitation), and SDG 16 (Justice and Strong Institutions) in the socioeconomic cluster. The indicator-level space provides details to explain how they act as 'bridges' in the network. In particular, 16-9: Free Press Index is the 'bridge' indicator with the highest betweenness centrality value and acts as the bottleneck indicator in China for its overall sustainable development. Improving it can enhance connected indicators' performance, leading to positive cascading effects on different aspects of sustainability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mimi Gong
- Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48823, USA
| | - Ke Yu
- Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Beijing Institute of Technology, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, China
| | - Zhenci Xu
- Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Ming Xu
- School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China
| | - Shen Qu
- Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Beijing Institute of Technology, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kalinda C, Qambayot MA, Ishimwe SMC, Regnier D, Bazimya D, Uwizeyimana T, Desie S, Rudert C, Gebremariam A, Brennan E, Karumba S, Wong R, Bekele A. Leveraging multisectoral approach to understand the determinants of childhood stunting in Rwanda: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2024; 13:16. [PMID: 38183064 PMCID: PMC10768136 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02438-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/07/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Addressing childhood stunting is a priority and an important step in the attainment of Global Nutrition Targets for 2025 and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In Rwanda, the prevalence of child stunting remains high despite concerted efforts to reduce it. METHODS Utilizing the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) framework on maternal and child nutrition, this study systematically evaluated the determinants of child stunting in Rwanda and identified available gaps. Twenty-five peer-reviewed papers and five Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) reports were included in the final selection of our review, which allowed us to identify determinants such as governance and norms including wealth index, marital status, and maternal education, while underlying determinants were maternal health and nutrition factors, early initiation of breastfeeding, water treatment and sanitation, and immediate factors included infections. RESULTS A total of 75% of the overall inequality in stunting was due to the difference in the social determinants of stunting between poor and nonpoor households. Maternal education (17%) and intergenerational transfer (31%) accounted for most of the inequalities in stunting, and an increase in gross domestic product per capita contributed to a reduction in its prevalence. There is a paucity of information on the impact of sociocultural norms, early life exposures, maternal health and nutrition, and Rwandan topography. CONCLUSION The findings of this study suggest that improving women's status, particularly maternal education and health; access to improved water, sanitation, and hygiene-related factors; and the socioeconomic status of communities, especially those in rural areas, will lay a sound foundation for reducing stunting among under-5 children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chester Kalinda
- Bill and Joyce Cummings Institute of Global Health, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda.
| | - Maria Albin Qambayot
- Centre for One Health, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Sage Marie C Ishimwe
- Institute of Global Health Equity Research (IGHER), University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Denis Regnier
- School of Medicine, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Darius Bazimya
- Bill and Joyce Cummings Institute of Global Health, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Theogene Uwizeyimana
- Bill and Joyce Cummings Institute of Global Health, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Samson Desie
- UNICEF Kigali Office, P.O. Box 381, Kigali, Rwanda
| | | | - Alemayehu Gebremariam
- Health Office, US Agency For International Development (USAID), Rwanda Office, KG 7 Avenue, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Elizabeth Brennan
- Catholic Relief Services, Rwanda Country Program, Chadel Building, P.O. Box 65, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Silver Karumba
- Catholic Relief Services, Rwanda Country Program, Chadel Building, P.O. Box 65, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Rex Wong
- Bill and Joyce Cummings Institute of Global Health, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Abebe Bekele
- School of Medicine, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali Heights, Plot 772 KG 7 Ave, PO Box 6955, Kigali, Rwanda
