138
engagement of international and local research institutions, while present across the
region, can be enhanced by stakeholder coalitions that reach out to engage additional actors and continue to encourage inclusive approaches.
Research on governance modes to address the interlinked drivers of a loss of BES
increasingly calls for governance by “imagination,” or to anticipate what will be
needed in an uncertain future shaped by as yet undetermined impacts of climate
change and biodiversity loss (Burch et al. 2019). These new states of sustainable use
and management need to be resilient states that anticipate and imagine ecosystem
service needs in the future as well as the present and that account for potential climate
change impacts. In a recent review, Chiu et al. (2018) found that future resilience
strategies would get the best return from those solutions that demonstrate co-benefits,
or in the case of SEPLS, those that meet the revitalization, adaptation and innovative
production and livelihood needs of local residents, while conserving and restoring
landscapes for climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation benefits.
Societal actors demonstrate preferences for solution types to reversing the loss of
BES in SEPLS while embracing all solution types across ecosystems. In current
management practices in mosaic SEPLS, stakeholders rely on different tool-kits for
managing BES on a local scale to achieve the same international targets such as the
Aichi Biodiversity Targets or Sustainable Development Goals depending on the
social-ecological system, stakeholder coalitions, and social-cultural context. This
suggests that sustainable use and management to conserve and restore BES on multiple scales can be achieved through varying management strategies.
Experiences in the IPSI network also demonstrate that investments in a spectrum
of solution types including cognitive, economic, social and cultural, and technological
are needed to meet the challenges of new and effective sustainable use and management approaches. The type of conservation and restoration solutions appropriate in
different social-ecological contexts may depend on the composition of stakeholder
coalitions, planning systems at social and ecological scales, and the mosaic ecosystem character of SEPLS.
We found overall that institutional and governance solution types are the most
frequent at local scales and at all scales combined. This is a good start to developing
the coordinated responses at multiple scales that can consider the continuing adaptation and management of ecosystem services in the future (MA 2005), and this can
be achieved with the harmonization of solutions in institutions and governance
together with solutions in all solution types. Mixes of different solution types with
the intention to achieve synergies among biodiversity and production benefits can
help address the feedbacks across scales, and among land uses and users, in complex social-ecological systems such as SEPLS.
Further, many of the technological solutions in IPSI member experiences have
the potential for multiple benefits, such as renewable energy technologies or ecological farming practices. If these are intentionally combined for better environmental decision-making with knowledge-based solutions, and with institutional and
social solutions that can provide supportive policy, management strategies and education and awareness, this will help ensure the realization of these co-benefits in
future sustainable use and management of SEPLS.
R. Kozar et al.
engagement of international and local research institutions, while present across the
region, can be enhanced by stakeholder coalitions that reach out to engage additional actors and continue to encourage inclusive approaches.
Research on governance modes to address the interlinked drivers of a loss of BES
increasingly calls for governance by “imagination,” or to anticipate what will be
needed in an uncertain future shaped by as yet undetermined impacts of climate
change and biodiversity loss (Burch et al. 2019). These new states of sustainable use
and management need to be resilient states that anticipate and imagine ecosystem
service needs in the future as well as the present and that account for potential climate
change impacts. In a recent review, Chiu et al. (2018) found that future resilience
strategies would get the best return from those solutions that demonstrate co-benefits,
or in the case of SEPLS, those that meet the revitalization, adaptation and innovative
production and livelihood needs of local residents, while conserving and restoring
landscapes for climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation benefits.
Societal actors demonstrate preferences for solution types to reversing the loss of
BES in SEPLS while embracing all solution types across ecosystems. In current
management practices in mosaic SEPLS, stakeholders rely on different tool-kits for
managing BES on a local scale to achieve the same international targets such as the
Aichi Biodiversity Targets or Sustainable Development Goals depending on the
social-ecological system, stakeholder coalitions, and social-cultural context. This
suggests that sustainable use and management to conserve and restore BES on multiple scales can be achieved through varying management strategies.
Experiences in the IPSI network also demonstrate that investments in a spectrum
of solution types including cognitive, economic, social and cultural, and technological
are needed to meet the challenges of new and effective sustainable use and management approaches. The type of conservation and restoration solutions appropriate in
different social-ecological contexts may depend on the composition of stakeholder
coalitions, planning systems at social and ecological scales, and the mosaic ecosystem character of SEPLS.
We found overall that institutional and governance solution types are the most
frequent at local scales and at all scales combined. This is a good start to developing
the coordinated responses at multiple scales that can consider the continuing adaptation and management of ecosystem services in the future (MA 2005), and this can
be achieved with the harmonization of solutions in institutions and governance
together with solutions in all solution types. Mixes of different solution types with
the intention to achieve synergies among biodiversity and production benefits can
help address the feedbacks across scales, and among land uses and users, in complex social-ecological systems such as SEPLS.
Further, many of the technological solutions in IPSI member experiences have
the potential for multiple benefits, such as renewable energy technologies or ecological farming practices. If these are intentionally combined for better environmental decision-making with knowledge-based solutions, and with institutional and
social solutions that can provide supportive policy, management strategies and education and awareness, this will help ensure the realization of these co-benefits in
future sustainable use and management of SEPLS.
R. Kozar et al.