Targeting the maintenance of functional ecosystems that provide the significant basis for human well‐being is an integral part of an ecosystem‐based sustainable development. Underlying causes of ecosystem degradation such as global climate change and ever‐growing human demands that rapidly shift socioeconomic and political baselines are often unmanageable at a local scale and require a new approach to planning and action in ecosystem management. The framework conditions that challenge sustainable development are shaped by increasing Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity (VUCA concept). Using the MARISCO method (adaptive management of vulnerability and risks at conservation sites), we analyzed 22 conservation sites, covering 26 protected areas and six administrative areas on four different continents and involving 524 participants. VUCA conditions were present across cultures and biomes, yet the responses in planning and management varied among conservation sites. The findings of both the qualitative and quantitative analyses confirm that participants understand how far human well‐being heavily depends on the functionality of ecosystems that were seen to suffer from a wide range of stresses and threats of varying criticality. Worldwide, local stakeholders and experts rated impacts of global climate change as most critical. In attempts to achieve ecosystem‐based sustainable development, most management teams strive for more risk‐robust and adaptive strategies by advocating for active risk management. A common factor identified among all case studies was the need for cooperative management between smaller conservation sites in order to address large‐scale challenges.

Growing levels of uncertainty and vulnerability generated by land use conversion and climate change set demands on local communities and national institutions to build synergies between the diverse array of knowledge systems in order to provide policy makers and practitioners with the best available information to decide what urgent actions must be taken. Science policy arenas and agreements such as the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) recognize the importance of different types of knowledge and the need for broad stakeholder involvement, yet the use of indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in environmental decision-making processes is still underdeveloped. This study involved working with local stakeholders, using the MARISCO method (adaptive MAnagement of vulnerability and RISks at COnservation sites) to carry out a systematic situation analysis of the existing socioenvironmental conditions. The assessments were conducted in the Kavango East Region in northern Namibia with the participation of inhabitants of the Khaudum North Complex, a protected area network covering wooded savannahs belonging to the Northern Kalahari sandveld. General outcomes of the assessments and evaluations made by the local stakeholders concerning the most critical drivers of degradation of the ecosystems appeared to support existing scientific knowledge of the study area, demonstrating that community-based assessments can provide valuable information about socioecological systems where scientific data are scarce. The findings of this study also highlight the importance of power dynamics for the implementation of participatory processes and the interpretation of their outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

The paper presents a systemic and participatory assessment approach and scrutinizes how methodological changes necessitated during the Covid-19 pandemic implicated the process and its outcomes. The approach was applied in rural Tajikistan to evaluate changes effected by a development project that promoted the enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services in agrarian landscapes. The central building block of the assessment consisted of participatory workshops in 2018 and 2020 with farmers and other stakeholders to develop a systemic knowledge map and to evaluate the promoted strategies based on local expertise. The methodological basis was MARISCO (adaptive MAnagement of vulnerability and RISk at COnservation sites), a holistic and participatory approach to ecosystem-based assessment and management that requires well-trained facilitators. While the activities in 2018 could be implemented as planned, major changes in the work plan were necessary in 2020 due to severe travel restrictions and social distancing rules. Conducting virtual workshops was not possible, as it would have excluded key stakeholders from the process. Instead of conducting a comprehensive assessment workshop guided by two German MARISCO facilitators as originally planned, a series of short and small workshops could be realized. These workshops were facilitated by Tajik scientists after receiving virtual training from their German colleagues. Although it was possible to bring the assessment to a satisfactory conclusion, the methodological changes revealed significant drawbacks. Radical simplifications of the methods were necessary that led to reduced depth of the assessment and missed learning opportunities for participants. Limited experience in workshop guidance by the new facilitators posed challenges to the participatory process and the quality of its outcomes. While the adapted method created training effects that would otherwise have been missed, it also put additional pressure on the capacities of local partners. Our experience during the pandemic offers valuable lessons learned for future applications of systemic-participatory approaches. Whereas, a complete shift to remote applications is problematic, there is a need to put greater emphasis on capacitating local partners. Methodological trade-offs are necessary for partially remote working processes, but principles of participation and systemic thinking should not be compromised.