In 2010, there was a bold commitment to take action in halting global biodiversity loss by 2020. Now, half way through the Convention on Biological Diversity strategic plan 2011-2020, the success of the mission is under discussion. With the Twelfth Conference of the Parties attesting a lack of action, attention is now focused on the science-policy interface. This article offers a critical examination of the current debate on the science-policy interface and its implications for biodiversity research. The aim is to demonstrate the need for a social-ecological perspective. First, we argue that there is not only a lack of action but also a lack of knowledge. Second, we present socialecological systems as a common framework for biodiversity research. Third, we explain the potential of transdisciplinarity in biodiversity research. We finish by calling for a decisive turning point to consider the hybrid notions of biodiversity in science, politics and conservation activities.

Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods.

No abstract

No abstract

Insect declines and biodiversity loss have attracted much attention in recent years, but lack of comprehensive data, conflicting interests among stakeholders and insufficient policy guidance hinder progress in preserving biodiversity. The project DINA (Diversity of Insects in Nature protected Areas) investigates insect communities in 21 nature reserves in Germany. All selected conservation sites border arable land, with agricultural practices assumed to influence insect populations. We taught citizen scientists how to manage Malaise traps for insect collection, and subsequently used a DNA metabarcoding approach for species identification. Vegetation surveys, plant metabarcoding as well as geospatial and ecotoxicological analyses will help to unravel contributing factors for the deterioration of insect communities. As a pioneering research project in this field, DINA includes a transdisciplinary dialogue involving relevant stakeholders such as local authorities, policymakers, and farmers, which aims at a shared understanding of conservation goals and action pathways. Stakeholder engagement combined with scientific results will support the development of sound policy recommendations to improve legal frameworks, landscape planning, land use, and conservation strategies. With this transdisciplinary approach, we aim to provide the background knowledge to implement policy strategies that will halt further decline of insects in German protected areas.

The dynamic interaction between population and water is usually discussed in the context of development issues in Third World countries, but rarely analysed for northern, industrialised countries. Nevertheless, the improvement of a supply system's ability to adapt to demographic changes poses challenges for industrialised countries as well, and generating knowledge for developing adequate solutions also implies new, intriguing tasks for demography. This article analyses the relationships between population decline and water infrastructure using Germany as a case study. After sketching the development of the debate on the correlation between population and problems of water supply, the most relevant demographic factors affecting the water infrastructure are described in general. The authors then identify the implications of demographic change for water demand and use on the one hand, and the resulting effects on technical networks and their economic basis on the other. Finally, approaches for solving the problems and possibilities for taking action are discussed.

Ecosystem services (ES) are defined as the interdependencies between society and nature. Despite several years of conceptual discussions, some challenges of the ES concept are far from being resolved. In particular, the usefulness of the concept for nature protection is questioned, and a strong critique is expressed concerning its contribution towards the neoliberal commodification of nature. This paper argues that these challenges can be addressed by dealing more carefully with ES as a boundary concept between different disciplines and between science and society. ES are neither about nature nor about human wellbeing, but about the mutual dependencies between nature and human wellbeing. These mutual interdependencies, however, create tensions and contradictions that manifest themselves in the boundary negotiations between different scientific disciplines and between science and society. This paper shows that approaches from Social Ecology can address these boundary negotiations and the power relations involved more explicitly. Finally, this implies the urgent need for more inter-and transdisciplinary collaboration in ES research. We conclude (1) that the social-ecological nature of ES must be elaborated more carefully while explicitly focussing on the interdependencies between nature and society; (2) to better implement inter-and transdisciplinary methods into ES research; and (3) that such ES research can-and to some extent already does-substantially enhance international research programmes such as Future Earth.

Science-policy-interfaces (SPIs) are expected to go beyond the linear model of scientific policy advice through creating spaces for exchange and dialogue between 'policy' and 'knowledge'. Given that most environmental issues require inter-and transdisciplinary approaches, SPIs must take into account a variety of knowledge types, views and interests of scientists, policymakers and other decision makers. Moreover, acceptance and durability of SPIs depend largely on their perceived legitimacy and the credibility of their knowledge-gathering processes, providing additional challenges for their internal organisation. As the interplay between different knowledge types and decision making is far from neutral, a reflexive approach is required in the design of an SPI so that it is capable of learning from past experiences. The aim of this article is to discuss which governance arrangements could best support the development of an effective and legitimate SPI for European biodiversity politics. We analyse different options for facilitating the implementation of a 'Network of Knowledge' approach. This approach has been developed to improve the interface between diverse knowledge-holder communities and decision making processes for biodiversity and ecosystem services-a field where multi-scalar and multi-dimensional problems arise. In this article, we develop and discuss two stylized extreme governance models as our starting point: an 'informal network model´, which almost entirely depends on the dedication of individuals, versus a more formalized 'platform model´, predominantly based on the needs and interests of the organisations involved. We discuss the pros and cons of each of these models in reaching their objectives and in developing sound governing processes for a 'Network of Knowledge'. From this discussion, we derive a recommended design for the reflexive governance of such a network in the context of the European Union and finish by discussing some more general lessons learnt.