Exploring the risks and benefits of flexibility in biodiversity offset location in a case study of migratory shorebirds

Biodiversity offsets aim to counterbalance the residual impacts of development on species and ecosystems. Guidance documents explicitly recommend that biodiversity offset actions be located close to the location of impact because of higher potential for similar ecological conditions, but allowing greater spatial flexibility has been proposed. We examined the circumstances under which offsets distant from the impact location could be more likely to achieve no net loss or provide better ecological outcomes than offsets close to the impact area. We applied a graphical model for migratory shorebirds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway as a case study to explore the problems that arise when incorporating spatial flexibility into offset planning. Spatially flexible offsets may alleviate impacts more effectively than local offsets; however, the risks involved can be substantial. For our case study, there were inadequate data to make robust conclusions about the effectiveness and equivalence of distant habitat-based offsets for migratory shorebirds. Decisions around offset placement should be driven by the potential to achieve equivalent ecological outcomes; however, when considering more distant offsets, there is a need to evaluate the likely increased risks alongside the potential benefits. Although spatially flexible offsets have the potential to provide more cost-effective biodiversity outcomes and more cobenefits, our case study showed the difficulty of demonstrating these benefits in practice and the potential risks that need to be considered to ensure effective offset placement.     

Co-development of an integrated assessment framework to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of selected nature-based water treatment technologies in Sri Lanka,The Philippines,and Vietnam

Water quality is a critical challenge in Asia in the context of growing industrialization, urbanization, and climate change. Nature-based solutions (NbS) could play an important role in reducing urban water pollution, while generating multiple co-benefits that could make cities more liveable and resilient. In this regard, a number of pilot and demonstration projects have been set up to explore their potential across cities in Asia. Their effectiveness and impacts, however, have not been adequately documented, thus how they can be sustained, replicated and up-scaled remain poorly understood. This study aims to contribute to addressing this challenge by co-developing an integrated assessment framework and employing it to understand how existing evaluations of NbS in the region can be improved. It focuses specifically on a set of nature-based solutions that have been employed for water treatment across six cities in Southeast Asia (two in each Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Vietnam), namely, floating wetlands, constructed wetlands and maturation ponds. The study also suggests specific methodologies for capturing a set of core indicators considered relevant for assessing the effectiveness and capturing the multi-faceted impacts of the examined NbS.     

The place of nature in conservation conflicts

Conservation conflicts are gaining importance in contemporary conservation scholarship such that conservation may have entered a conflict hype. We attempted to uncover and deconstruct the normative assumptions behind such studies by raising several questions: what are conservation conflicts, what justifies the attention they receive, do conservation-conflict studies limit wildlife conservation, is scientific knowledge stacked against wildlife in conservation conflicts, do conservation-conflict studies adopt a specific view of democracy, can laws be used to force conservation outcomes, why is flexibility needed in managing conservation conflicts, can conservation conflicts be managed by promoting tolerance, and who needs to compromise in conservation conflicts? We suggest that many of the intellectual premises in the field may defang conservation and prevent it from truly addressing the current conservation crisis as it accelerates. By framing conservation conflicts as conflicts between people about wildlife or nature, the field insidiously transfers guilt, whereby human activities are no longer blamed for causing species decline and extinctions but conservation is instead blamed for causing social conflicts. When the focus is on mitigating social conflicts without limiting in any powerful way human activities damaging to nature, conservation-conflict studies risk keeping conservation within the limits of human activities, instead of keeping human activities within the limits of nature. For conservation to successfully stop the biodiversity crisis, we suggest the alternative goal of recognizing nature's right to existence to maintenance of ecological functions and evolutionary processes. Nature being a rights bearer or legal person would imply its needs must be explicitly taken into account in conflict adjudication. If, even in conservation, nature's interests come second to human interests, it may be no surprise that conservation cannot succeed.     

