Four steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

Milner‐Gulland, E. J.; Addison, Prue; Arlidge, William N. S.; Baker, Julia; Booth, Hollie; Brooks, Thomas M.; Bull, Joseph W.; Burgass, Michael J.; Ekstrom, Jon; Ermgassen, Sophus zu; Fleming, L. V.; Grub, Henry M.J.; Hase, Amrei von; Hoffmann, Michael; Hutton, J. M.; Juffe‐Bignoli, Diego; Kate, Kerry ten; Kiesecker, Joseph M.; Kümpel, Noëlle F.; Maron, Martine; Newing, Helen; Ole-Moiyoi, Katrina; Sinclair, Cheli; Sinclair, Sam; Starkey, Malcolm; Stuart, Simon N.; Tayleur, Catherine; Watson, James

doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2020.12.011

Cited by 84 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following this framework, urbanisation is designed to contribute to biodiversity preservation and restoration as well as producing services for inhabitants. This shift fits perfectly with the mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation, recommended by the latest frameworks of mitigation and conservation hierarchy [50].…”

Section: The Potentiality Of Digital Technologies To Foster Biodiversity By Designsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…Nevertheless, we assist to a growing demand by inhabitants and governmental institutions to meet the sustainability targets and the growing involvement of ecologists to obtain more nature in the city [204]. In fact, ecologists are pledging for a planned efficient integration of biodiversity issues in landscape and city planning [50] as well as for the design of biodiversity-friendly building [43]. To this regard, the development of large-scale ecological modelling allows us to handle and take into account the complexity of biodiversity and biological processes [45,205].…”

Section: Traditional Knowledgementioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Smart Sustainable Cities of the New Millennium: Towards Design for Nature

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban environments consist of a mosaic of natural fragments, planned and unintentional habitats hosting both introduced and spontaneous species. The latter group exploits abandoned and degraded urban niches which, in the case of plants, form what is called the third landscape. In the Anthropocene, cities, open spaces and buildings must be planned and designed considering not only human needs but also those of other living organisms. The scientific approach of habitat sharing is defined as reconciliation ecology, whilst the action of implementing the ecosystem services and functioning of such anthropogenic habitats is called Urban Rehabilitation. However, urban development still represents the main cause of biodiversity loss worldwide. Yet, the approach of planners and landscape architects highly diverges from that of ecologists and scientists on how to perceive, define and design urban green and blue infrastructure. For instance, designers focus on the positive impact that nature (generally associated with indoor and outdoor greeneries) has on human well-being, often neglecting ecosystems’ health. Instead, considering the negative impact of any form of development and to achieve the no net loss Aichi’s objectives, conservationists apply mitigation hierarchy policies to avoid or reduce the impact and to offset biodiversity. The rationale of this review paper is to set the fundamentals for a multidisciplinary design framework tackling the issue of biodiversity loss in the urban environment by design for nature. The method focuses on the building/city/landscape scales and is enabled by emerging digital technologies, i.e., geographic information systems, building information modelling, ecological simulation and computational design.

show abstract

Section: The Potentiality Of Digital Technologies To Foster Biodiversity By Designsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Traditional Knowledgementioning

confidence: 98%

Smart Sustainable Cities of the New Millennium: Towards Design for Nature

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, target-based ecological compensation has been proposed to overcome offset challenges (Simmonds et al, 2019). Novel approaches are being explored to encourage proactive conservation actions across all sectors of society building from the mitigation hierarchy (Milner-Gulland et al, 2021). None of these have been yet considered for development corridors.…”

Section: Addressing Evidence Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating the Impacts of Development Corridors on Biodiversity: A Global Review

Juffe‐Bignoli

Burgess

Hobbs³

et al. 2021

Front. Ecol. Evol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development corridors are extensive, often transnational and linear, geographical areas targeted for investment to help achieve sustainable development. They often comprise the creation of hard infrastructure (i.e., physical structures) and soft infrastructure (i.e., policies, plans, and programmes) involving a variety of actors. They are globally widespread, and likely to be a significant driver of habitat loss. Here, we describe the development corridors phenomenon from a biodiversity perspective and identify the elements of best practice in biodiversity impact mitigation. We use these to carry out a review of the peer reviewed literature on corridors to respond to three questions: (i) how impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services are assessed; (ii) what mitigation measures are discussed to manage these impacts; and (iii) to what extent do these measures approximate to best practice. We found that of 271 publications on development corridors across all continents (except for Antarctica) mentioning biodiversity or ecosystem services, only 100 (37%) assessed impacts on biodiversity and 7 (3%) on ecosystem services. Importantly, only half of these (52, 19% of the total 271 articles) discussed mitigation measures to manage these impacts. These measures focused on avoidance and minimisation and there was scant mention of restoration or ecological compensation illustrating a deficient application of the mitigation hierarchy. We conclude that the academic literature on corridors does not give sufficient consideration to comprehensive mitigation of biodiversity impacts. To change this, impact assessment research needs to acknowledge the complexity of such multi-project and multi-stakeholder initiatives, quantify biodiversity losses due to the full suite of their potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts, and follow all the steps of the mitigation hierarchy impact framework. We suggest a series of research avenues and policy recommendations to improve impact assessments of corridors towards achieving better biodiversity outcomes.

show abstract

“…Therefore, Frangipani has gone for several levels of trials and errors to perform the appropriate organic waste composting and use of it for environmental conservation in collaboration with researchers and universities. Milner-Gulland et al [39] also stated that restoring nature while meeting human needs requires a bold vision. The mitigation and conservation hierarchy supports the choice of actions to conserve and restore nature and evaluation of the effectiveness of those actions across sectors and scales.…”

Section: Shi 2016 [61] South East Asian Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership Roles for Sustainable Development: The Case of a Malaysian Green Hotel

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The leadership roles of green hotels are essential for sustainable development because of their contribution to reducing carbon emission, supplying safe food, and managing water resources. However, sustainability education has not adequately integrated entrepreneurial skills to promote green hotel practices towards sustainable development. Therefore, this study explored the leadership roles of the Frangipani Hotel in Langkawi, Malaysia, because it adopted a circular economy in line with the zero-waste concept to develop the environmental and socio-economic condition of the locality. Extensive literature reviews were conducted to explore the transformational leadership roles of the Frangipani hotel for green practices. Interviews with the managing director, general manager, and the head of 10 operating branches of Frangipani also provided information about the green hotel practices to support its leadership roles. Similarly, interviews with the public, private, business, and community stakeholders also supported the transformational leadership roles of Frangipani to integrated green hotel practices with effective multi-stakeholder collaboration for quality control and quality assurance of its green practices. The patience of Frangipani and its roles as a liaison among government, non-government, business, and private and community sectors have been very effective in promoting green practices in the hospitability industry via training and knowledge-sharing. However, the monitoring and evaluation of these green practices are essential, and they can be completed via developing a special key performance index for the effective promotion of green hotels.

show abstract

Four steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

Cited by 84 publications

References 70 publications

Smart Sustainable Cities of the New Millennium: Towards Design for Nature

Smart Sustainable Cities of the New Millennium: Towards Design for Nature

Mitigating the Impacts of Development Corridors on Biodiversity: A Global Review

Leadership Roles for Sustainable Development: The Case of a Malaysian Green Hotel

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About