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zuo J, Zhang L, Chen B, Liao J, Hashim M, Sutrisno D, Hasan ME, Mahmood R, Sani DA. Assessment of coastal sustainable development along the maritime silk road using an integrated natural-economic-social (NES) ecosystem. Heliyon 2023; 9:e17440. [PMID: 37426792 PMCID: PMC10329136 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17440] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Understanding spatial change and its driving factors behind coastal development is essential for coastal management and restoration. There is an urgent need for quantitative assessments of sustainable development in the coastal ecosystems that are most affected by anthropogenic activities and climate change. This study built a theme-based evaluation methodology with the Natural-Economic-Social (NES) complex ecosystem and proposed an evaluation system of coastal sustainable development (CSD) to understand the complex interactions between coastal ecosystems and anthropogenic activities. The approach revealed the levels of coastal natural, economic, and social sustainable development in the countries along the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) from 2010 to 2020. The results showed (1) a decreasing trend for coastal sustainable development between 2010 and 2015 and a rapid increasing trend between 2015 and 2020; (2) spatially varied CSD, with higher levels in Europe and Southeast Asia and lower levels in South and West Asia and North Africa; and (3) a strong influence on CSD by a combination of economic and social factors and relatively little influence by natural factors. The study further assessed the natural, economic, and social development scores for 41 countries and compared them with the mean scores (MSR) to classify coastal development patterns into three stages (favorable, transitional, and unfavorable). Finally, in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the study highlighted the importance of more refined global indicators for CSD assessments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jian Zuo
- Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals, Beijing, 100094, China
- University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China
| | - Li Zhang
- Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals, Beijing, 100094, China
| | - Bowei Chen
- Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals, Beijing, 100094, China
| | - Jingjuan Liao
- Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China
- International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals, Beijing, 100094, China
| | - Mazlan Hashim
- Geoscience & Digital Earth Centre (INSTEG), Research Institute for Sustainable Environment (RISE), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
- Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
| | - Dewayany Sutrisno
- Center for Research, Promotion and Cooperation, Geospatial Information Agency (BIG), Cibinong, 16911, Indonesia
| | - Mohammad Emran Hasan
- Climate Justice and Natural Resource Rights, Oxfam GB in Bangladesh, Mohakhali, Dhaka, 1206, Bangladesh
| | - Riffat Mahmood
- Department of Geography and Environment, Jagannath University, Dhaka, 1100, Bangladesh
| | - Dalhatu Aliyu Sani
- Geoscience & Digital Earth Centre (INSTEG), Research Institute for Sustainable Environment (RISE), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
- Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
- Department of Geography, Yusuf Maitama Sule University, Kano, Nigeria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Guan T, Zhang Q. Value Orientations, Personal Norms, and Public Attitude toward SDGs. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 20:4031. [PMID: 36901041 PMCID: PMC10002065 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20054031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2023] [Revised: 02/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
Improving communication and engagement with the public is vital for implementing sustainable development goals (SDGs). Public attitude toward SDGs can influence this engagement, as people are more likely to accept SDG-relevant information and take actions that are consistent with their own attitudes. This study examines the determinants for individual attitudes in supporting SDGs and further explores the formation of public attitudes toward SDGs, i.e., how public attitude is shaped by the value orientations and norms of the individuals. Using an online survey (n = 3089), we uncovered several important findings: (1) individuals' altruistic/biospheric value orientations are positively associated with pro-SDG attitudes; (2) personal norms mediate the relationship of individuals' altruistic values and attitudes; (3) some demographic characteristics (i.e., age, gender, having children) moderate the relationship of people's value orientations and attitudes; and (4) people's biospheric values have heterogeneous effects on their pro-SDG attitudes based on education and income. Through these findings, this study enhanced the public's general understanding of SDGs by providing a holistic analytical framework of public attitude formation on SDGs and uncovering the significant role of value orientations. We further identify the moderating effects of demographic characteristics and the mediating effects of personal norms in the relationship between individuals' values and attitude on SDGs.
