Effectively evaluating the governance of natural resources is a precondition for its improvement in contexts of change. In order to do so, one can use methods for evaluating (1) the outcome of a governance process or (2) the governance process itself. Outcome-oriented and process-oriented approaches have different strengths and weaknesses. This paper explores the challenges associated with both options when applied to European biodiversity and water governance -namely the implementation of the Habitats Directive (Natura 2000 network) and the Water Framework Directive.Current evaluation practice, concerned with governance processes for EU policy implementation, focuses mainly on outcomes. In this paper, we examine the methodology involved and argue that, for three reasons, it makes sense to combine the two approaches: a normative reason, relating to standards of good governance; a substantive reason, relating to the complexity of the system to be governed; and a third, instrumental, reason relating to the task of policy evaluation and implementation itself. Combining outcome-and process-oriented evaluation of governance processes is not without caveats, but it appears a promising approach in the light of current problems in European governance of natural resources.

No abstract

Cite this article: Jacobs S et al. (2020). Use your power for good: plural valuation of naturethe Oaxaca statement. Global Sustainability 3, e8, 1-7. https://doi. Non-technical abstractDecisions on the use of nature reflect the values and rights of individuals, communities and society at large. The values of nature are expressed through cultural norms, rules and legislation, and they can be elicited using a wide range of tools, including those of economics. None of the approaches to elicit peoples' values are neutral. Unequal power relations influence valuation and decision-making and are at the core of most environmental conflicts. As actors in sustainability thinking, environmental scientists and practitioners are becoming more aware of their own posture, normative stance, responsibility and relative power in society. Based on a transdisciplinary workshop, our perspective paper provides a normative basis for this new community of scientists and practitioners engaged in the plural valuation of nature. Technical abstractDuring a workshop held in Oaxaca, Mexico, a shared vision, mission and strategies to foster a more plural valuation of nature were developed. The participants represent a wide range of backgrounds and are active in science, policy and practitioner networks and activities.https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.

No abstract

No abstract