Stakeholder participation in IPBES: connecting local environmental work with global decision making

Panel-based assessment of ecosystem condition as a platform for adaptive and knowledge driven management

Ecosystems are subjected to increasing exposure to multiple anthropogenic drivers. This has led to the development of national and international accounting systems describing the condition of ecosystems, often based on few, highly aggregated indicators. Such accounting systems would benefit from a stronger theoretical and empirical underpinning of ecosystem dynamics. Operational tools for ecosystem management require understanding of natural ecosystem dynamics, consideration of uncertainty at all levels, means for quantifying driver-response relationships behind observed and anticipated future trajectories of change, and an efficient and transparent synthesis to inform knowledge-driven decision processes. There is hence a gap between highly aggregated indicator-based accounting tools and the need for explicit understanding and assessment of the links between multiple drivers and ecosystem condition as a foundation for informed and adaptive ecosystem management. We describe here an approach termed PAEC (Panel-based Assessment of Ecosystem Condition) for combining quantitative and qualitative elements of evidence and uncertainties into an integrated assessment of ecosystem condition at spatial scales relevant to management and monitoring. The PAEC protocol is founded on explicit predictions, termed phenomena, of how components of ecosystem structure and functions are changing as a result of acting drivers. The protocol tests these predictions with observations and combines these tests to assess the change in the condition of the ecosystem as a whole. PAEC includes explicit, quantitative or qualitative, assessments of uncertainty at different levels and integrates these in the final assessment. As proofs-of-concept we summarize the application of the PAEC protocol to a marine and a terrestrial ecosystem in Norway.

Placing diverse knowledge systems at the core of transformative climate research

We argue that solutions-based research must avoid treating climate change as a merely technical problem, recognizing instead that it is symptomatic of the history of European and North American colonialism. It must therefore be addressed by decolonizing the research process and transforming relations between scientific expertise and the knowledge systems of Indigenous Peoples and of local communities. Partnership across diverse knowledge systems can be a path to transformative change only if those systems are respected in their entirety, as indivisible cultural wholes of knowledge, practices, values, and worldviews. This argument grounds our specific recommendations for governance at the local, national, and international scales. As concrete mechanisms to guide collaboration across knowledge systems, we propose a set of instruments based on the principles of consent, intellectual and cultural autonomy, and justice. We recommend these instruments as tools to ensure that collaborations across knowledge systems embody just partnerships in support of a decolonial transformation of relations between human communities and between humanity and the more-than-human world.

How to run a sustainability science research group sustainably?

Rigorous sustainability science includes addressing pressing real-world problems, weaving multiple knowledge systems, and striving for transformative change. However, these key attributes of sustainability science often conflict with university structures and established academic work practices, for instance with regard to frequent long-distance travel. Such contradictions between key principles of sustainability and everyday practices are experienced by many researchers not only at university level, but also in their individual behaviors. To help resolve this widespread divergence, we present ten principles to foster the sustainability of a research group working in sustainability science, based on our personal experiences and experiments as research group leaders. These principles comprise: (1) monitor the environmental footprint, (2) foster learning and innovation, (3) reduce the environmental footprint, (4) nurture campus sustainability, (5) embrace sustainability in private life, (6) constructively deal with environmental anxiety, (7) design research projects for sustainability impact, (8) engage with stakeholders, (9) capitalize on sustainability teaching, and (10) recognize biases and limits. Applying sustainability principles in everyday research practices can provide important social tipping points that may trigger the spreading of new social norms and behaviors.