Collapse
|
6
|
McKinley E, Kelly R, Mackay M, Shellock R, Cvitanovic C, van Putten I. Development and expansion in the marine social sciences: Insights from the global community. iScience 2022; 25:104735. [PMID: 35942098 PMCID: PMC9356031 DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.104735] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
|
7
|
Navigating Chinese cities to achieve sustainable development goals by 2030. Innovation (N Y) 2022; 3:100288. [PMID: 35990172 PMCID: PMC9382565 DOI: 10.1016/j.xinn.2022.100288] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Achieving the 17 United Nations sustainable development goals (SDGs) in China largely depends on the transition of cities toward sustainable development. However, significant knowledge gaps exist in evaluating the SDG index at the city scale and in understanding how to simulate pathways to achieve the 17 SDGs for Chinese cities by 2030. This study aimed to quantify the SDG index of 285 Chinese cities and developed a forecasting model to simulate the performance of each SDG in each city until 2030 using varied scenarios. The results indicated that although the SDG index in Chinese cities increased by 33.97% during 2005–2016, Chinese cities, which continued their past paths, achieved an average of only five SDGs by 2030. To promote the joint achievement of all SDGs, we designed different paths for all SDGs of each of the 285 cities and simulated their SDG index until 2030. Under the scenarios, 216 Chinese cities (75.79%) could achieve 9–13 more SDGs in 2030 and the overall SDG index can improve from 74.57 in 2030 to 97.49 (target score 100) by adopting more intensive path adjustment. We lastly determined a cost-effective path for each SDG of each city to promote joint achievement of all SDGs by 2030. The proposed simulation model and cost-effective path serve as a foundation for other countries to simulate SDG progress and develop pathways for achieving SDGs in the future. The first simulation of the performance of Chinese cities in 17 SDGs by 2030 A scenario-based projection model is proposed to make simulation of SDGs Chinese cities can achieve an average of five SDGs by continuing past paths We present cost-effective integrated paths to promote the achievement of all SDGs
Collapse
|
8
|
Trebilco R, Fleming A, Hobday AJ, Melbourne-Thomas J, Meyer A, McDonald J, McCormack PC, Anderson K, Bax N, Corney SP, Dutra LXC, Fogarty HE, McGee J, Mustonen K, Mustonen T, Norris KA, Ogier E, Constable AJ, Pecl GT. Warming world, changing ocean: mitigation and adaptation to support resilient marine systems. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES 2022. [PMID: 34566277 DOI: 10.22541/au.160193478.81087102/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED Proactive and coordinated action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will be essential for achieving the healthy, resilient, safe, sustainably harvested and biodiverse ocean that the UN Decade of Ocean Science and sustainable development goals (SDGs) seek. Ocean-based mitigation actions could contribute 12% of the emissions reductions required by 2030 to keep warming to less than 1.5 ºC but, because substantial warming is already locked in, extensive adaptation action is also needed. Here, as part of the Future Seas project, we use a "foresighting/hindcasting" technique to describe two scenarios for 2030 in the context of climate change mitigation and adaptation for ocean systems. The "business-as-usual" future is expected if current trends continue, while an alternative future could be realised if society were to effectively use available data and knowledge to push as far as possible towards achieving the UN SDGs. We identify three drivers that differentiate between these alternative futures: (i) appetite for climate action, (ii) handling extreme events, and (iii) climate interventions. Actions that could navigate towards the optimistic, sustainable and technically achievable future include:(i)proactive creation and enhancement of economic incentives for mitigation and adaptation;(ii)supporting the proliferation of local initiatives to spur a global transformation;(iii)enhancing proactive coastal adaptation management;(iv)investing in research to support adaptation to emerging risks;(v)deploying marine-based renewable energy;(vi)deploying marine-based negative emissions technologies;(vii)developing and assessing solar radiation management approaches; and(viii)deploying appropriate solar radiation management approaches to help safeguard critical ecosystems. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11160-021-09678-4.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rowan Trebilco
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Aysha Fleming
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- CSIRO Land & Water, Hobart, TAS Australia
| | - Alistair J Hobday
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jess Melbourne-Thomas
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Amelie Meyer
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jan McDonald
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Phillipa C McCormack
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Kelli Anderson
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Narissa Bax
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Stuart P Corney
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Leo X C Dutra
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Brisbane, Australia
- Blue Economy CRC-Co Ltd, Newnham, Australia
| | - Hannah E Fogarty
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jeffrey McGee
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | | | | | - Kimberley A Norris
- School of Psychological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Emily Ogier
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Andrew J Constable
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Gretta T Pecl