“竞争申请制”:可持续发展政策试点与央地关系重构

可持续发展目标(SDGs)的提出,开启了人类可持续发展领域最宏大的政策实验,也为开展国际视野的比较公共政策研究提供了难得机遇。执行SDGs及国家可持续发展政策需要处理好中央政府与地方政府间关系,而政策试点是协调这一关系的重要政策工具。已有文献对经济政策试点做了较充分的研究,然而对旨在实现经济、社会与环境协调的可持续发展政策试点,现有研究尚缺乏成型理论。在复杂央地关系格局下,对于需持续投入成本且成果难以界定的可持续发展政策试点,其具有怎样的不同于经济政策试点的机制?此外,众多西方学者将美国作为政策试点研究的制度基础并视其为“民主实验室”。然而,政策试点在以中国为代表的不同体制国家中同样存在,并以多样的机制发挥作用。那么,不同国家体制内的可持续发展政策试点又有哪些异同?政策试点影响下中国既有的央地关系发生了怎样的重构?对此,本文基于最典型案例原则,选取中国与美国响应SDGs分别开展的政策试点进行比较研究。笔者识别了不同体制下试点机制的异同,指出中国基于“竞争申请制”开展的可持续发展政策试点强化了中央部委与地方政府间关系,形成了地方官员的可持续发展激励,保障了政策试点的实施。     

Who shapes local climate policy? Unpicking governance arrangements in English and German cities

A new framework for analysing subnational policymaking is applied to climate governance in the ‘twin towns’ of Newcastle upon Tyne and Gelsenkirchen. Low levels of resource interdependence between central and local government in England mean that Newcastle Council has to rely heavily on other horizontal actors to achieve its climate objectives. In contrast, Gelsenkirchen Council receives substantial support from higher tiers of government, which gives it greater control over policymaking within the locality. Greater independence between tiers of government can make it more difficult for subnational bodies to adopt the kind of ambitious policies that may be necessary to combat wicked and/or significant policy challenges such as climate change. Instead, interdependent ‘joint-decision’ systems, which facilitate mutual support across tiers of government, may be better equipped to ensure that subnational public bodies have the capacity to act appropriately.     

How does eliminating mercury from artisanal and small-scale gold mining lead to achieving sustainable development goals?

Artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM) is the principal anthropogenic activity that globally contributes to overloading our environment with mercury. Although the Minamata Convention, led by the United Nations, is a crucial instrument to eliminate its use progressively, novel approaches to accelerate this difficult transition are welcome. This article proposes a framework for policy-making or improvement, fostering the enforcement of mercury elimination through the lens of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), focusing on the excluded artisanal and small-scale gold miners and their dependents. We move forward with a literature review of the Artisanal and Small Mining topic, taking each SDG as a unit of analysis. Understanding the problem as a puzzle of four sets of pieces, namely: (1) social, (2) environmental, (3) economic, and (4) institutional, the paper offers potential opportunities for the decision-makers and practitioners to accelerate the substitution of this heavy metal and develop sustainable futures for the ASGM communities. We conclude by proposing a pragmatic framework that synthesizes the means, actions, and ends to accelerate a sustainable transition.     

Depoliticizing adaptation: a critical analysis of EU climate adaptation policy

The ways in which climate adaptation is understood in the European Union is examined via three key policy documents: the Strategy on adaptation and the Green and White Papers that preceded it. Drawing on Poststructuralist Discourse Theory, light is shed on the implicit values and assumptions that underpin this recent policy initiative. The findings demonstrate a tension between the declared ambition to act on adaptation and implicit suggestions that nothing really has to change, and the challenge can be addressed by market and technological innovations, and by mainstreaming adaptation into existing sectoral policies. The policy discourse effectively serves to depoliticize choices societies make in response to climate change, presenting adaptation as a non-political issue. Insight into European adaptation discourse enables deeper understanding of recent policy developments and opens up possible entry points for critique.     

