1
|
Wyborn C, Montana J, Kalas N, Clement S, Davila F, Knowles N, Louder E, Balan M, Chambers J, Christel L, Forsyth T, Henderson G, Izquierdo Tort S, Lim M, Martinez‐Harms MJ, Merçon J, Nuesiri E, Pereira L, Pilbeam V, Turnhout E, Wood S, Ryan M. An agenda for research and action toward diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Conserv Biol 2021; 35:1086-1097. [PMID: 33244774 PMCID: PMC8359367 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2020] [Revised: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
Decades of research and policy interventions on biodiversity have insufficiently addressed the dual issues of biodiversity degradation and social justice. New approaches are therefore needed. We devised a research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of revisiting biodiversity toward the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Revisiting biodiversity involves critically reflecting on past and present research, policy, and practice concerning biodiversity to inspire creative thinking about the future. The agenda was developed through a 2-year dialogue process that involved close to 300 experts from diverse disciplines and locations. This process was informed by social science insights that show biodiversity research and action is underpinned by choices about how problems are conceptualized. Recognizing knowledge, action, and ethics as inseparable, we synthesized a set of principles that help navigate the task of revisiting biodiversity. The agenda articulates 4 thematic areas for future research. First, researchers need to revisit biodiversity narratives by challenging conceptualizations that exclude diversity and entrench the separation of humans, cultures, economies, and societies from nature. Second, researchers should focus on the relationships between the Anthropocene, biodiversity, and culture by considering humanity and biodiversity as tied together in specific contexts. Third, researchers should focus on nature and economies by better accounting for the interacting structures of economic and financial systems as core drivers of biodiversity loss. Finally, researchers should enable transformative biodiversity research and action by reconfiguring relationships between human and nonhuman communities in and through science, policy, and practice. Revisiting biodiversity necessitates a renewed focus on dialogue among biodiversity communities and beyond that critically reflects on the past to channel research and action toward fostering just and diverse futures for human and nonhuman life on Earth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C. Wyborn
- Luc Hoffmann InstituteIUCN Conservation CentreRue Mauverney 28Gland1196Switzerland
- Institute for Water Futures, Fenner School of Environment and SocietyAustralian National UniversityCanberraACT0200Australia
| | - J. Montana
- School of Geography and the EnvironmentUniversity of OxfordSouth Parks RoadOxfordOX1 3QYU.K.
| | - N. Kalas
- Department of Environmental Systems ScienceETH ZürichUniversitätstrasse 8‐22Zürich8092Switzerland
| | - S. Clement
- Geography and PlanningUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolL69 3BXU.K.
| | - F. Davila
- Institute for Sustainable FuturesUniversity of Technology Sydney253 Jones StreetUltimoNSW2007Australia
| | - N. Knowles
- Department of Geography and Environmental ManagementUniversity of Waterloo200 University Ave WWaterlooONN2L 3G1Canada
| | - E. Louder
- School of Geography and DevelopmentUniversity of ArizonaENR2 Building, South 4th floor 1064 E. Lowell StreetTucsonAZ85721U.S.A.
| | - M. Balan
- The Forest WayNo 8, 2nd St, D P Nagar, KotturpuramChennaiTamil Nadu600085India
| | - J. Chambers
- Forest and Nature Conservation Policy GroupWageningen UniversityP.O. Box 47Wageningen6700 AAThe Netherlands
| | - L. Christel
- School of Politics and Government (EPyG)National University of San MartinAvenida 25 de Mayo 1021San MartínProvincia de Buenos Aires1650Argentina
| | - T. Forsyth
- Department of International DevelopmentLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceHoughton StreetLondonWC2A 2AEU.K
| | - G. Henderson
- Harry Ransom CenterThe University of Texas at AustinP.O. Drawer 7219, 300 W 21st StreetAustinTX78712U.S.A.
