IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v132y2023ics0264837723002831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework for participatory scenario planning to guide transitions towards sustainability in mountain social-ecological systems: A case study from the Colombian Andes

Author

Listed:
  • Rodríguez, Tatiana
  • Reu, Björn
  • Bolívar-Santamaría, Sergio
  • Cortés-Aguilar, Alexandra
  • Buendía, Corina

Abstract

Pronounced environmental gradients of tropical mountains result in interconnected social-ecological systems of great cultural and biological diversity and high provision of essential ecosystem services. This intrinsic diversity of mountain social-ecological systems (MtSES) entails great complexity which, coupled with remoteness, vulnerability, and lack of fine-scale data, hampers the adequate planning of transitions towards sustainability and affects the livelihoods of their inhabitants. Based on our experience in a tropical MtSES, here we propose a framework for participatory scenario planning (PSP) that supports local stakeholders to create plausible development pathways while harmonizing top-down planning instruments and securing the provision of ecosystem services (ES). Our framework comprises: (1) screening the study area to understand historical land cover changes and development pathways based on current planning instruments and local knowledge, (2) gathering future visions from MtSES inhabitants based on their wishes, perceived drivers of change, and key ecosystems services, (3) creating a land-cover map using satellite imagery, (4) establishing a baseline with on-field data collection, (5) writing narratives that harmonize those visions with planning instruments and translating them into spatially explicit future scenarios, (6) estimating ecosystems services in each scenario, and (7) refining future scenario narratives by facilitating a dialog where farmers, researchers, and stakeholders discuss contrasting scenario results and their perceived potential impacts. Our PSP framework raises awareness among local stakeholders about land cover changes and their impacts, while generating fine-scale data that is usually lacking for MtSES. Both aspects are important for updating planning instruments and policies in a participatory way taking into account the complexity of each particular MtSES as well as people's perceptions about the future. Our study adds to the existing literature on PSP as it provides a case study in a Andean tropical MtSES. Since each MtSES is unique, we hope this practical example can inspire planning policy schemes to include bottom-up approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodríguez, Tatiana & Reu, Björn & Bolívar-Santamaría, Sergio & Cortés-Aguilar, Alexandra & Buendía, Corina, 2023. "A framework for participatory scenario planning to guide transitions towards sustainability in mountain social-ecological systems: A case study from the Colombian Andes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002831
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723002831
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106817?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nina Hagemann & Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Nadine Pannicke & Jennifer Hauck, 2016. "Possible Futures towards a Wood-Based Bioeconomy: A Scenario Analysis for Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Griewald, Yuliana & Clemens, Gerhard & Kamp, Johannes & Gladun, Elena & Hölzel, Norbert & von Dressler, Hubertus, 2017. "Developing land use scenarios for stakeholder participation in Russia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 264-276.
    3. Vrebos, Dirk & Staes, Jan & Vandenbroucke, Tom & D׳Haeyer, Tom & Johnston, Robyn & Muhumuza, Moses & Kasabeke, Clovis & Meire, Patrick, 2015. "Mapping ecosystem service flows with land cover scoring maps for data-scarce regions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 28-40.
    4. Kragt, Marit E. & Robertson, Michael J., 2014. "Quantifying ecosystem services trade-offs from agricultural practices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 147-157.
    5. Kirchner, Mathias & Schmidt, Johannes & Kindermann, Georg & Kulmer, Veronika & Mitter, Hermine & Prettenthaler, Franz & Rüdisser, Johannes & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schönhart, Martin & Strauss, Fran, 2015. "Ecosystem services and economic development in Austrian agricultural landscapes — The impact of policy and climate change scenarios on trade-offs and synergies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 161-174.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hagemann, N. & van der Zanden, E.H. & Willaarts, B.A. & Holzkämper, A. & Volk, M. & Rutz, C. & Priess, J.A. & Schönhart, M., 2020. "Bringing the sharing-sparing debate down to the ground—Lessons learnt for participatory scenario development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Heiskanen, Aleksi & Hurmekoski, Elias & Toppinen, Anne & Näyhä, Annukka, 2022. "Exploring the unknowns – State of the art in qualitative forest-based sector foresight research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Yang Zou & Dehua Mao, 2022. "Simulation of Freshwater Ecosystem Service Flows under Land-Use Change: A Case Study of Lianshui River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    6. Mitter, Hermine & Schmid, Erwin, 2019. "Computing the economic value of climate information for water stress management exemplified by crop production in Austria," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 430-448.
    7. Gawel, Erik & Purkus, Alexandra & Pannicke, Nadine & Hagemann, Nina, 2016. "Die Governance der Bioökonomie: Herausforderungen einer Nachhaltigkeitstransformation am Beispiel der holzbasierten Bioökonomie in Deutschland," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    8. Bojie Wang & Haiping Tang & Qin Zhang & Fengqi Cui, 2020. "Exploring Connections among Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Human Well-Being in a Mountain-Basin System, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    9. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    10. Griewald, Yuliana & Clemens, Gerhard & Kamp, Johannes & Gladun, Elena & Hölzel, Norbert & von Dressler, Hubertus, 2017. "Developing land use scenarios for stakeholder participation in Russia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 264-276.
    11. Rui Zhao & Kening Wu, 2021. "Soil Health Evaluation of Farmland Based on Functional Soil Management—A Case Study of Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-27, June.
    12. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Sattler, Claudia & Schröter, Barbara, 2022. "Collective action across boundaries: Collaborative network initiatives as boundary organizations to improve ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    14. Wenbo Cai & Wei Jiang & Hongyu Du & Ruishan Chen & Yongli Cai, 2021. "Assessing Ecosystem Services Supply-Demand (Mis)Matches for Differential City Management in the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-22, July.
    15. Wenping Liu & Chenlu Dong & Weijuan Chen, 2017. "Mapping and Quantifying Spatial and Temporal Dynamics and Bundles of Travel Flows of Residents Visiting Urban Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    16. Marcos Jiménez Martínez & Christine Fürst, 2021. "Simulating the Capacity of Rainfed Food Crop Species to Meet Social Demands in Sudanian Savanna Agro-Ecologies," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-28, August.
    17. Franz Sinabell & Gerhard Streicher & Mathias Kirchner, 2017. "Wachstums- und Beschäftigungseffekte des Programmes der Ländlichen Entwicklung 2007-2013," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 90(10), pages 797-805, October.
    18. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    19. Christian Albert & Johannes Hermes & Felix Neuendorf & Christina Von Haaren & Michael Rode, 2016. "Assessing and Governing Ecosystem Services Trade-Offs in Agrarian Landscapes: The Case of Biogas," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-17, January.
    20. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Spatial dynamics of biophysical trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Himalayas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002831. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.