IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2013i1p193-216d31686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Goal Structure, Target Areas and Means of Implementation

Author

Listed:
  • Paul L. Lucas

    (PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, Postbus 303, 3720 AH, Bilthoven, The Netherlands)

  • Marcel T.J. Kok

    (PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, Postbus 303, 3720 AH, Bilthoven, The Netherlands)

  • Måns Nilsson

    (Stockholm Environment Institute, Linnégatan 87 D, Stockholm 115 23, Sweden
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Drottning Kristinas väg 30, Stockholm 100 44, Sweden)

  • Rob Alkemade

    (PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, Postbus 303, 3720 AH, Bilthoven, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The United Nations’ discussions on defining a new set of post-2015 development goals focus on poverty eradication and sustainable development. Biodiversity and ecosystem services are essential for poverty eradication, which is also one of the foundations of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Based on an assessment of current proposals of goals and targets, and a quantitative pathway analysis to meet long term biodiversity and food security goals, this paper discusses how biodiversity and ecosystem services can be integrated into a broad set of goals and targets, and concludes with relevant target areas and means of implementation for which specific targets need to be defined. Furthermore, it responds to the call of the CBD to consider the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and the related Aichi biodiversity targets in the post-2015 development agenda. The paper’s analysis identifies three overlapping but also supplemental ways to integrate biodiversity and ecosystem services in the post-2015 agenda: integrated goals, goals addressing earth system functioning and goals addressing environmental limits. It further concludes seven target areas to be included under the goals to address biodiversity and ecosystem services in the context of food and agriculture: access to food, demand for agricultural products, sustainable intensification, ecosystem fragmentation, protected areas, essential ecosystem services and genetic diversity. The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity provides a good basis for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in the post-2015 development agenda. Many Aichi targets address the proposed target areas and the means of implementation discussed, while they need to be complemented with targets that specifically address human well-being, as well as institutions and governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul L. Lucas & Marcel T.J. Kok & Måns Nilsson & Rob Alkemade, 2013. "Integrating Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Goal Structure, Target Areas and Means of Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2013:i:1:p:193-216:d:31686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/1/193/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/1/193/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kareiva, Peter & Tallis, Heather & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Daily, Gretchen C. & Polasky, Stephen (ed.), 2011. "Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199589005.
    2. Bradley J. Cardinale & J. Emmett Duffy & Andrew Gonzalez & David U. Hooper & Charles Perrings & Patrick Venail & Anita Narwani & Georgina M. Mace & David Tilman & David A. Wardle & Ann P. Kinzig & Gre, 2012. "Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7401), pages 59-67, June.
    3. Måns Nilsson & Paul Lucas & Tetsuro Yoshida, 2013. "Towards an Integrated Framework for SDGs: Ultimate and Enabling Goals for the Case of Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(10), pages 1-28, September.
    4. Boltz, Frederick & Turner, Will R. & Wugt Larsen, Frank & Scholz, Imme & Guarin, Alejandro, 2013. "Post 2015: reconsidering sustainable development goals; is the environment merely a dimension?," Briefing Papers 4/2013, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    5. Jonathan A. Foley & Navin Ramankutty & Kate A. Brauman & Emily S. Cassidy & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Christine O’Connell & Deepak K. Ray & Paul C. West & Christian Balz, 2011. "Solutions for a cultivated planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 337-342, October.
    6. David Griggs & Mark Stafford-Smith & Owen Gaffney & Johan Rockström & Marcus C. Öhman & Priya Shyamsundar & Will Steffen & Gisbert Glaser & Norichika Kanie & Ian Noble, 2013. "Sustainable development goals for people and planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7441), pages 305-307, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Odirilwe Selomane & Belinda Reyers & Reinette Biggs & Maike Hamann, 2019. "Harnessing Insights from Social-Ecological Systems Research for Monitoring Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-36, February.

    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. Manuel Rivera, 2013. "Political Criteria for Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Selection and the Role of the Urban Dimension," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(12), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Zhang, Yan & Wu, Tong & Song, Changsu & Hein, Lars & Shi, Faqi & Han, Mingchen & Ouyang, Zhiyun, 2022. "Influences of climate change and land use change on the interactions of ecosystem services in China’s Xijiang River Basin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    3. Accatino, Francesco & Tonda, Alberto & Dross, Camille & Léger, François & Tichit, Muriel, 2019. "Trade-offs and synergies between livestock production and other ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 58-72.
    4. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    5. Marion Desquilbet & Bruno Dorin & Denis Couvet, 2016. "Land Sharing vs Land Sparing to Conserve Biodiversity: How Agricultural Markets Make the Difference [land-sharing/land-sparing, comment les marchés font la différence]," Post-Print hal-03948463, HAL.
    6. Abera, Wuletawu & Tamene, Lulseged & Kassawmar, Tibebu & Mulatu, Kalkidan & Kassa, Habtemariam & Verchot, Louis & Quintero, Marcela, 2021. "Impacts of land use and land cover dynamics on ecosystem services in the Yayo coffee forest biosphere reserve, southwestern Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Reed, James & van Vianen, Josh & Foli, Samson & Clendenning, Jessica & Yang, Kevin & MacDonald, Margaret & Petrokofsky, Gillian & Padoch, Christine & Sunderland, Terry, 2017. "Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 62-71.
    8. Bernard Amadei, 2021. "Systemic Modeling of the Peace–Development Nexus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    10. Miller, Daniel C., 2014. "Explaining Global Patterns of International Aid for Linked Biodiversity Conservation and Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 341-359.
    11. Fabio Pranovi & Gianluca Sarà & Piero Franzoi, 2013. "Valuing the Unmarketable: An Ecological Approach to the Externalities Estimate in Fishing Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-11, February.
    12. Dona Azizi, 0. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    13. Michael D. Gerst & Paul D. Raskin & Johan Rockström, 2013. "Contours of a Resilient Global Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Qie, Lu & Pu, Lijie & Tang, Pengfei & Liu, Rongjuan & Huang, Sihua & Xu, Fei & Zhong, Taiyang, 2023. "Gains and losses of farmland associated with farmland protection policy and urbanization in China: An integrated perspective based on goal orientation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Frank, Eyal G. & Sudarshan, Anant, 2022. "The Social Costs of Keystone Species Collapse : Evidence From The Decline of Vultures in India," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1433, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    16. Dona Azizi, 2020. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 323-338, June.
    17. Yang Liu & Jing Zhao & Xi Zheng & Xiaoyang Ou & Yaru Zhang & Jiaying Li, 2023. "Evaluation of Biodiversity Maintenance Capacity in Forest Landscapes: A Case Study in Beijing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Rommel, Jens & Anggraini, Eva, 2018. "Spatially explicit framed field experiments on ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 201-205.
    19. Kedi Liu & Ranran Wang & Inge Schrijver & Rutger Hoekstra, 2024. "Can we project well-being? Towards integral well-being projections in climate models and beyond," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2013:i:1:p:193-216:d:31686. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.