Plausible (albeit dire) scenarios for the future in Southeast Asia include increasing conflict over land and water resources and degradation of hydro logical, ecological, and other environmental services, which could undermine the stability of national economies, urban centres, and national food security. But do we really know enough about these complex relationships to build a consensus for action How big are the effects of land use change (for better or worse) on stability of production systems at the local, regional,and national level How well do these forest-derived land uses substitute for natural forests from the perspective of local people and national objectives What scientific evidence is available to answer these questions Are scientists even asking the right questions
Tag: biodiversity
Public Sensitization Meeting: Witu Primary School, July 22, 2015. Theme: Improving Livelihoods through Biodiversity Management
This report covers public event organized by ICRAF in collaboration with partners to sensitize the stakeholders including communities on biodiversity conservation for improved livelihoods. The event attracted over 100 invited participants including community members from Witu and Aweer areas. Key speakers during the event included Lamu County Commissioner representative, Lamu County minister for Land s, Divisional Officer-Witu, ICRAF project staff and area women representative. Two schools; one secondary and one Primary performed during the event, the schools were selected as winners of the event theme competition organized before the public event. Local Traditional dancers also performed during the event. The main achievement of the event was the positive significant public response participation and kind reception from the local communities, assurance of support from the Lamu county government and successful Biodiversity related exhibitions by invited partners and community groups.
The science–policy interface for safeguarding key biodiversity areas
Bridging the divide between pure and practical science is an age-old challenge in all disciplines, but in biodiversity conservation at least, the prospect of better integration between science, policy and practice is an increasingly realistic one. On 21 December 2010, the United Nations 65th General Assembly agreed to establish an Intergovern-mental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services(IPBES), to tighten the interface between academia and application in the eld of nature conservation (Mooney& Mace, 2009; seehttp://www.ipbes.net). While the mechanisms by which IPBES operates have yet to be nalized,and while vigilance will be essential to ensure that the platform builds from existing initiatives rather than duplicating efforts and spreading scarce resources even more thinly, the potential for guiding science towards tackling the most pressing questions while infusing cutting-edge research into policy and practice is invigorating.In this issue, Beresford et al . (2010) provide a powerful example of the value of such an interface between science,policy and practice. On the one hand, their analysis of the coverage of threatened African bird distributions by protected areas advances pure biodiversity science in a number of important ways. On the other, it stands to inform a number of conservation applications in Africa and beyond.Here, we highlight four of the most important of these directions and implications
Biodiversity and agricultural sustainagility: from assessment to adaptive management
Rapid changes in land use, food systems, and livelihoods require socialecological systems that keep multiple options open and prepare for future unpredictability. Sustainagility refers to the properties and assets of a system that sustain the ability (agility) of agents to adapt andmeet their needs in newways. In contrast, sustainability tends to invoke persistence along current trajectories, and the resilience to return to current baselines. With three examples, the use and conservation of agrobiodiversity is explored along temporal, spatial, and human institutional scales for its role in sustainagility: first, farmers seed systems; second, complex pollination systems; and third, wildlife conservation in agricultural areas with high poverty. Incentives are necessary if agrobiodiversity is to provide benefits to future generations.
China shakes the world – and then what?
As conservation biologists from around the globe travel to Beijing for the 2009 annual meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) hosted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, they bring with them basic knowledge about biodiversity and environmental issues in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). China is a megadiversity country, harboring about 12% of the flowering plants, 10% of mammals, and 14% of birds living on Earth. The PRC is one of the few countries that contain two global biodiversity hotspots; many species in these hotspots and throughout the country are Chinese endemics. China is also the homeland for rice and soybeans, agricultural staples on which billions of humans depend. Since 1956 the central government has acted on behalf of China’s natural ecosystems, designating over 2500 protected areas across 15% of the country’s land. In comparison with the United States, China has reserved more lands in considerably less time.
