Linking international agricultural research knowledge with action for sustainable development

Kristjanson, Patti; Reid, Robin S.; Dickson, Nancy M.; Clark, William C.; Romney, D.L.; Puskur, Ranjitha; Macmillan, Susan; Grace, Delia

doi:10.1073/pnas.0807414106

Cited by 169 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

146

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Involvement of local residents in conservation efforts in ways that support their livelihoods increases the likelihood that policies will be respected (Box 1) 40 .…”

Section: Maintaining a Diversity Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Urban green spaces and mobile species that link these habitats (e.g. pollinators and concerned gardeners) sustain diversity in human-dominated landscapes where society's connection to nature is most tenuous 39 .Involvement of local residents in conservation efforts in ways that support their livelihoods increases the likelihood that policies will be respected (Box 1) 40 .Maintaining biodiversity entails tradeoffs. People deliberately reduce genetic, stand, and landscape diversity to enhance the productivity or harvest efficiency of a particular ecosystem service such as an agricultural or forestry crop under a narrow range of environmental and economic conditions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet

Chapin

Carpenter

Kofinas

et al. 2010

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

Self Cite

797

489

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem stewardship is an action-oriented framework intended to foster social-ecological sustainability of a rapidly changing planet. Recent developments identify three strategies that make optimal use of current understanding in an environment of inevitable uncertainty and abrupt change: reducing the magnitude of, and exposure and sensitivity to, known stresses; focusing on proactive policies that shape change; and avoiding or escaping unsustainable socialecological traps. All social-ecological systems are vulnerable to recent and projected changes but have sources of adaptive capacity and resilience that can sustain ecosystem services and human well-being through active ecosystem stewardship. A Call for Ecosystem StewardshipHuman actions are having large and accelerating effects on Earth's climate, environment, and ecosystems 1, 2 , thereby degrading many ecosystem services (see glossary) 3 . This unsustainable 2 trajectory demands a dramatic change in human relationships with the environment and lifesupport system of the planet 2,3 . In this paper we address recent developments in thinking about the sustainable use of ecosystems and resources by society in the context of rapid and frequently abrupt change (Box 1).Western resource management paradigms have evolved from exploitation, where sustainability is not an important consideration, to steady-state resource management aimed at maximum or optimum sustainable yield (MSY or OSY, respectively) and efficient production of a single resource such as fish or trees, to ecosystem management to sustain a broader suite of ecosystem services 4 ( Fig. 1). Despite its sustainability goal, management for MSY or OSY tends to over-exploit targeted resources because of overly optimistic assumptions about the capacity to sustain productivity, avoid disturbances, regulate harvesters' behavior, and anticipate extreme economic or environmental events 5 . Ecosystem management seeks to sustain multiple ecosystem services 6 but often uses, as a reference point, historic conditions that are not achievable in a rapidly changing world.Given the challenges of sustainable use of ecosystems during rapid change, we advocate a shift to ecosystem stewardship (Table 1) 7,8 . Its central goal is to sustain the capacity to provide ecosystem services that support human well-being under conditions of uncertainty and change (see glossary). Uncertainty has always characterized social-ecological systems and should therefore not be an impediment to action. Such a paradigm shift entails important tradeoffs, particularly between efficiency and flexibility and between immediate and long-term benefits 9, 10 .Ecosystem stewardship integrates three broadly overlapping sustainability approaches 8,11, 12 (Fig. 2): reducing vulnerability to expected changes [11][12][13] ; fostering resilience to sustain 3 desirable conditions in the face of perturbations and uncertainty 14 ; and transforming from undesirable trajectories when opportunities emerge 15,16 . Adaptive capacity contributes to all three ...

show abstract

“…Involvement of local residents in conservation efforts in ways that support their livelihoods increases the likelihood that policies will be respected (Box 1) 40 .…”

Section: Maintaining a Diversity Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet

Chapin

Carpenter

Kofinas

et al. 2010

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

Self Cite

797

489

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meanwhile the local government in Kabale, which is a permanent local actor, had an incentive to contribute to policy development for the benefit of its citizens as well as to oversee the implementation of regulations. To align such a diversity of incentives and interests, the MSIP played a role as an open forum governing the innovation networks at different levels (multi-scalar complex innovation networks), with a dynamic meta-governance (hybrid governance (Goldberger, 2008;Kristjanson et al, 2009), by mobilising communities of practice at different network levels, and dynamically over time.…”

Section: Please Cite This Article As 'In Press'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder roles for fostering ambidexterity in Sub-Saharan African agricultural netchains for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives

Perdomo

Farrow²,

Trienekens

et al. 2016

Journ. Chain and Network Sc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Sub-Saharan African smallholder agricultural sector faces multiple and usually complex challenges, which can potentially be overcome by collective action. Smallholder farmers and other value chain stakeholders can tackle temporal, structural and contextual challenges by joining multi-level innovation networks to benefit collectively from shared information, knowledge, improved capacities and economies of scale in a process of innovation. Ambidexterity is a capability of innovation networks to balance exploration and exploitation dynamics in an innovation process, and is applicable at multiple levels: individuals, leaders, champions, teams and clusters. In the paradigm of open innovation, these levels become intertwined in hybrid social structures of innovation netchains. The objective of this paper is to describe the roles and identify the stakeholders that play those roles in an innovation process. We present case studies on farmer groups who participate in collective action and we compare multi-stakeholder platforms with other configurations of actors that tackle challenges in potato netchains in three Sub-Saharan African countries. We track and analyse innovation trajectories for six cases adapting netchain analysis techniques linking roles with the challenges faced at particular stages of each innovation trajectory. We find three management designs for fostering exploration and exploitation: (1) exploratory or exploitative management designs for small innovation networks; (2) exploitative management designs for larger networks; and (3) ambidextrous management designs for multi-stakeholder networks. Traditional roles played by managers are identified to manage exploration and exploitation in an ambidextrous way, but also evidence of roles of civil society actors facilitating collective action for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives. Since ambidexterity is about dynamism, we identified three types of mobility to be fostered when tackling challenges in an innovation process: (1) mobility-dynamism of the innovation process over time; (2) structural-knowledge mobility in innovation networks; and (3) boundary mobility.

show abstract

“…Unless the technologies, the skills required to use them, and the institutional approaches appropriate to deploy them are effectively transferred from providers to users ('technology transfer'), the effects of technology options, however promising, are minimized (see Section 7.4.3). Challenges in putting science and technology to use for sustainable development have received considerable attention (e.g., Nelson and Winter, 1982;Patel and Pavit, 1995;NRC, 1999;ICSU, 2002;Kristjanson et al, 2009), emphasizing the wide range of contexts that shape both barriers and potentials. If obstacles related to intellectual property rights can be overcome, however, the growing power of the information technology revolution could accelerate technology transfer (linked with local knowledge) in ways that would be very promising Technology is an essential part of responses to climate extremes, at least partly because technology choices and uses are so often a part of the problem.…”

Section: Technology Choices Availability and Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%