A strategy for wildlife management in depopulating rural areas of Japan

Former ranges of wild animals have been reestablished in many developed countries. However, this reestablishment has led to increasing human–wildlife conflict in agroforest ecosystems. In Japan, human–wildlife conflict, such as crop raiding by and ecological impacts of wild ungulates and primates, is a serious problem in depopulated rural areas due to these animal range expansions and increased abundances. Japan's human population is predicted to decline by 24% by 2050, and approximately 20% of agricultural settlements will become completely depopulated. In this scenario, anthropogenic pressures on wildlife (e.g., hunting and habitat alteration) will continue to decrease and human–wildlife conflict will increase due to increasing wildlife recovery. Japan's local governments plan to slow range recovery, prevent species reestablishment, or remove recolonizing large mammals through lethal control. This strategy, however, is not cost-effective, and workforce shortages in depopulated communities make it infeasible. Moreover, the suppression of wildlife prevents the recovery of ecological functions and thus would degrade regional biodiversity. The declining pressure on wildlife that accompanies human depopulation will prevent the restoration of any past states of human–wildlife interaction. We suggest human-used areas in rural landscapes be aggregated in compact cities and that in transition zones between human settlements and depopulated lands that land-sharing approaches be applied. Concentrating management efforts in compact cities may effectively decrease human–wildlife conflict, rather than intensifying human pressures. Reforestation of depopulated lands may lead to recovery of wildlife habitats, their ecosystem functions, and regional biodiversity due to minimization of negative anthropogenic effects (land-sparing approach). Balancing resolution of human–wildlife conflict and ecological rewilding could become a new, challenging task for regional wildlife managers.     

Countering resistance to protected‐area extension

The establishment of protected areas is a critical strategy for conserving biodiversity. Key policy directives like the Aichi targets seek to expand protected areas to 17% of Earth's land surface, with calls by some conservation biologists for much more. However, in places such as the United States, Germany, and Australia, attempts to increase protected areas are meeting strong resistance from communities, industry groups, and governments. We examined case studies of such resistance in Victoria, Australia, Bavaria, Germany, and Florida, United States. We considered 4 ways to tackle this problem. First, broaden the case for protected areas beyond nature conservation to include economic, human health, and other benefits, and translate these into a persuasive business case for protected areas. Second, better communicate the conservation values of protected areas. This should include highlighting how many species, communities, and ecosystems have been conserved by protected areas and the counterfactual (i.e., what would have been lost without protected area establishment). Third, consider zoning of activities to ensure the maintenance of effective management. Finally, remind citizens to think about conservation when they vote, including holding politicians accountable for their environmental promises. Without tackling resistance to expanding the protected estate, it will be impossible to reach conservation targets, and this will undermine attempts to stem the global extinction crisis.     

When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research

Understanding human perspectives is critical in a range of conservation contexts, for example, in overcoming conflicts or developing projects that are acceptable to relevant stakeholders. The Q methodology is a unique semiquantitative technique used to explore human perspectives. It has been applied for decades in other disciplines and recently gained traction in conservation. This paper helps researchers assess when Q is useful for a given conservation question and what its use involves. To do so, we explained the steps necessary to conduct a Q study, from the research design to the interpretation of results. We provided recommendations to minimize biases in conducting a Q study, which can affect mostly when designing the study and collecting the data. We conducted a structured literature review of 52 studies to examine in what empirical conservation contexts Q has been used. Most studies were subnational or national cases, but some also address multinational or global questions. We found that Q has been applied to 4 broad types of conservation goals: addressing conflict, devising management alternatives, understanding policy acceptability, and critically reflecting on the values that implicitly influence research and practice. Through these applications, researchers found hidden views, understood opinions in depth and discovered points of consensus that facilitated unlocking difficult disagreements. The Q methodology has a clear procedure but is also flexible, allowing researchers explore long‐term views, or views about items other than statements, such as landscape images. We also found some inconsistencies in applying and, mainly, in reporting Q studies, whereby it was not possible to fully understand how the research was conducted or why some atypical research decisions had been taken in some studies. Accordingly, we suggest a reporting checklist.