Does information on the interdependence of climate adaptation measures stimulate collaboration? A case study analysis

Vos, C.C.; Wal, M.M. van der; Opdam, P.F.M.; Coninx, I.; Dewulf, Art; Steingröver, E.G.; Stremke, S.

doi:10.1007/s10113-018-1306-x

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More generally, spatial and temporal scales of AS trade-offs and co-benefits and associated co-production mechanisms need to be considered along pathways. Among these, the integration of landscape processes is crucial as agency and governance for adaptation develop within lived landscapes [90]. Several of the co-production mechanisms we have highlighted directly concern landscape processes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change

Lavorel

Locatelli

Colloff

et al. 2020

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystems can sustain social adaptation to environmental change by protecting people from climate change effects and providing options for sustaining material and non-material benefits as ecological structure and functions transform. Along adaptation pathways, people navigate the trade-offs between different ecosystem contributions to adaptation, or adaptation services (AS), and can enhance their synergies and co-benefits as environmental change unfolds. Understanding trade-offs and co-benefits of AS is therefore essential to support social adaptation and requires analysing how people co-produce AS. We analysed co-production along the three steps of the ecosystem cascade: (i) ecosystem management; (ii) mobilization; and (iii) appropriation, social access and appreciation. Using five exemplary case studies across socio-ecosystems and continents, we show how five broad mechanisms already active for current ecosystem services can enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs between AS: (1) traditional and multi-functional land/sea management targeting ecological resilience; (2) pro-active management for ecosystem transformation; (3) co-production of novel services in landscapes without compromising other services; (4) collective governance of all co-production steps; and (5) feedbacks from appropriation, appreciation of and social access to main AS. We conclude that knowledge and recognition of co-production mechanisms will enable pro-active management and governance for collective adaptation to ecosystem transformation. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions’.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change

Lavorel

Locatelli

Colloff

et al. 2020

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples of topics investigated are the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices in human health (Burgess et al 2016), the homebuyer's willingness to purchase a dwelling with a sustainability certification (Judge et al 2019), and consumer intentions to buy food in short food-supply chains (Giampietri et al 2018). In the landscape ecology domain, Opdam and Steingröver (2018) applied the theory to explore how companies could be engaged in landscape-inclusive solutions to sustainability.…”

Section: Constructing the Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Informing actors about how they depend on each other for implementing landscape improvements stimulates their willingness to collaborate (Opdam et al 2016). In a collaborative workshop about adapting a landscape to Vos et al (2018) provided information about how landscape adaptation measures lead to shared values. The increased level of collaboration made people change their mind and adopt a positive intention to take measures.…”

Section: Constructing the Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Navigating the space between landscape science and collective action for sustainability: identifying key factors in information processing

Opdam

2020

Landscape Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Transitions to more sustainable landscapes require that actors change their thinking about using the landscape and act collectively to implement a shared view on the future. If landscape ecologists want their knowledge to contribute to such transitions, the information they provide need to stimulate collective decisions and action. Objective To identify key factors that determine how scientific information about landscape functioning and benefits influences actors in organizing collective action for landscape sustainability. Method I combine a theory of knowledge management with a theory of behavioural change to construct a framework of 4 phases of interpretation and implementation of landscape information. Results The 4 phases are: (1) actors accept the information as significant, (2) actors assess the saliency of the information for their case, (3) the information stimulates social network building and collective action, and (4) the information enforces the capacity to organize collaborative change. The extent to which these phases effectively develop in the interaction between scientists and practitioners depends on characteristics of the information, but to a great deal also on the process of interaction and the roles scientist play. I discuss how landscape ecologists can intervene in these phases, by providing the right information and by facilitating an interactive process of knowledge generation. Conclusions Whether landscape information is eventually used in organizing the landscape change depends on characteristics of the information and the governance process in which the information is brought in. Knowledge from social sciences is indispensable for landscape ecology with impact.

show abstract

“…A study by Vos et al (2018) in de Baaksche Beek area, The Netherlands, offers some insight in how information on interdependencies between stakeholders with contrasting interests resulted in collaboration. A stakeholder network consisting of farmers, water managers and nature managers collectively decided about measures to adapt a mixed agricultural landscape (including nature areas and a stream valley) in view of expected climate-related changes in the water system.…”

Section: Fostering Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information about landscape services affects social network interactions in collaborative landscape adaptation

Opdam

2019

Socio Ecol Pract Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In bridging the gap between environmental science and practice, most attention has been given to the transmission of information from science to practice, and to forms of knowledge coproduction. Much less is known about the impact that environmental knowledge and tools have on social processes within groups of actors engaged in collaborative landscape adaptation. In this essay, I select socio-ecological practice cases from my own experience to reflect on the role the concept of landscape services may have played to influence network building, searching for collaborative solutions and making governance agreements. Four types of influence are identified: (1) Applying the concept of landscape services creates a level playing field for governments, business and citizens which facilitated social network building. (2) When groups of actors were informed about multiple landscape benefits generated by green infrastructure, they recognized that if they seek to increase those benefits, they are mutually interdependent, which motivated them to cooperate. (3) Because landscape services thinking implicates demanding and supplying roles, the concept facilitated the formulation of governance agreements. (4) Collaboratively produced landscape maps indicating where the green infrastructure can best be extended fostered joint action. The essay concludes with recommendations for further research.

show abstract

Does information on the interdependence of climate adaptation measures stimulate collaboration? A case study analysis

Cited by 6 publications

References 37 publications

Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change

Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change

Navigating the space between landscape science and collective action for sustainability: identifying key factors in information processing

Information about landscape services affects social network interactions in collaborative landscape adaptation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About