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ward D, Melbourne-Thomas J, Pecl GT, Evans K, Green M, McCormack PC, Novaglio C, Trebilco R, Bax N, Brasier MJ, Cavan EL, Edgar G, Hunt HL, Jansen J, Jones R, Lea MA, Makomere R, Mull C, Semmens JM, Shaw J, Tinch D, van Steveninck TJ, Layton C. Safeguarding marine life: conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES 2022; 32:65-100. [PMID: 35280238 PMCID: PMC8900478 DOI: 10.1007/s11160-022-09700-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Marine ecosystems and their associated biodiversity sustain life on Earth and hold intrinsic value. Critical marine ecosystem services include maintenance of global oxygen and carbon cycles, production of food and energy, and sustenance of human wellbeing. However marine ecosystems are swiftly being degraded due to the unsustainable use of marine environments and a rapidly changing climate. The fundamental challenge for the future is therefore to safeguard marine ecosystem biodiversity, function, and adaptive capacity whilst continuing to provide vital resources for the global population. Here, we use foresighting/hindcasting to consider two plausible futures towards 2030: a business-as-usual trajectory (i.e. continuation of current trends), and a more sustainable but technically achievable future in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. We identify key drivers that differentiate these alternative futures and use these to develop an action pathway towards the desirable, more sustainable future. Key to achieving the more sustainable future will be establishing integrative (i.e. across jurisdictions and sectors), adaptive management that supports equitable and sustainable stewardship of marine environments. Conserving marine ecosystems will require recalibrating our social, financial, and industrial relationships with the marine environment. While a sustainable future requires long-term planning and commitment beyond 2030, immediate action is needed to avoid tipping points and avert trajectories of ecosystem decline. By acting now to optimise management and protection of marine ecosystems, building upon existing technologies, and conserving the remaining biodiversity, we can create the best opportunity for a sustainable future in 2030 and beyond.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delphi Ward
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Jessica Melbourne-Thomas
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Gretta T. Pecl
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Karen Evans
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Madeline Green
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Phillipa C. McCormack
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Adelaide Law School, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5005 Australia
| | - Camilla Novaglio
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Rowan Trebilco
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Narissa Bax
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute, Stanley, Falkland Islands
| | - Madeleine J. Brasier
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Emma L. Cavan
- Silwood Park Campus, Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Berkshire, SL5 7PY UK
| | - Graham Edgar
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Heather L. Hunt
- Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Brunswick, PO Box 5050, Saint John,, New Brunswick E2L 4L5 Canada
| | - Jan Jansen
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Russ Jones
- Hereditary Chief, Haida Nation, PO Box 1451, Skidegate, B.C. V0T 1S1 Canada
| | - Mary-Anne Lea
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Reuben Makomere
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Chris Mull
- Integrated Fisheries Lab, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2 Canada
| | - Jayson M. Semmens
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Janette Shaw
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Dugald Tinch
- Tasmanian School of Business & Economics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Tatiana J. van Steveninck
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Carmabi, Caribbean Research and Management of Biodiversity, Piscaderabaai z/n, Willemstad, Curaçao
| | - Cayne Layton
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ward D, Melbourne-Thomas J, Pecl GT, Evans K, Green M, McCormack PC, Novaglio C, Trebilco R, Bax N, Brasier MJ, Cavan EL, Edgar G, Hunt HL, Jansen J, Jones R, Lea MA, Makomere R, Mull C, Semmens JM, Shaw J, Tinch D, van Steveninck TJ, Layton C. Safeguarding marine life: conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES 2022; 32:65-100. [PMID: 35280238 DOI: 10.22541/au.160513367.73706234/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Marine ecosystems and their associated biodiversity sustain life on Earth and hold intrinsic value. Critical marine ecosystem services include maintenance of global oxygen and carbon cycles, production of food and energy, and sustenance of human wellbeing. However marine ecosystems are swiftly being degraded due to the unsustainable use of marine environments and a rapidly changing climate. The fundamental challenge for the future is therefore to safeguard marine ecosystem biodiversity, function, and adaptive capacity whilst continuing to provide vital resources for the global population. Here, we use foresighting/hindcasting to consider two plausible futures towards 2030: a business-as-usual trajectory (i.e. continuation of current trends), and a more sustainable but technically achievable future in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. We identify key drivers that differentiate these alternative futures and use these to develop an action pathway towards the desirable, more sustainable future. Key to achieving the more sustainable future will be establishing integrative (i.e. across jurisdictions and sectors), adaptive management that supports equitable and sustainable stewardship of marine environments. Conserving marine ecosystems will require recalibrating our social, financial, and industrial relationships with the marine environment. While a sustainable future requires long-term planning and commitment beyond 2030, immediate action is needed to avoid tipping points and avert trajectories of ecosystem decline. By acting now to optimise management and protection of marine ecosystems, building upon existing technologies, and conserving the remaining biodiversity, we can create the best opportunity for a sustainable future in 2030 and beyond.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delphi Ward
