IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v8y2021i1d10.1057_s41599-021-00837-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological sensitivity within human realities concept for improved functional biodiversity outcomes in agricultural systems and landscapes

Author

Listed:
  • Melissa Anne Beryl Vogt

    (UNSW)

Abstract

Sustainable agricultural landscapes seek to improve environmental, societal and economic outcomes locally and internationally. They depend on functionally biodiverse agricultural systems, i.e., systems that include diversity in plants and/or crops and maintain productive function. These systems are variably defined and are not adequately or consistently represented or ensured across agricultural landscapes. The variability results in inconsistent productive function, and minimally biodiverse agricultural systems and landscapes that degrade the environment, preventing consistent increases in functional biodiverse systems across farming landscapes and impeding long-term societal and economic benefit. The article answers the question: how can the Ecological Sensitivity within Human Realities (ESHR) concept improve consistent and more thorough increases in functional biodiversity outcomes from human natural environment interactions as a conceptual explanation. The ESHR concept for functional biodiversity is introduced and explained using an integrated narrative literature review. Motivation to develop and present the ESHR is an observed and identified need to emphasize the human influence on functional biodiversity outcomes and encourage sensitivity of human interactions with the natural environment through more detailed considerations that might better ensure consistent outcomes. Existing and commonly used concepts that seek to improve biodiversity in agricultural systems are compared to the ESHR to demonstrate novelty. New understandings of ecological and human conditions in coffee farming landscapes are not introduced, instead, the concept substantiates (1) functionally biodiverse agricultural systems rely on consistently functional ecological interactions and processes for all system and landscape complexities by structure, heterogeneity, and interactions, between and across systems; (2) human interactions are influenced by variability in the human condition across individuals and societal groups, referred to as human realities. When compared to the selection of existing concepts of similar intentions it demonstrates to combine strengths of different concepts with improved opportunity for contextual adaptations. Comparatively consistent, comprehensive considerations and functional biodiversity outcomes are encouraged and expected with the use of the ESHR. Recommendations for future use and research are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Melissa Anne Beryl Vogt, 2021. "Ecological sensitivity within human realities concept for improved functional biodiversity outcomes in agricultural systems and landscapes," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00837-3
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00837-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-021-00837-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-021-00837-3?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. Alison Holt, 2006. "Biodiversity definitions vary within the discipline," Nature, Nature, vol. 444(7116), pages 146-146, November.
    2. Lanz, Bruno & Dietz, Simon & Swanson, Tim, 2018. "The Expansion of Modern Agriculture and Global Biodiversity Decline: An Integrated Assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 260-277.
    3. R. J. Scholes & R. Biggs, 2005. "A biodiversity intactness index," Nature, Nature, vol. 434(7029), pages 45-49, March.
    4. Laura J. Sonter & Diego Herrera & Damian J. Barrett & Gillian L. Galford & Chris J. Moran & Britaldo S. Soares-Filho, 2017. "Mining drives extensive deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-7, December.
    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. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    2. Nir Kshetri & Diana Carolina Rojas Torres & Hany Besada & Maria Andreina Moros Ochoa, 2020. "Big Data as a Tool to Monitor and Deter Environmental Offenders in the Global South: A Multiple Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Prince T. Mabey & Wei Li & Abu J. Sundufu & Akhtar H. Lashari, 2020. "Environmental Impacts: Local Perspectives of Selected Mining Edge Communities in Sierra Leone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Halkos, George E., 2011. "Nonparametric modelling of biodiversity: Determinants of threatened species," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 618-635, July.
    5. Ferrante, Lucas & Andrade, Maryane B.T. & Fearnside, Philip M., 2021. "Land grabbing on Brazil's Highway BR-319 as a spearhead for Amazonian deforestation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Changbai Xi & Yao Chi & Tianlu Qian & Wenhan Zhang & Jiechen Wang, 2020. "Simulation of Human Activity Intensity and Its Influence on Mammal Diversity in Sanjiangyuan National Park, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Bjoern Soergel & Elmar Kriegler & Isabelle Weindl & Sebastian Rauner & Alois Dirnaichner & Constantin Ruhe & Matthias Hofmann & Nico Bauer & Christoph Bertram & Benjamin Leon Bodirsky & Marian Leimbac, 2021. "A sustainable development pathway for climate action within the UN 2030 Agenda," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(8), pages 656-664, August.
    8. Ding, Helen & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D., 2014. "Modeling the links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing in the context of climate change: Results from an econometric analysis of the European forest ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-73.
    9. Lai, Zhaohao & Chen, Meiqiu & Liu, Taoju, 2020. "Changes in and prospects for cultivated land use since the reform and opening up in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Halkos, George, 2010. "Modelling biodiversity," MPRA Paper 39075, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Mathilde Salin & Katie Kedward & Nepomuk Dunz, 2024. "Assessing Integrated Assessment Models for Building Global Nature-Economy Scenarios," Working papers 959, Banque de France.
    12. Iker Etxano & Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Oihana Garcia, 2018. "Conflicting Values in Rural Planning: A Multifunctionality Approach through Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    13. C. Hall & J. I. Macdiarmid & R. B. Matthews & P. Smith & S. F. Hubbard & T. P. Dawson, 2019. "The relationship between forest cover and diet quality: a case study of rural southern Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(3), pages 635-650, June.
    14. Atmiş, Erdoğan & Yıldız, Damla & Erdönmez, Cihan, 2024. "A different dimension in deforestation and forest degradation: Non-forestry uses of forests in Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    15. Martin, Inès & Vranken, Liesbet & Ugás, Roberto, 2021. "Farmers’ Preferences to Cultivate Threatened Crop Varieties: Evidence from Peru," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315216, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Funke, Franziska & Mattauch, Linus & van den Bijgaart, Inge & Godfray, Charles & Hepburn, Cameron & Klenert, David & Springmann, Marco & Treich, Nicholas, 2021. "Is Meat Too Cheap? Towards Optimal Meat Taxation," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-08, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    17. Bruno Lanz & Simon Dietz & Tim Swanson, 2016. "Economic growth and agricultural land conversion under uncertain productivity improvements in agriculture," FOODSECURE Working papers 53, LEI Wageningen UR.
    18. Sagoff, Mark, 2018. "What Is Invasion Biology?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 22-30.
    19. Nicoletta Batini & Luigi Durand, 2024. "Accounting for Nature in Economic Models," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 1014, Central Bank of Chile.
    20. Sang, Meiyue & Shen, Liyin, 2024. "An international perspective on carbon peaking status between a sample of 154 countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00837-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.