Nature is perceived and valued in starkly different and often conflicting ways. This paper presents the rationale for the inclusive valuation of nature’s contributions to people (NCP) in decision making, as well as broad methodological steps for doing so. While developed within the context of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), this approach is more widely applicable to initiatives at the knowledge–policy interface, which require a pluralistic approach to recognizing the diversity of values. We argue that transformative practices aiming at sustainable futures would benefit from embracing such diversity, which require recognizing and addressing power relationships across stakeholder groups that hold different values on human nature-relations and NCP

The number of collaborative initiatives between scientists and volunteers (i.e., citizen science)is increasing across many research fields. The promise of societal transformation together with scientific breakthroughs contributes to the current popularity of citizen science (CS)

No abstract

No abstract

2018. Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: a decision tree approach.Contact CEH NORA team at noraceh@ceh.ac.ukThe NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. Highlights Guidance is needed for selecting ecosystem service assessment methods  Stakeholder participation was the key reason for selecting many methods  The decision context and ecosystem services at stake were also important reasons  Decision trees can help structure and rationalise the selection of ecosystem service assessment methods  Linking decision trees with other forms of guidance addresses a broader range of user needs

The PDF document is a copy of the final version of this manuscript that was subsequently accepted by the journal for publication. The paper has been through peer review, but it has not been subject to any additional copy editing or journal-specific formatting. It thus looks different from the final published version, which may be accessed following the DOI above.

No abstract

Land use changes induced by nature conservation regulation and management practices, especially in protected areas, often result in trade-offs between ecosystem services (ESs). Exploring trade-offs between ESs and linking them with stakeholders can help reveal the potential losers and winners of land use changes. In this paper, we demonstrate that ES trade-offs do not always go hand in hand with conflicts. The perception of local stakeholders about trade-offs between ESs at three protected sites in the Great Hungarian Plain were assessed through qualitative methods. In all areas significant conservation measures had been introduced since the 1990s resulting in land use changes. Locals (farmers at each site and inhabitants at one site) were the main 'losers' of the land use changes and related ES trade-offs, while there were many winners at different spatial and temporal scales. Conflicts appeared only between locals and the national park directorates, and not between locals and other beneficiaries of the new ESs. Due to scale mismatch, locals might not be in direct contact with other stakeholders, and vice versa, and therefore there is no interface between them for confrontation and negotiation. Integrating scale into the analysis also helps in advising policy instruments to minimise local-level conflicts.