Abstract

Despite the increased attention, which has been given to the issue of involving knowledge and experts from the social sciences and humanities (SSH) into the products and works of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), little is known on what the expectations towards the involvement of SSH in IPBES actually are. The aim of this paper is to close this gap by identifying the range of possible SSH contributions to IPBES that are expected in the literature, and discuss the inherent challenges of and concrete ways to realize these contributions in the particular institutional setting of IPBES. We address these two points by: firstly, assessing the literature dealing with IPBES and building a typology describing the main ways in which contributions from SSH to IPBES have been conceived between 2006 and 2017. We discuss these expected contributions in light of broader debates on the role of SSH in nature conservation and analyse some of the blind spots and selectivities in the perception of how SSH could substantially contribute to the works of IPBES. Then, secondly, by looking at one particular example, economics and its use in the first thematic assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production, we will concretely illustrate how works in a given discipline could contribute in many different and unprecedented ways to the works of IPBES and help identify paths for enhancing the conservation of biodiversity. Finally, we propose a range of practical recommendations as to how to increase the contribution of SSH in the works of IPBES.

Highlights

  • The creation of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has given fresh impetus to debates over the role of the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in nature conservation

  • We address these two points by: firstly, assessing the literature dealing with IPBES and building a typology describing the main ways in which contributions from SSH to IPBES have been conceived between 2006 and 2017

  • The aim of this paper is to identify the range of possible SSH contributions to IPBES that are expected in the literature, and discuss the concrete ways to realize these contributions in the particular institutional setting of IPBES

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The creation of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has given fresh impetus to debates over the role of the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in nature conservation. The aim of this paper is to identify the range of possible SSH contributions to IPBES that are expected in the literature, and discuss the concrete ways to realize these contributions in the particular institutional setting of IPBES We address these two points by: firstly, assessing the literature dealing with IPBES and building a typology describing the main ways in which contributions from SSH to IPBES have been conceived so far. We will discuss these expected contributions in light of broader debates on the role of SSH in nature conservation, discuss how these debates relate to IPBES’ conceptual framework and analyse some of the blind-spots in the perception of how SSH could substantially contribute to the works of IPBES (Section 3.). We propose a range of practical recommendations as to how to increase the contribution of SSH in the works of IPBES, by following the different procedural steps that lead to the production of a given IPBES assessment (Section 5/conclusion)

Methodology
A typology of expected contributions from SSH to IPBES
IPBES and the politics of knowledge
Discussing the typology and identification of shortcomings
Conclusion: pathways for a stronger inclusion of SSH in IPBES works
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call