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Jessica Melbourne-Thomas
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Gretta T Pecl
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Karen Evans
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Madeline Green
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Phillipa C McCormack
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Adelaide Law School, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5005 Australia
| | - Camilla Novaglio
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Rowan Trebilco
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Narissa Bax
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute, Stanley, Falkland Islands
| | - Madeleine J Brasier
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Emma L Cavan
- Silwood Park Campus, Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Berkshire, SL5 7PY UK
| | - Graham Edgar
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Heather L Hunt
- Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Brunswick, PO Box 5050, Saint John,, New Brunswick E2L 4L5 Canada
| | - Jan Jansen
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Russ Jones
- Hereditary Chief, Haida Nation, PO Box 1451, Skidegate, B.C. V0T 1S1 Canada
| | - Mary-Anne Lea
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Reuben Makomere
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Chris Mull
- Integrated Fisheries Lab, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2 Canada
| | - Jayson M Semmens
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Janette Shaw
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Dugald Tinch
- Tasmanian School of Business & Economics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| | - Tatiana J van Steveninck
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Carmabi, Caribbean Research and Management of Biodiversity, Piscaderabaai z/n, Willemstad, Curaçao
| | - Cayne Layton
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
- Centre for Marine Socio-Ecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Gutierrez V, Hallett JG, Ota L, Sterling E, Wilson SJ, Bodin B, Chazdon RL. Forest and landscape restoration monitoring frameworks: how principled are they? Restor Ecol 2021. [DOI: 10.1111/rec.13572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - James G. Hallett
- Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, Franke College of Forestry and Conservation University of Montana Missoula MT 59812 U.S.A
| | - Liz Ota
- Tropical Forests and People Research Centre University of the Sunshine Coast 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sunshine Coast Queensland Australia
| | - Eleanor Sterling
- Center for Biodiversity and Conservation American Museum of Natural History New York NY 10024 U.S.A
| | - Sarah J. Wilson
- School of Environmental Studies University of Victoria 3800 Finnerty Road, Victoria British Columbia Canada
| | - Blaise Bodin
- Forestry Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome Italy
| | - Robin L. Chazdon
- Tropical Forests and People Research Centre University of the Sunshine Coast 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sunshine Coast Queensland Australia
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Connecticut Storrs CT 06269 U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Trebilco R, Fleming A, Hobday AJ, Melbourne-Thomas J, Meyer A, McDonald J, McCormack PC, Anderson K, Bax N, Corney SP, Dutra LXC, Fogarty HE, McGee J, Mustonen K, Mustonen T, Norris KA, Ogier E, Constable AJ, Pecl GT. Warming world, changing ocean: mitigation and adaptation to support resilient marine systems. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES 2021; 32:39-63. [PMID: 34566277 PMCID: PMC8453030 DOI: 10.1007/s11160-021-09678-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Proactive and coordinated action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will be essential for achieving the healthy, resilient, safe, sustainably harvested and biodiverse ocean that the UN Decade of Ocean Science and sustainable development goals (SDGs) seek. Ocean-based mitigation actions could contribute 12% of the emissions reductions required by 2030 to keep warming to less than 1.5 ºC but, because substantial warming is already locked in, extensive adaptation action is also needed. Here, as part of the Future Seas project, we use a "foresighting/hindcasting" technique to describe two scenarios for 2030 in the context of climate change mitigation and adaptation for ocean systems. The "business-as-usual" future is expected if current trends continue, while an alternative future could be realised if society were to effectively use available data and knowledge to push as far as possible towards achieving the UN SDGs. We identify three drivers that differentiate between these alternative futures: (i) appetite for climate action, (ii) handling extreme events, and (iii) climate interventions. Actions that could navigate towards the optimistic, sustainable and technically achievable future include:(i)proactive creation and enhancement of economic incentives for mitigation and adaptation;(ii)supporting the proliferation of local initiatives to spur a global transformation;(iii)enhancing proactive coastal adaptation management;(iv)investing in research to support adaptation to emerging risks;(v)deploying marine-based renewable energy;(vi)deploying marine-based negative emissions technologies;(vii)developing and assessing solar radiation management approaches; and(viii)deploying appropriate solar radiation management approaches to help safeguard critical ecosystems. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11160-021-09678-4.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rowan Trebilco
