Engaging with the science and politics of biodiversity futures: a literature review

Wyborn, Carina; Louder, Elena; Harfoot, Mike; Hill, Samantha L. L.

doi:10.1017/s037689292000048x

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, conservation science can provide crucial insights into how and why social changes occur (Isgren et al 2019) and where leverage points may exist to facilitate transformations to sustainability (Díaz et al 2019, Fischer & Riechers 2019, Chan et al 2020). Numerous opportunities exist for conservation scientists to engage in transformational change (Pereira et al 2020, Scoones et al 2020, Wyborn et al 2020a), including with narratives (Louder & Wyborn 2020), systems (Davila et al 2021) and futures thinking (Wyborn et al 2021a). This necessarily requires scientists and science as a whole to ‘… become more reflective about [their] own assumptions and paradigms, including those relating to how change comes about’ (O’Brien 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is this apparent paradox that the Biodiversity Revisited initiative has sought to interrogate through deep, creative reflection on the constructs of ‘biodiversity’ itself (Wyborn et al 2020a, 2020b). The science underpinning biodiversity is one of several themes that Biodiversity Revisited aimed to critically examine, alongside narratives (Louder & Wyborn 2020), systems (Davila et al 2021), governance and futures (Wyborn et al 2021a). Scientific knowledge, actors and institutions are but small components of global systems that must be transformed to reverse biodiversity loss (IPBES 2019), yet they are far more within the control of the conservation science community than powerful global economic, social and political factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Re-conceptualizing the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation

Evans

2021

Envir. Conserv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Science, as both a body of knowledge and a process of acquiring new knowledge, is widely regarded as playing a central role in biodiversity conservation. Science undoubtedly enhances our understanding of the drivers of biodiversity loss and assists in the formulation of practical and policy responses, but it has not yet proved sufficiently influential to reverse global trends of biodiversity decline. This review seeks to critically examine the science of biodiversity conservation and to identify any hidden assumptions that, once interrogated and explored, may assist in improving conservation science, policy and practice. By drawing on existing reviews of the literature, this review describes the major themes of the literature and examines the historical shifts in the framing of conservation. It highlights the dominance of research philosophies that view conservation through a primarily ecological lens, changes in the goal(s) of conservation and a lack of clarity over the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation. Finally, this review offers a simple framework to more clearly and consistently conceptualize the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation in the future. Greater critical reflection on how conservation science might better accommodate multiple knowledges, goals and values could assist in ‘opening up’ new, legitimate pathways for biodiversity conservation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-conceptualizing the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation

Evans

2021

Envir. Conserv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While it is beyond the scope of this paper to address this point in detail, there are a number of promising approaches that could be applied to facilitate such visioning. These include conflict management as part of management processes, e.g., within ICZM (Westmacott 2002) in conjunction with methods for co-production e.g., participatory action research (Keahey 2021), anticipation and foresight for governance (Vervoort andGupta 2018, Levin et al 2021), and futures thinking (Stoddart et al 2020, Wyborn et al 2021. The participatory "three horizons approach" to scenario development and back-casting (Sharpe et al 2016) may provide another useful approach for developing normative visions for coastal systems.…”

Section: Target Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience and coastal governance: knowledge and navigation between stability and transformation

Rölfer¹,

Celliers²,

Abson³

2022

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several intergovernmental agreements highlight the need for resilience in the face of environmental and societal challenges. Coastal systems are particularly complex and susceptible to global climate change, and building human resilience to future changes is of high priority. While the concept of resilience has historically been associated with stability to perturbations, the notion of transformation within the social-ecological resilience (SER) approach has recently gained importance in ecosystem management. In order to operationalize resilience in the context of coastal governance in a changing climate, a better understanding of the concept is required. This paper provides an overview of different approaches to resilience, including stability and transformation, in order to understand resilience as a concept in a coastal governance context. Subsequently, we propose five steps and three types of knowledge (system, target, transformative) with which to embed SER in coastal governance. In addition, we consider scale and system boundaries; identify (un)desirable system characteristics and the role of normative goals and common visions in resilience management. Finally, we highlight the central role that local actors and information services play in fostering a two-way exchange between science and society and tailoring solutions for establishing or enhancing SER to the needs of local actors. We conclude that the navigation between stability and transformation within the concept of resilience is central to finding sustainable future pathways in the face of climate change.

show abstract

“…Values-based conservation ideally incorporates social, cultural, and even economic goals and values, to facilitate holistic decision making that has meaning to diverse groups and communities [68,98]. Fostering a values-based approach is also practical and strategic, given the importance of political support for conservation efforts in an increasingly uncertain global environment.…”

Section: = Values-basedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing conservation

Cooke

Michaels

Nyboer

et al. 2022

PLOS Sustain Transform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early definitions of conservation focused largely on the end goals of protection or restoration of nature, and the various disciplinary domains that contribute to these ends. Conservation science and practice has evolved beyond being focused on just issues of scarcity and biodiversity decline. To better recognize the inherent links between human behaviour and conservation, “success” in conservation is now being defined in terms that include human rights and needs. We also know that who engages in conservation, and how, dictates the likelihood that conservation science will be embraced and applied to yield conservation gains. Here we present ideas for reconceptualizing conservation. We emphasize the HOW in an attempt to reorient and repurpose the term in ways that better reflect what contemporary conservation is or might aspire to be. To do so, we developed an acrostic using the letters in the term “CONSERVATION” with each serving as an adjective where C = co-produced, O = open, N = nimble, S = solutions-oriented, E = empowering, R = relational, V = values-based, A = actionable, T = transdisciplinary, I = inclusive, O = optimistic, and N = nurturing. For each adjective, we briefly describe our reasoning for its selection and describe how it contributes to our vision of conservation. By reconceptualizing conservation we have the potential to center how we do conservation in ways that are more likely to result in outcomes that benefit biodiversity while also being just, equitable, inclusive, and respectful of diverse rights holders, knowledge holders, and other actors. We hope that this acrostic will be widely adopted in training to help the next generation of conservation researchers and practitioners keep in mind what it will take to make their contributions effective and salient.

show abstract

Engaging with the science and politics of biodiversity futures: a literature review

Cited by 10 publications

References 65 publications

Re-conceptualizing the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation

Re-conceptualizing the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation

Resilience and coastal governance: knowledge and navigation between stability and transformation

Reconceptualizing conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About