Literature DB >> 25561673

Ensuring the success of IPBES: between interface, market place and parliament.

Katrin Vohland1, Tahani Nadim2.   

Abstract

After years of protracted negotiations, the Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was finally established in 2012. One year on and we have already witnessed two plenary sessions which have, so far, defined procedures for nominating members for observatory and decision-making panels as well as experts and knowledge holders for the compilation of reports. The sessions also determined the work programme for the next 4 years (2014-2018). According to its internally formulated criteria, the success of IPBES will be determined by how credible, relevant and legitimate its institution and operations are. More specifically, these criteria suggest that success is contingent on the transparency of the processes within IPBES, the autonomy and quality of scientific knowledge, and the early integration of different stakeholders and diverse knowledge and value systems. Currently, we see IPBES encompassing open and integrative approaches as well as providing a convenient trading floor for particulate and opaque agendas formulated elsewhere. In any case, without the backing of large and effective publics the policy-support function of IPBES will be limited. Local capacity building and supporting communities to actively participate in research projects dealing with biodiversity are essential for furthering a practical and emancipatory understanding of the relationship between political and economic decisions, the state and functioning of biodiversity and ecosystems, and current and future human well-being.
© 2015 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IPBES; biodiversity; ecosystem service; global governance; option value

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25561673      PMCID: PMC4290426          DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8436            Impact factor:   6.237


  5 in total

1.  Keep it complex.

Authors:  Andy Stirling
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Science-policy interface: beyond assessments.

Authors:  Mike Hulme; Martin Mahony; Silke Beck; Christoph Görg; Bernd Hansjürgens; Jennifer Hauck; Carsten Nesshöver; Axel Paulsch; Marie Vandewalle; Heidi Wittmer; Stefan Böschen; Peter Bridgewater; Mariteuw Chimère Diaw; Pierre Fabre; Aurelia Figueroa; Kong Luen Heong; Horst Korn; Rik Leemans; Eva Lövbrand; Mohd Norowi Hamid; Chad Monfreda; Roger Pielke; Josef Settele; Marten Winter; Alice B M Vadrot; Sybille van den Hove; Jeroen P van der Sluijs
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Conservation policy: Listen to the voices of experience.

Authors:  Esther Turnhout; Bob Bloomfield; Mike Hulme; Johannes Vogel; Brian Wynne
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-08-23       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  IPBES: biodiversity panel should play by rules.

Authors:  Lars Opgenoorth; Stefan Hotes; Harold Mooney
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 5.  Knowledge systems for sustainable development.

Authors:  David W Cash; William C Clark; Frank Alcock; Nancy M Dickson; Noelle Eckley; David H Guston; Jill Jäger; Ronald B Mitchell
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-05-30       Impact factor: 12.779

  5 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Biodiversity in the Anthropocene: prospects and policy.

Authors:  Nathalie Seddon; Georgina M Mace; Shahid Naeem; Joseph A Tobias; Alex L Pigot; Rachel Cavanagh; David Mouillot; James Vause; Matt Walpole
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 5.349

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.