Time filter

Source Type

Derbyshire, United Kingdom

Pahl-Wostl C.,University of Osnabruck | Arthington A.,Griffith University | Bogardi J.,Global Water System Project | Bunn S.E.,Griffith University | And 12 more authors.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability | Year: 2013

Human water security is often achieved with little consideration of environmental consequences and, even when these are acknowledged, the trade-offs between human and environmental water needs are increasing in frequency and amplitude on the increase. The environmental flows concept has continued to evolve in response to these challenges. However, the field is characterized by a limited transferability of insights, due to the prevalence of specific case-study analyses and a lack of research on the governance of environmental flows. Building on recent advances in environmental flow science, water governance and management, we identify a clear need for a more systematic approach to the determination of environmental flow requirements (EFRs) on both the natural and social science fronts and, in particular, on the interaction between social/political and environmental systems. We suggest a framework that details as to how these advances and interactions can be achieved. The framework supports scientific analysis and practical implementation of EFRs involving systematic compilation, sharing and evaluation of experiences from different riverine ecosystems and governance systems around the globe. The concept of ecosystem services is introduced into the framework to raise awareness for the importance of ecosystem functions for the resilience of social-ecological systems, to support negotiation of trade-offs and development of strategies for adaptive implementation. Experience in implementation of environmental flow policies reveals the need for an engaged, transdisciplinary research approach where research is closely linked to implementation initiatives on the ground. We advocate that this is more effective at building the foundations for sustainable water management. © 2013 Elsevier B.V. Source

Wich S.A.,Liverpool John Moores University | Gaveau D.,Center for International Forestry Research | Abram N.,University of Kent | Baccini A.,Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution | And 34 more authors.
PLoS ONE | Year: 2012

The geographic distribution of Bornean orang-utans and its overlap with existing land-use categories (protected areas, logging and plantation concessions) is a necessary foundation to prioritize conservation planning. Based on an extensive orang-utan survey dataset and a number of environmental variables, we modelled an orang-utan distribution map. The modelled orang-utan distribution map covers 155,106 km2 (21% of Borneo's landmass) and reveals four distinct distribution areas. The most important environmental predictors are annual rainfall and land cover. The overlap of the orang-utan distribution with land-use categories reveals that only 22% of the distribution lies in protected areas, but that 29% lies in natural forest concessions. A further 19% and 6% occurs in largely undeveloped oil palm and tree plantation concessions, respectively. The remaining 24% of the orang-utan distribution range occurs outside of protected areas and outside of concessions. An estimated 49% of the orang-utan distribution will be lost if all forest outside of protected areas and logging concessions is lost. To avoid this potential decline plantation development in orang-utan habitats must be halted because it infringes on national laws of species protection. Further growth of the plantation sector should be achieved through increasing yields in existing plantations and expansion of new plantations into areas that have already been deforested. To reach this goal a large scale island-wide land-use masterplan is needed that clarifies which possible land uses and managements are allowed in the landscape and provides new standardized strategic conservation policies. Such a process should make much better use of non-market values of ecosystem services of forests such as water provision, flood control, carbon sequestration, and sources of livelihood for rural communities. Presently land use planning is more driven by vested interests and direct and immediate economic gains, rather than by approaches that take into consideration social equity and environmental sustainability. © 2012 Wich et al. Source

Discover hidden collaborations