| | - S. Izquierdo Tort
- Institut des Sciences de la Forêt TempéréeUniversité du Québec en Outaouais58 rue PrincipaleRiponQCJ0V 1V0Canada
- Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos A.C.Plaza San Jacinto 23D, San Ángel, Álvaro ObregónMexico City01000Mexico
| | - M. Lim
- Centre for Environmental Law, Macquarie Law SchoolMacquarie University6 First WalkSydneyNSW2109Australia
| | - M. J. Martinez‐Harms
- Center for Applied Ecology and Sustainability (CAPES)Pontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiago, Avd. Libertador Bernardo O'Higgins 340SantiagoChile
| | - J. Merçon
- Instituto de Investigaciones en EducasiónUniversidad VeracruzanaPaseo 112, Nuevo JalapaXalapa‐Enríquez91193Mexico
| | - E. Nuesiri
- Social Science FacultyAfrican Leadership University (ALU)Powder Mill RoadPamplemousses21001Mauritius
| | - L. Pereira
- Stockholm Resilience CentreStockholm UniversityKräftriket 2BStockholmSE‐10691Sweden
- Copernicus Institute of Sustainable DevelopmentUtrecht UniversityPrincetonlaan 8aUtrecht3584 CBThe Netherlands
- Centre for Complex Systems in TransitionStellenbosch University19 Jonkershoek Rd, MostertsdriftStellenbosch7600South Africa
| | - V. Pilbeam
- Clear Horizon Consulting132B Gwynne StCremorneVIC3121Australia
| | - E. Turnhout
- Forest and Nature Conservation Policy GroupWageningen UniversityP.O. Box 47Wageningen6700 AAThe Netherlands
| | - S. Wood
- Future Earth1250 Guy St, MontrealQuebecONH3H 2L3Canada
| | - M. Ryan
- Luc Hoffmann InstituteIUCN Conservation CentreRue Mauverney 28Gland1196Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wyborn C, Montana J, Kalas N, Clement S, Davila F, Knowles N, Louder E, Balan M, Chambers J, Christel L, Forsyth T, Henderson G, Izquierdo Tort S, Lim M, Martinez-Harms MJ, Merçon J, Nuesiri E, Pereira L, Pilbeam V, Turnhout E, Wood S, Ryan M. An agenda for research and action toward diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Conserv Biol 2021; 35:1086-1097. [PMID: 33244774 DOI: 10.13140/rg.2.2.12086.52804/2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2020] [Revised: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 05/18/2023]
Abstract
Decades of research and policy interventions on biodiversity have insufficiently addressed the dual issues of biodiversity degradation and social justice. New approaches are therefore needed. We devised a research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of revisiting biodiversity toward the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Revisiting biodiversity involves critically reflecting on past and present research, policy, and practice concerning biodiversity to inspire creative thinking about the future. The agenda was developed through a 2-year dialogue process that involved close to 300 experts from diverse disciplines and locations. This process was informed by social science insights that show biodiversity research and action is underpinned by choices about how problems are conceptualized. Recognizing knowledge, action, and ethics as inseparable, we synthesized a set of principles that help navigate the task of revisiting biodiversity. The agenda articulates 4 thematic areas for future research. First, researchers need to revisit biodiversity narratives by challenging conceptualizations that exclude diversity and entrench the separation of humans, cultures, economies, and societies from nature. Second, researchers should focus on the relationships between the Anthropocene, biodiversity, and culture by considering humanity and biodiversity as tied together in specific contexts. Third, researchers should focus on nature and economies by better accounting for the interacting structures of economic and financial systems as core drivers of biodiversity loss. Finally, researchers should enable transformative biodiversity research and action by reconfiguring relationships between human and nonhuman communities in and through science, policy, and practice. Revisiting biodiversity necessitates a renewed focus on dialogue among biodiversity communities and beyond that critically reflects on the past to channel research and action toward fostering just and diverse futures for human and nonhuman life on Earth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Wyborn
- Luc Hoffmann Institute, IUCN Conservation Centre, Rue Mauverney 28, Gland, 1196, Switzerland
- Institute for Water Futures, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia
| | - J Montana
- School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QY, U.K
| | - N Kalas
- Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, Universitätstrasse 8-22, Zürich, 8092, Switzerland
| | - S Clement
- Geography and Planning, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3BX, U.K
| | - F Davila
- Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, 253 Jones Street, Ultimo, NSW, 2007, Australia
| | - N Knowles
- Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - E Louder
