|
|
DÃaz, S.; Demissew, S.; Carabias, J.; Joly, C.; Lonsdale, M.; Ash, N.; Larigauderie, A.; Adhikari, J. R.; Arico, S.; Báldi, A.; Bartuska, A.; Baste, I. A.; Bilgin, A.; Brondizio, E.; Chan, K. M. A.; Figueroa, V. E.; Duraiappah, A.; Fischer, M.; Hill, R.; Koetz, T.; Leadley, P.; Lyver, P.; Mace, G. M.; Martin-Lopez, B.; Okumura, M.; Pacheco, D.; Pascual, U.; Pérez, E. S.; Reyers, B.; Roth, E.; Saito, O.; Scholes, R. J.; Sharma, N.; Tallis, H.; Thaman, R.; Watson, R.; Yahara, T.; Hamid, Z. A.; Akosim, C.; Al-Hafedh, Y.; Allahverdiyev, R.; Amankwah, E.; Asah, T. S.; Asfaw, Z.; Bartus, G.; Brooks, A. L.; Caillaux, J.; Dalle, G.; Darnaedi, D.; Driver, A.; Erpul, G.; Escobar-Eyzaguirre, P.; Failler, P.; Fouda, A. M. M.; Fu, B.; Gundimeda, H.; Hashimoto, S.; Homer, F.; Lavorel, S.; Lichtenstein, G.; Mala, W. A.; Mandivenyi, W.; Matczak, P.; Mbizvo, C.; Mehrdadi, M.; Metzger, J. P.; Mikissa, J. B.; Moller, H.; Mooney, H. A.; Mumby, P.; Nagendra, H.; Nesshover, C.; Oteng-Yeboah, A. A.; Pataki, G.; Roué, M.; Rubis, J.; Schultz, M.; Smith, P.; Sumaila, R.; Takeuchi, K.; Thomas, S.; Verma, M.; Yeo-Chang, Y.; Zlatanova, D.
The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework
. This conceptual and analytical tool, presented here in detail, will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that IPBES will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions. Salient innovative aspects of the IPBES Conceptual Framework are its transparent and participatory construction process and its explicit consideration of diverse scientific disciplines, stakeholders, and knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge. Because the focus on co-construction of integrative knowledge is shared by an increasing number of initiatives worldwide, this framework should be useful beyond IPBES, for the wider research and knowledge-policy communities working on the links between nature and people, such as natural, social and engineering scientists, policy-makers at different levels, and decision-makers in different sectors of society
Read More
|
|
|
We argue that differences in the perception and governance of adaptation to climate change and extreme weather events are related to sets of beliefs and concepts through which people understand the environment and which are used to solve the problems they face (mental models)
. Using data gathered in 31 in-depth interviews with adaptation experts in Europe, we identify five basic stakeholder groups whose divergent aims and logic can be related to different mental models they use: advocacy groups, administration, politicians, researchers, and media and the public. Each of these groups uses specific interpretations of climate change and specifies how to deal with climate change impacts. We suggest that a deeper understanding and follow-up of the identified mental models might be useful for the design of any stakeholder involvement in future climate impact research processes. It might also foster consensus building about adequate adaptation measures against climate threats in a society
Read More
|
email alert
or subscribe to the 
RSS feed.
