326
C. Fürst
A highly relevant integrative research area will thus be to focus less on agricultural adaptation strategies alone, but on the water-energy-food-biodiversity nexus
(Fürst et al. 2017; Stoy et al. 2018; Venghaus and Hake 2018). The nexus
approach as suggested, for instance, in the Future Earth initiative Food-Energy
and Water (https://futureearth.org/networks/knowledge-action-networks/water-ene
rgy-food-nexus) delivers an integrative concept similar to the synergy-trade-off
considerations in social-ecological systems, sustainability and ecosystem services
assessments (e.g. Karabulut et al. 2018; Nhamo et al. 2019). Research in the sectors
of water management, efficient energy production and accessibility, food systems and
biodiversity is so far often highly segregated and solutions to overcome scarcity or
losses in quality are missing to be coherent with each other sector (Fader et al. 2018)
since causal interactions between these sectors are often not directly visible. The
most recent calls for scoping as suggested by IPBES therefore enhance the systemoverarching perspective and will trigger research that transitions from inter- and
transdisciplinary approaches focussing on a specific topic or question to connecting
similar disciplines and actor types across sectors regarding a multitude of questions.
Part of these across-sector research demands will be the consideration of societal
transformations concerning their capacities to contribute to a sustainable development and come up with related social and systemic innovations. Societal transformations are known to be key processes that impact land use systems in terms of their
performance in providing a multitude of services and resources and equitable access
to them (Ehrensperger et al. 2019; Long and Qu 2018) Expressions of social transformations in their land use context can range from changes in community living styles
(e.g. from hunting to herding, Bergman et al. 2013), ecosystem management practices
(Olsson et al. 2004), to changes from land use to land development rights (Zhu 2004).
Land use planning as an integrative discipline needs to take into account such transformations concerning the prioritization of areas in regional spatial and urban planning
for delivering the requested amounts of food, clean water, recreational areas and green
infrastructure, areas for protecting settlements against CC driven extreme events and
other demands. These can change dramatically along socio-cultural-economic transformations through rural–urban migration and informal settlements or changed diets
and living styles (Bardsley and Hugo 2010; Lerner and Eakin 2011).
17.4 Challenges in Research Practice
An important challenge in land use science is an equal enrolment of social and natural
sciences (Müller and Munroe 2014) and the development of an original set of interand transdisciplinary research methods (Rounsevell et al. 2012). Current research
attempts are often either focussed on one of the disciplinary fields (natural/social
sciences) and consider the other instead of coming to a fully integrative approach
(Zscheischler and Rogga 2015). Reasons for this might consist in funding strategies
that are in many countries worldwide still set up from a highly disciplinary point of
C. Fürst
A highly relevant integrative research area will thus be to focus less on agricultural adaptation strategies alone, but on the water-energy-food-biodiversity nexus
(Fürst et al. 2017; Stoy et al. 2018; Venghaus and Hake 2018). The nexus
approach as suggested, for instance, in the Future Earth initiative Food-Energy
and Water (https://futureearth.org/networks/knowledge-action-networks/water-ene
rgy-food-nexus) delivers an integrative concept similar to the synergy-trade-off
considerations in social-ecological systems, sustainability and ecosystem services
assessments (e.g. Karabulut et al. 2018; Nhamo et al. 2019). Research in the sectors
of water management, efficient energy production and accessibility, food systems and
biodiversity is so far often highly segregated and solutions to overcome scarcity or
losses in quality are missing to be coherent with each other sector (Fader et al. 2018)
since causal interactions between these sectors are often not directly visible. The
most recent calls for scoping as suggested by IPBES therefore enhance the systemoverarching perspective and will trigger research that transitions from inter- and
transdisciplinary approaches focussing on a specific topic or question to connecting
similar disciplines and actor types across sectors regarding a multitude of questions.
Part of these across-sector research demands will be the consideration of societal
transformations concerning their capacities to contribute to a sustainable development and come up with related social and systemic innovations. Societal transformations are known to be key processes that impact land use systems in terms of their
performance in providing a multitude of services and resources and equitable access
to them (Ehrensperger et al. 2019; Long and Qu 2018) Expressions of social transformations in their land use context can range from changes in community living styles
(e.g. from hunting to herding, Bergman et al. 2013), ecosystem management practices
(Olsson et al. 2004), to changes from land use to land development rights (Zhu 2004).
Land use planning as an integrative discipline needs to take into account such transformations concerning the prioritization of areas in regional spatial and urban planning
for delivering the requested amounts of food, clean water, recreational areas and green
infrastructure, areas for protecting settlements against CC driven extreme events and
other demands. These can change dramatically along socio-cultural-economic transformations through rural–urban migration and informal settlements or changed diets
and living styles (Bardsley and Hugo 2010; Lerner and Eakin 2011).
17.4 Challenges in Research Practice
An important challenge in land use science is an equal enrolment of social and natural
sciences (Müller and Munroe 2014) and the development of an original set of interand transdisciplinary research methods (Rounsevell et al. 2012). Current research
attempts are often either focussed on one of the disciplinary fields (natural/social
sciences) and consider the other instead of coming to a fully integrative approach
(Zscheischler and Rogga 2015). Reasons for this might consist in funding strategies
that are in many countries worldwide still set up from a highly disciplinary point of