Toward an empirical analysis of justice in ecosystem governance
The 2010 Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity and recent changes in the policies of major international conservation organizations highlight current interest in revisiting the moral case for conservation. Concerns with equity and human rights challenge well-established notions of justice centered on human responsibility toward nature, the common good or the rights of future generations. This review introduces an empirical approach to the analysis of justice and shows how conservation scientists can apply it to ecosystem services-based governance (or in short, ecosystem governance). It identifies dominant notions of justice and points out their compatibility with utilitarian theories of justice. It then discusses the limited appropriateness of these notions in many contexts in which conservation takes place in the Global South and explores how technical components of ecosystem governance influence the realization of the notions in practice. The review highlights the need for conservation scientists and managers to analyze the justice of ecosystem governance in addition to their effectiveness and efficiency. Justice offers a more encompassing perspective than equity for the empirical analysis of conservation governance.
Agroforestry is a form sustainable forest management: lessons from Southeast Asia
Agroforestry as land use based on planted trees, provides productive and protective(biological diversity, healthy ecosystems, protection of soil and water resources,terrestrial carbon storage) forest functions that societies care about in the debate onsustainable forest management. Yet, the trees planted in agroforestry systems areexcluded in formal definitions and statistics of ‘forestry plantations’ and overlooked inthe legal and institutional framework for sustainable forest management. A paradigmshift is needed in the forestry sector and public debate to redress this oversight. Weexamine five issues that hinder a regreening revolution based on farmer tree planting tocontribute to sustainable forest management. First, issues of terminology for forests,plantations and reforestation are linked to land tenure and land use restrictions. Second,access to high quality planting material of proven suitability remains a challenge,especially at the start of a farmer-tree-planting phase of a landscape. Third,management skill and information often constrain production for high market values.Fourth, overregulation often restricts access to markets for farmer grown timber andtree products, partly due to rules intended to curb illegal logging from natural forests orgovernment plantations. Fifth, there is a lack of reward mechanisms for environmentalservices provided by agroforestry. Current relationships between agroforestry andplantation forestry are perceived to be complementary, neutral or competitive,depending on the ability of (inter)national policy frameworks to provide a level playingfield for the provision to society at large of productive and protective forest functions.In conditions where large-scale plantations operate with substantial governmentsubsidies (direct or indirect, partly justified by environmental service functions), incontrast to non-existent or minimal subsidies for agroforestry, the potential to producewood and simultaneously provide for many forest benefits and ecological services withagroforestry is placed at a disadvantage, to the detriment of society at large
Agroforestry supports ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: trees on farms protect waterways, lessen the impact of drought and increase biodiversity
Trees protect waterways from erosion and lessen the impact of floods and droughts. Trees help water soak into the soil around them. This prevents runoff, soil erosion and flood damage, leading to better aquatic habitats and water quality. Tree roots also filter contaminants and pollutants and their leaves trap windblown dust, keeping them out of waterways. Trees can be planted on sloping land to halt landslides and protect waterways from silt.
Is China’s unparalleled and understudied bee diversity at risk?
China is one of the most significant providers of pollination ecosystem services globally. In addition to having unparalleled bee diversity, China has more than eight million managed bee colonies, and it is the world’s major honey producer. Yet, pollinators in China, especially bumble bees (Bombus spp.) and honey bees (Apis spp.), are likely at risk. Massive pollinator declines in various countries have rightly grabbed the attention of beekeepers, scientists, policymakers, and the general public, but research has almost exclusively focused on the U.S. and Europe, while countries with significantly higher pollination resources (such as China) have received far less attention. This perspective piece questions and highlights the risks to wild and managed pollinators in China and critical research gaps. We show that there may be a “pollination gap” in China for crops dependent on insect pollination and we examine the potential causes. Specifically, we assess the risks associated with land-use intensification, pesticide poisoning, climate change, invasive species, and other factors affecting the survival of bee pollinators in Asia. If true, the effects of declining pollinator populations in China would be felt globally, and with so much at stake, this problem merits careful consideration in the development of agriculture, economic, and conservation policies.