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Aysha Fleming
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- CSIRO Land & Water, Hobart, TAS Australia
| | - Alistair J. Hobday
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jess Melbourne-Thomas
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Amelie Meyer
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jan McDonald
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Phillipa C. McCormack
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Kelli Anderson
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Narissa Bax
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Stuart P. Corney
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Leo X. C. Dutra
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Brisbane, Australia
- Blue Economy CRC-Co Ltd, Newnham, Australia
| | - Hannah E. Fogarty
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | - Jeffrey McGee
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | | | | | | | - Emily Ogier
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| | | | - Gretta T. Pecl
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Blythe J, Baird J, Bennett N, Dale G, Nash KL, Pickering G, Wabnitz CCC. Fostering ocean empathy through future scenarios. PEOPLE AND NATURE 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10253] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Blythe
- Environmental Sustainability Research Centre Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
| | - Julia Baird
- Environmental Sustainability Research Centre Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
- Department of Geography and Tourism Studies Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
- Sustainability Research Centre University of the Sunshine Coast Maroochydore DC QLD Australia
| | | | - Gillian Dale
- Environmental Sustainability Research Centre Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
| | - Kirsty L. Nash
- Centre for Marine Socioecology University of Tasmania Hobart TAS Australia
- Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies University of Tasmania Hobart TAS Australia
| | - Gary Pickering
- Environmental Sustainability Research Centre Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
- Sustainability Research Centre University of the Sunshine Coast Maroochydore DC QLD Australia
- Department of Biological Sciences Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
- Department of Psychology Brock University Saint Catharines ON Canada
| | - Colette C. C. Wabnitz
- Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada
- Stanford Center for Ocean Solutions Stanford University Stanford CA USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Awareness of Sustainable Development Goals among Students from a Chinese Senior High School. EDUCATION SCIENCES 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/educsci11090458] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Education is an essential component of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Through a questionnaire survey among students from a Chinese senior high school, this study measured the self-reported knowledge, sources of information, learning situations, priorities, the impact of personal life and career planning with respect to the SDGs to understand their cognition, learning motivation and social readiness. The results show that students’ knowledge and information sources in relation to the SDGs are limited, and there is no significant difference between boys and girls in relation to their knowledge of the SDGs, the source of information, the learning level of the SDGs, impact of personal life on the SDGs and career planning related to the SDGs. It is also shown that students have a better understanding of the number of the SDGs and the countries to which the SDGs are addressed and students receive information about the SDGs via formal education and traditional media. Regarding the penetration of the SDGs in course subjects, Chinese and native culture, foreign language, biology and geography have included all the SDGs. Through an analysis of responses and popularity rates, gender equality, quality education, reduced inequalities, no poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being are shown to be the students’ priorities with higher attention rates. Gender equality, quality education, clean water and sanitation are the top three goals in relation to which students consider that their personal life can have a greater impact. Students prefer to adopt the SDGs (decent work and economic growth, quality education, industry, innovation and infrastructure, sustainable cities and communities) as their personal career choice in the future. Suggestions for improving the implementation of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) include comprehensive formal and non-formal education, publicity and curriculum integration to promote learning about the SDGs. A model of ESD in the school surveyed is presented for practical application. Based on this research, guidance and suggestions are provided to enhance students’ awareness, knowledge and competencies in relation to sustainability and to encourage student engagement in global sustainable development.
