TY - JOUR A1 - Huber, Robert A1 - Rigling, Andreas A1 - Bebi, Peter A1 - Brand, Fridolin Simon A1 - Briner, Simon A1 - Buttler, Alexandre A1 - Elkin, Che A1 - Gillet, Francois A1 - Gret-Regamey, Adrienne A1 - Hirschi, Christian A1 - Lischke, Heike A1 - Scholz, Roland Werner A1 - Seidl, Roman A1 - Spiegelberger, Thomas A1 - Walz, Ariane A1 - Zimmermann, Willi A1 - Bugmann, Harald T1 - Sustainable land use in Mountain Regions under global change synthesis across scales and disciplines JF - Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability N2 - Mountain regions provide essential ecosystem goods and services (EGS) for both mountain dwellers and people living outside these areas. Global change endangers the capacity of mountain ecosystems to provide key services. The Mountland project focused on three case study regions in the Swiss Alps and aimed to propose land-use practices and alternative policy solutions to ensure the provision of key EGS under climate and land-use changes. We summarized and synthesized the results of the project and provide insights into the ecological, socioeconomic, and political processes relevant for analyzing global change impacts on a European mountain region. In Mountland, an integrative approach was applied, combining methods from economics and the political and natural sciences to analyze ecosystem functioning from a holistic human-environment system perspective. In general, surveys, experiments, and model results revealed that climate and socioeconomic changes are likely to increase the vulnerability of the EGS analyzed. We regard the following key characteristics of coupled human-environment systems as central to our case study areas in mountain regions: thresholds, heterogeneity, trade-offs, and feedback. Our results suggest that the institutional framework should be strengthened in a way that better addresses these characteristics, allowing for (1) more integrative approaches, (2) a more network-oriented management and steering of political processes that integrate local stakeholders, and (3) enhanced capacity building to decrease the identified vulnerability as central elements in the policy process. Further, to maintain and support the future provision of EGS in mountain regions, policy making should also focus on project-oriented, cross-sectoral policies and spatial planning as a coordination instrument for land use in general. KW - adaptive management KW - climate change KW - ecosystem services KW - experiments KW - interdisciplinary research KW - land-use change KW - modeling KW - transdisciplinary research Y1 - 2013 U6 - https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05499-180336 SN - 1708-3087 VL - 18 IS - 3 PB - Resilience Alliance CY - Wolfville ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Martin-Lopez, Berta A1 - Leister, Ines A1 - Cruz, Pedro Lorenzo A1 - Palomo, Ignacio A1 - Gret-Regamey, Adrienne A1 - Harrison, Paula A. A1 - Lavorel, Sandra A1 - Locatelli, Bruno A1 - Luque, Sandra A1 - Walz, Ariane T1 - Nature’s contributions to people in mountains BT - a review JF - PLoS one N2 - Mountains play a key role in the provision of nature’s contributions to people (NCP) worldwide that support societies’ quality of life. Simultaneously, mountains are threatened by multiple drivers of change. Due to the complex interlinkages between biodiversity, quality of life and drivers of change, research on NCP in mountains requires interdisciplinary approaches. In this study, we used the conceptual framework of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the notion of NCP to determine to what extent previous research on ecosystem services in mountains has explored the different components of the IPBES conceptual framework. We conducted a systematic review of articles on ecosystem services in mountains published up to 2016 using the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Descriptive statistical and network analyses were conducted to explore the level of research on the components of the IPBES framework and their interactions. Our results show that research has gradually become more interdisciplinary by studying higher number of NCP, dimensions of quality of life, and indirect drivers of change. Yet, research focusing on biodiversity, regulating NCP and direct drivers has decreased over time. Furthermore, despite the fact that research on NCP in mountains becoming more policy-oriented over time, mainly in relation to payments for ecosystem services, institutional responses remained underexplored in the reviewed studies. Finally, we discuss the relevant knowledge gaps that should be addressed in future research in order to contribute to IPBES. Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217847 SN - 1932-6203 VL - 14 IS - 6 PB - PLoS CY - San Fransisco ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schoonover, Heather A. A1 - Gret-Regamey, Adrienne A1 - Metzger, Marc J. A1 - Ruiz-Frau, Ana A1 - Santos-Reis, Margarida A1 - Scholte, Samantha S. K. A1 - Walz, Ariane A1 - Nicholas, Kimberly A. T1 - Creating space, aligning motivations, and building trust BT - a practical framework for stakeholder engagement based on experience in 12 ecosystem services case studies JF - Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability N2 - Ecosystem services inherently involve people, whose values help define the benefits of nature's services. It is thus important for researchers to involve stakeholders in ecosystem services research. However, a simple and practicable framework to guide such engagement, and in particular to help researchers anticipate and consider key issues and challenges, has not been well explored. Here, we use experience from the 12 case studies in the European Operational Potential of Ecosystem Research Applications (OPERAs) project to propose a stakeholder engagement framework comprising three key elements: creating space, aligning motivations, and building trust. We argue that involving stakeholders in research demands thoughtful reflection from the researchers about what kind of space they want to create, including if and how they want to bring different interests together, how much space they want to allow for critical discussion, and whether there is a role for particular stakeholders to serve as conduits between others. In addition, understanding their own motivations—including values, knowledge, goals, and desired benefits—will help researchers decide when and how to involve stakeholders, identify areas of common ground and potential disagreement, frame the project appropriately, set expectations, and ensure each party is able to see benefits of engaging with each other. Finally, building relationships with stakeholders can be difficult but considering the roles of existing relationships, time, approach, reputation, and belonging can help build mutual trust. Although the three key elements and the paths between them can play out differently depending on the particular research project, we suggest that a research design that considers how to create the space in which researchers and stakeholders will meet, align motivations between researchers and stakeholders, and build mutual trust will help foster productive researcher–stakeholder relationships. KW - cocreated knowledge KW - ecosystem services KW - participatory research KW - research design KW - stakeholder engagement KW - transdisciplinary research Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10061-240111 SN - 1708-3087 VL - 24 IS - 1 PB - Resilience Alliance CY - Wolfville ER - TY - GEN A1 - Walz, Ariane A1 - Gret-Regamey, Adrienne A1 - Lavorel, Sandra T1 - Social valuation of ecosystem services in mountain regions T2 - Regional environmental change Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1028-x SN - 1436-3798 SN - 1436-378X VL - 16 SP - 1985 EP - 1987 PB - Springer CY - Heidelberg ER -