Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science

Hakkarainen, Viola; Anderson, Christopher B.; Eriksson, Max; Riper, Carena J. van; Raymond, Christopher M.

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.003

Cited by 35 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The field is ultimately faced with the challenge of creating innovation, transforming unsustainable pathways, and shaping collective visions for sustainable futures. The Fourth Wave is particularly relevant in a time where conservation practice must acknowledge plural values and knowledges that influence biodiversity conservation (Hakkarainen et al 2020).…”

Section: Stream One: Evolving Hard and Soft Systems Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Philanthropic and corporate actors have embraced the practice of biodiversity conservation, often to fill the declining effectiveness of public agencies (Kumar 2012, Hamrick 2016, Arlaud et al 2018. Multiple human values influence how biodiversity is framed and conserved (Dedeurwaerdere et al 2016), and a combination of modernist scientific thought and traditional indigenous knowledge interact to support holistic biodiversity outcomes (Hakkarainen et al 2020). This makes biodiversity conservation an important concept for sustainable development, requiring critical insights from diverse knowledges and experiences to develop more impactful research and practice (Wyborn et al 2019b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Systems thinking provides a comprehensive range of theories and methods that are useful for understanding and managing sustainability challenges. Biodiversity conservation is riddled with complex interactions between science, society and myriad interacting systems through temporal and spatial scales. This article presents a synthetic analysis of the history of systems thinking from a genealogical perspective, drawing from hard and soft systems thinking, and resilience and social-ecological systems. Using the anchor point of system leverage points and system characteristics (parameters, feedbacks, design and intent), we employ a diversity of examples to illustrate their relevance to multiple biodiversity related problems. We conclude by illustrating the opportunities for systems thinking to bridge epistemic divides with multiple biodiversity actors working towards conservation outcomes. Systems thinking can support more integrative biodiversity interventions, as they provide a pluralistic set of tools for bridging knowledges and disciplines, which can be useful to create new shared understandings of how to conserve biodiversity.

show abstract

Section: Stream One: Evolving Hard and Soft Systems Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conducting transformative research requires changes to how institutions fund, conduct, and value research and action. Despite increased calls for interdisciplinarity and incorporation of non-Western knowledge systems, traditional funding mechanisms tend to focus on research that is tightly bound to a singular disciplinary focus with clearly defined objectives and outcomes (Hakkarainen et al 2020). More work is needed to examine what approaches to research and action can catalyze or block transformation, how to foster pluralism and diversity, and in particular how to make marginalized voices and scholarship integral to transformative biodiversity research (Tengö et al 2014;Latulippe & Klenk 2020).…”

Section: Inclusive and Plural Transformationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Inclusive and Plural Transformationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An agenda for research and action toward diverse and just futures for life on Earth

Wyborn

Montana

Kalas

et al. 2021

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decades of research and policy interventions on biodiversity have insufficiently addressed the dual issues of biodiversity degradation and social justice. New approaches are therefore needed. We devised a research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of revisiting biodiversity toward the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Revisiting biodiversity involves critically reflecting on past and present research, policy, and practice concerning biodiversity to inspire creative thinking about the future. The agenda was

show abstract

“…While this approach has contributed significantly to the diversity of the Platform, there have been notable critiques of an inclusion-by-numbers approach. Hakkarainen et al (2020) have found that increasing diversity through standalone indicators, such as the disciplinary background of an expert, can fail to account for otherwise desirable diversity in epistemic worldviews. Montana (2019) has noted that selection by defined categories can also predetermine what experts represent through their participation, and thereby preclude expert communities from defining why and how they might contribute.…”

Section: Understanding Inclusion In Ipbesmentioning

confidence: 99%

From inclusion to epistemic belonging in international environmental expertise: learning from the institutionalisation of scenarios and models in IPBES

Montana

2021

Environmental Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inclusion of diverse perspectives from different disciplines, genders and locations has become a foreground concern in environmental expertise. While inclusion is increasingly accounted for in the design and evaluation of expert organisations, questions remain about the extent to which the pursuit of inclusion equates to effective participation. Building on recent scholarship on expertise in environmental sociology and public participation in environmental governance, this paper puts forward the argument that enabling inclusion in international expert organisations can be supported by facilitating epistemic belonging -a state achieved not only through mutual recognition of skilful practice amongst their expert communities (i.e. group belonging) but also the mobilisation of material resources within and beyond these organisations that enable participating experts to assert their importance, define their specialist skills and to effectively enact their epistemic practices. In this account, I trace the institutionalization of biodiversity scenarios and models in the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) to show how achieving epistemic belonging requires expert communities to actively reshape the resource environments in which they operate. This account extends current sociological perspectives on environmental expertise and offers insights for environmental expert organisations seeking to broaden their inclusion practices.

show abstract

Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science

Cited by 35 publications

References 41 publications

Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking

Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking

An agenda for research and action toward diverse and just futures for life on Earth

From inclusion to epistemic belonging in international environmental expertise: learning from the institutionalisation of scenarios and models in IPBES

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About