Collapse
|
15
|
Pressey RL, Visconti P, McKinnon MC, Gurney GG, Barnes MD, Glew L, Maron M. The mismeasure of conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 2021; 36:808-821. [PMID: 34303527 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2021.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2020] [Revised: 06/15/2021] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
One of the basic purposes of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation interventions is to achieve conservation impact, the sum of avoided biodiversity loss and promoted recovery relative to outcomes without protection. In the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity's negotiations on the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we find that targets for area-based interventions are framed overwhelmingly with measures that fail to inform decision-makers about impact and that risk diverting limited resources away from achieving it. We show that predicting impact in space and time is feasible and can provide the basis for global guidance for jurisdictions to develop targets for conservation impact and shift investment priorities to areas where impact can be most effectively achieved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert L Pressey
- Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia.
| | - Piero Visconti
- International Institute for Applied System Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria
| | | | - Georgina G Gurney
- Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
| | - Megan D Barnes
- Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, School of Agriculture and Environment, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | | | - Martine Maron
- School of Earth and Environmental Sciences & Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Booth H, Arias M, Brittain S, Challender DWS, Khanyari M, Kuiper T, Li Y, Olmedo A, Oyanedel R, Pienkowski T, Milner-Gulland EJ. “Saving Lives, Protecting Livelihoods, and Safeguarding Nature”: Risk-Based Wildlife Trade Policy for Sustainable Development Outcomes Post-COVID-19. Front Ecol Evol 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2021.639216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused huge loss of life, and immense social and economic harm. Wildlife trade has become central to discourse on COVID-19, zoonotic pandemics, and related policy responses, which must focus on “saving lives, protecting livelihoods, and safeguarding nature.” Proposed policy responses have included extreme measures such as banning all use and trade of wildlife, or blanket measures for entire Classes. However, different trades pose varying degrees of risk for zoonotic pandemics, while some trades also play critical roles in delivering other key aspects of sustainable development, particularly related to poverty and hunger alleviation, decent work, responsible consumption and production, and life on land and below water. Here we describe how wildlife trade contributes to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in diverse ways, with synergies and trade-offs within and between the SDGs. In doing so, we show that prohibitions could result in severe trade-offs against some SDGs, with limited benefits for public health via pandemic prevention. This complexity necessitates context-specific policies, with multi-sector decision-making that goes beyond simple top-down solutions. We encourage decision-makers to adopt a risk-based approach to wildlife trade policy post-COVID-19, with policies formulated via participatory, evidence-based approaches, which explicitly acknowledge uncertainty, complexity, and conflicting values across different components of the SDGs. This should help to ensure that future use and trade of wildlife is safe, environmentally sustainable and socially just.
Collapse
|
17
|
Zheng X, Wang R, Hoekstra AY, Krol MS, Zhang Y, Guo K, Sanwal M, Sun Z, Zhu J, Zhang J, Lounsbury A, Pan X, Guan D, Hertwich EG, Wang C. Consideration of culture is vital if we are to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2021.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
18
|
Virdin J, Vegh T, Jouffray JB, Blasiak R, Mason S, Österblom H, Vermeer D, Wachtmeister H, Werner N. The Ocean 100: Transnational corporations in the ocean economy. SCIENCE ADVANCES 2021; 7:7/3/eabc8041. [PMID: 33523873 PMCID: PMC7806236 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abc8041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
The ocean economy is growing as commercial use of the ocean accelerates, while progress toward achieving international goals for ocean conservation and sustainability is lagging. In this context, the private sector is increasingly recognized as having the capacity to hamper efforts to achieve aspirations of sustainable ocean-based development or alternatively to bend current trajectories of ocean use by taking on the mantle of corporate biosphere stewardship. Here, we identify levels of industry concentration to assess where this capacity rests. We show that the 10 largest companies in eight core ocean economy industries generate, on average, 45% of each industry's total revenues. Aggregating across all eight industries, the 100 largest corporations (the "Ocean 100") account for 60% of total revenues. This level of concentration in the ocean economy presents both risks and opportunities for ensuring sustainability and equity of global ocean use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Virdin
- Duke University Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Durham, NC, USA.