- School of Geography and Development, University of Arizona, ENR2 Building, South 4th floor 1064 E. Lowell Street, Tucson, AZ, 85721, U.S.A
| | - M Balan
- The Forest Way, No 8, 2nd St, D P Nagar, Kotturpuram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600085, India
| | - J Chambers
- Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, Wageningen, 6700 AA, The Netherlands
| | - L Christel
- School of Politics and Government (EPyG), National University of San Martin, Avenida 25 de Mayo 1021, San Martín, Provincia de Buenos Aires, 1650, Argentina
| | - T Forsyth
- Department of International Development, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, U.K
| | - G Henderson
- Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin, P.O. Drawer 7219, 300 W 21st Street, Austin, TX, 78712, U.S.A
| | - S Izquierdo Tort
- Institut des Sciences de la Forêt Tempérée, Université du Québec en Outaouais, 58 rue Principale, Ripon, QC, J0V 1V0, Canada
- Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos A.C., Plaza San Jacinto 23D, San Ángel, Álvaro Obregón, Mexico City, 01000, Mexico
| | - M Lim
- Centre for Environmental Law, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, 6 First Walk, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia
| | - M J Martinez-Harms
- Center for Applied Ecology and Sustainability (CAPES), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Avd. Libertador Bernardo O'Higgins 340, Santiago, Chile
| | - J Merçon
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Educasión, Universidad Veracruzana, Paseo 112, Nuevo Jalapa, Xalapa-Enríquez, 91193, Mexico
| | - E Nuesiri
- Social Science Faculty, African Leadership University (ALU), Powder Mill Road, Pamplemousses, 21001, Mauritius
| | - L Pereira
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B, Stockholm, SE-10691, Sweden
- Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Princetonlaan 8a, Utrecht, 3584 CB, The Netherlands
- Centre for Complex Systems in Transition, Stellenbosch University, 19 Jonkershoek Rd, Mostertsdrift, Stellenbosch, 7600, South Africa
| | - V Pilbeam
- Clear Horizon Consulting, 132B Gwynne St, Cremorne, VIC, 3121, Australia
| | - E Turnhout
- Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, Wageningen, 6700 AA, The Netherlands
| | - S Wood
- Future Earth, 1250 Guy St, Montreal, Quebec, ON, H3H 2L3, Canada
| | - M Ryan
- Luc Hoffmann Institute, IUCN Conservation Centre, Rue Mauverney 28, Gland, 1196, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gomes LC, Chippari-Gomes AR, Miranda TO, Pereira TM, Merçon J, Davel VC, Barbosa BV, Pereira ACH, Frossard A, Ramos JPL. Genotoxicity effects on Geophagus brasiliensis fish exposed to Doce River water after the environmental disaster in the city of Mariana, MG, Brazil. BRAZ J BIOL 2019; 79:659-664. [DOI: 10.1590/1519-6984.188086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2017] [Accepted: 02/20/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract The Doce River basin has suffered the largest environmental accident ever occurred in Brazil with the influx of tailings from Fundão and Santarém, belonging to Samarco mining company, due to the disaster in Mariana. A spill between 50 and 60 million m3 of tailings was estimated by the company. According to Samarco, the wastewater was composed mainly of clay, silt and heavy metals like iron, copper and manganese. Thereby, the objective of the present study was evaluated the genotoxic damage in juvenile of Geophagus brasiliensis (Quoy e Gaimard, 1824) exposed to Doce river water before (DRWBA – Doce River water before acident) and after (DRWAA – Doce River water after acident) the influx of tailings from the Germano and Santarém Dam disasters in Mariana, MG, Brazil. For this, 24 individuals of the species G. brasiliensis (obtained on IFES/ALEGRE fish culture) were submitted to a bioassay with three treatments and eight replicates. The treatments were: 1) Control water (water from the urban water supply system, filtered with a 0.45 µm membrane), 2) DRBA and 3) DRAA. After 96 h, these fishes were anesthetized to remove blood for evaluation of genotoxic damage (micronucleus and comet). For the bioassay, a total of 80 L of The Doce River water were collected before the influx of tailings and after the influx and then submitted to metal quantification analysis. Fish exposed to DRWBA and DRWAA treatments showed a significant increase in both the number of erythrocyte micronuclei and the DNA damage index in relation to the control fish; however, they did not present any differences between the two treatments. The results demonstrate that the DRWBA treatment was already genotoxic for the fish, mainly due to dissolved Cu concentrations in the water. The DRWAA treatment probably presented genotoxicity due to the increase in the dissolved fraction and synergistic effects of several metals found in the tailings of the Mariana accident.
Collapse
|