首页> 外文OA文献 >Emerging ecosystem services governance issues in the Belgium Ecosystem Services Community of Practice.
【2h】

Emerging ecosystem services governance issues in the Belgium Ecosystem Services Community of Practice.

机译:比利时生态系统服务实践社区中新出现的生态系统服务治理问题。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In this paper we will focus on how governance issues are being dealt with in the BElgium Ecosystem Services (BEES) Community of Practice and on some Belgian Ecosystem Services (ES) research projects aimed at policy or practice support. As ES governance is still mainly an aspect of policy or practice oriented research, we will specifically focus on method and methodological decision making. The system or systems we aim to govern are complex. But also the governance processes are inherently complex. How do we take this complexity into account in decision support? Do we acknowledge complexity in our approach or do we drastically simplify and reduce it to relatively simple proportions? The methodological approach of decision support methods is open for debate as neither crystal clear nor undisputed yardsticks for best practices exist. On an ambition level, BEES members generally seem to prefer transdisciplinary as well as inclusive valuation approaches, though not exclusively in all circumstances. In Belgium research projects, similar to the developments within BEES, from a research practice dominated by scientists, gradually research processes are opening up to transdisciplinary collaboration. Simultaneously these processes gradually shift from mainly top down approaches to bottom up approaches or hybrid combinations of both entry points. A closer and more nuanced view shows that real transdisciplinary collaboration in Belgian ES research still is only at the beginning. Partly this can be explained by the fact that inter- and transdisciplinary approaches are perhaps more realistic, but also have to deal with more social complexity. New balances have to be found between sophistication and pragmatics. Also the role of science can become more ambiguous: the closer to stakeholders, the more an independent role can be questioned. Regarding ES valuation methods, in general a trend towards more inclusive valuation is clearly noticeable in Belgian ES research, inclusive in the sense of a diversity of ES valuation aspects to be taken into account, diverse types of expression of value(s), a combination of quantifiable and qualitative information, and a diversity of valuators by way of more bottom-up approaches. Still, there are quite some differences between projects and challenges for integration.
机译:在本文中,我们将重点关注比利时生态系统服务(BEES)实践社区中如何处理治理问题,以及一些旨在为政策或实践提供支持的比利时生态系统服务(ES)研究项目。由于ES治理仍主要是面向政策或实践研究的一个方面,因此我们将特别关注方法和方法学决策。我们要治理的一个或多个系统很复杂。但是治理流程本质上也是复杂的。我们如何在决策支持中考虑这种复杂性?我们是否承认方法的复杂性,还是将其大大简化并减少到相对简单的比例?决策支持方法的方法论方法尚待商debate,因为既没有清晰明了的标准,也没有毫无争议的最佳实践标准。从雄心壮志的角度来看,BEES成员通常似乎更喜欢跨学科以及包容性的估值方法,尽管并非在所有情况下都独有。在比利时,与BEES内部的发展类似的研究项目,是由科学家主导的研究实践而来的,逐渐向跨学科合作开放了研究过程。同时,这些过程逐渐从主要的自上而下的方法过渡到自下而上的方法或两个入口点的混合组合。更加细致入微的观点表明,比利时ES研究中真正的跨学科合作仍只是开始。部分原因可以由以下事实解释:跨学科和跨学科的方法也许更现实,但还必须处理更多的社会复杂性。必须在复杂性和实用性之间找到新的平衡。科学的作用也可能变得更加模糊:与利益相关者越近,人们对独立作用的质疑就越多。关于ES估值方法,通常在比利时ES研究中,包容性估值的趋势很明显,这包括要考虑的ES估值方面的多样性,价值表达的多种类型,组合可量化和定性的信息,以及采用更多的自下而上的方法来评估者的多样性。尽管如此,项目与集成挑战之间还是存在一些差异。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号