| | - T Vegh
- Duke University Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Durham, NC, USA
| | - J-B Jouffray
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - R Blasiak
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - S Mason
- Duke University Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Durham, NC, USA
| | - H Österblom
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - D Vermeer
- Duke University Fuqua School of Business, Durham, NC, USA
| | - H Wachtmeister
- Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - N Werner
- Duke University Nicholas School of the Environment, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Abstract
Food, energy and water are important basic resources that affect the sustainable development of a region. The influence of food–energy–water (FEW) nexus on sustainable development has quickly become a frontier topic since the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were put forward. However, the overall context and core issues of the FEW nexus contributions to SDGs are still unclear. Using co-citation analysis, this paper aims to map the knowledge domains of FEW nexus research, disentangles its evolutionary context, and analyzes the core issues in its research, especially the progress of using quantitative simulation models to study the FEW nexus. We found that (1) studies within the FEW nexus focused on these following topics: correlation mechanisms, influencing factors, resource footprints, and sustainability management policies; (2) frontier of FEW studies have evolved from silo-oriented perspective on single resource system to nexus-oriented perspective on multiple systems; (3) quantitative research on the FEW nexus was primarily based on spatiotemporal evolution analysis, input–output analysis and scenario analysis; (4) the resource relationship among different sectors was synergies and tradeoffs within a region. In general, current research still focuses on empirical data, mostly qualitative and semiquantitative analyses, and there is a lack of research that can systematically reflect the temporal and spatial contribution of the FEW nexus to multiple SDGs. We believe that future research should focus more on how FEW nexus can provide mechanistic tools for achieving sustainable development.
Collapse
|
20
|
Artificial Intelligence in the Urban Environment: Smart Cities as Models for Developing Innovation and Sustainability. SUSTAINABILITY 2020. [DOI: 10.3390/su12197860] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Climate change, overpopulation and the squandering of resources currently pose problems of such magnitude that they require a change in the trend to mitigate their effects. It is essential to make society aware of the facts and to educate the population about the advantages that new technologies can provide for efficient urban development. We therefore ask whether an ordinary medium-sized city can become a Smart City. In order to assess this possibility, our study analyzes different models of Smart Cities implemented in Spain (e.g., Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Malaga and Santander), contrasting them with the specific case of one city that is not yet a Smart City (Granada) in order to discuss which strategic technological actions to implement in different topical areas of action: the economy, sustainability, mobility, government, population, and quality of life. The study uses Cohen’s wheel to give researchers in the field a series of indicators and factors that can be used to analyze public data with statistical methods in order to obtain clear positive scores for Madrid and Barcelona. The analysis shows Granada’s deficiencies in the scores for digital government, accessibility, the efficiency of public transport, and mobility, among others. Finally, the data obtained demonstrate the need to implement an integrated dashboard with different proposals in the strategic areas analyzed in order to achieve the transformation of conventional cities into Smart Cities.
Collapse
|
21
|
Moon K, Marsh D, Cvitanovic C. Coupling property rights with responsibilities to improve conservation outcomes across land and seascapes. Conserv Lett 2020. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Moon
- School of Business University of New South Wales Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia
- Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences University of New South Wales Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Dru Marsh
- School of Business University of New South Wales Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia
- Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of Australia Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia
| | - Christopher Cvitanovic
- Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science Australian National University Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia
- Centre for Marine Socioecology University of Tasmania Hobart Tasmania Australia
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Leal Filho W, Wolf F, Lange Salvia A, Beynaghi A, Shulla K, Kovaleva M, Vasconcelos CRP. Heading towards an unsustainable world: some of the implications of not achieving the SDGs. DISCOVER SUSTAINABILITY 2020; 1:2. [PMID: 38624553 PMCID: PMC7471633 DOI: 10.1007/s43621-020-00002-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2020] [Accepted: 08/19/2020] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were conceived at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro in 2012 (Rio + 20), and adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015. They are part of a larger framework, namely the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Since then, many countries round the world have been engaging in respect of their implementation. The slow progress seen in the implementation of the SDGs, is in contrast with the many negative implications of not implementing them. This paper outlines the relevance of the SDGs, the barriers currently seen in respect of their implementation and outlines what is at stake, if they are not duly implemented. To accomplish this, a thorough literature review of contributions published in the field of SDGs in English between the years 2012-2020 was performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Walter Leal Filho
- European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Franziska Wolf
- European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Amanda Lange Salvia
- European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Ali Beynaghi
- Office of Sustainability, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran
| | - Kalterina Shulla
- ZEF, Center for Development Research, University of Bonn, Germany, Genscherallee 3, 53113 Bonn, Germany
| | - Marina Kovaleva
- European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Claudio R. P. Vasconcelos
- Laboratory of Sustainability Engineering and Consumption, Federal University of Paraíba, João Pessoa, PB Brazil
- Algoritmi Research Centre, School of Engineering, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|