Explore the vast range of titles available.

The bioeconomy is currently being globally promoted as a sustainability avenue involving several societal actors. While the bioeconomy is broadly about the substitution of fossil resources with bio-based ones, three main (competing or complementary) bioeconomy visions are emerging in scientific literature: resource, biotechnology, and agroecology. The implementation of one or more of these visions into strategies implies changes to land use and thus ecosystem services delivery, with notable trade-offs. This review aims to explore the interdisciplinary space at the interface of these two concepts. We reviewed scientific publications explicitly referring to bioeconomy and ecosystem services in their title, abstract, or keywords, with 45 documents identified as relevant. The literature appeared to be emerging and fragmented but eight themes were discernible (in order of decreasing occurrence frequency in the literature): a. technical and economic feasibility of biomass extraction and use; b. potential and challenges of the bioeconomy; c. frameworks and tools; d. sustainability of bio-based processes, products, and services; e. environmental sustainability of the bioeconomy; f. governance of the bioeconomy; g. biosecurity; h. bioremediation. Approximately half of the documents aligned to a resource vision of the bioeconomy, with emphasis on biomass production. Agroecology and biotechnology visions were less frequently found, but multiple visions generally tended to occur in each document. The discussion highlights gaps in the current research on the topic and argues for communication between the ecosystem services and bioeconomy communities to forward both research areas in the context of sustainability science.

Fossil fuel subsidies continue to be a considerable barrier to meeting the targets of the Paris Agreement. It is thus crucial to understand the political economy of fossil fuel subsidies and their reform. To understand these mechanisms in the developed world, we use a database of different types of fossil fuel subsidy reforms among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. We find evidence for four intertwined processes i) a market-power mechanism: higher market shares for renewables ease fossil fuel subsidy reforms, and ii) a policy mechanism: reforms reduce the levels of fossil fuel subsidies. Importantly, both effects are contingent on iii) a polity mechanism where institutional quality influences the feasibility and effectiveness of political reforms, and iv) a feedback mechanism where systemic lock-ins determine the effectiveness of market competition. Our results even suggest that reforms carried out by effective governments with low corruption control are associated with increasing subsidies per capita. Renewable energy support can however provide a leverage point to break path-dependencies in fossil fuel-based economies. This turns out to be more effective when coupled with improvements to institutional quality and the insulation of political processes from pro-subsidy interests. This study on fossil fuel subsidy reforms shows that the share of renewable energy and insulation of political processes from pro-subsidy interests can provide leverage points to break path-dependencies in fossil fuel-based economies.

We analyze how the content of ecosystem service research has evolved since the early 1990s. Conducting a computational bibliometric content analysis we process a corpus of 14,118 peer-reviewed scientific article abstracts on ecosystem services (ES) from Web of Science records. To provide a comprehensive content analysis of ES research literature, we employ a latent Dirichlet allocation algorithm. For three different time periods (1990-2000, 2001-2010, 2011-2016), we derive nine main ES topics arising from content analysis and elaborate on how they are related over time. The results show that natural science-based ES research analyzes oceanic, freshwater, agricultural, forest, and soil ecosystems. Pollination and land cover emerge as traceable standalone topics around 2001. Social science ES literature demonstrates a reflexive and critical lens on the role of ES research and includes critiques of market-oriented perspectives. The area where social and natural science converge most is about land use systems such as agriculture. Overall, we provide evidence of the strong natural science foundation, the highly interdisciplinary nature of ES research, and a shift in social ES research towards integrated assessments and governance approaches. Furthermore, we discuss potential reasons for observable topic developments.

People depend on functioning ecosystems, which provide benefits that support human existence and wellbeing. The relationship between people and nature has been experienced and conceptualized in multiple ways. Recently, ecosystem services (ES) concepts have permeated science, government policies, multi-national environmental agreements, and science–policy interfaces. In 2017, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) introduced a new and closely related concept – Nature’s Contributions to People (NCP). The introduction of NCP has sparked some lively discussion and confusion about the distinguishing characteristics between ES and NCP. In order to clarify their conceptual relation, we identify eleven specific claims about novel elements from the latest NCP literature and analyze how far ES research has already contributed to these corresponding conceptual claims in the existing ES literature. We find a mixed-picture, where on six specific conceptual claims (culture, social sciences and humanities, indigenous and local knowledge, negative contributions of nature, generalizing perspective, non-instrumental values and valuation) NCP does not differ greatly from past ES research, but we also find five conceptual claims (diverse worldviews, context-specific perspective, relational values, fuzzy and fluid reporting categories and groups, inclusive language and framing) where NCP provides novel conceptualizations of people and nature relations.

Intensification of arable crop production degrades soil health and production potential through loss of soil organic carbon. This, potentially, reduces agriculture's resilience to climate change and thus food security. Furthermore, the expected increase in frequency of adverse and extreme weather events due to climate change are likely to affect crop yields differently, depending on when in the growing season they occur. We show that soil carbon provides farmers with a natural insurance against climate change through a gain in yield stability and more resilient production. To do this, we combined yield observations from 12 sites and 54 years of Swedish long-term agricultural experiments with historical weather data. To account for heterogenous climate effects, we partitioned the growing season into four representative phases for two major cereal crops. Thereby, we provide evidence that higher soil carbon increases yield gains from favourable conditions and reduces yield losses due to adverse weather events and how this occurs over different stages of the growing season. However, agricultural management practices that restore the soil carbon stock, thus contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation, usually come at the cost of foregone yield for the farmer in the short term. To halt soil degradation and make arable crop production more resilient to climate change, we need agricultural policies that address the public benefits of soil conservation and restoration.

The Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol display a broad international consensus for biodiversity conservation and equitable benefit sharing. Yet, the Aichi biodiversity targets show a lack of progress and thus indicate a need for additional action such as enhanced and better targeted financial resource mobilization. To date, no global financial burden‐sharing instrument has been proposed. Developing a global‐scale financial mechanism to support biodiversity conservation through intergovernmental transfers, we simulate three allocation designs: ecocentric, socioecological, and anthropocentric. We analyze the corresponding incentives needed to reach the Aichi target of terrestrial protected area coverage by 2020. Here we show that the socioecological design would provide the strongest median incentive for states which are farthest from achieving the target. Our proposal provides a novel concept for global biodiversity financing, which can serve as a starting point for more specific policy dialogues on intergovernmental burden and benefit‐sharing mechanisms to halt biodiversity loss.

While recent experimental frameworks for national ecosystem service accounting have shown substantial progress, in our view some crucial methodological issues remain that deserve further consideration before setting final standards. In response to the landmark work of Obst et al. (Environ Resour Econ 64:1–23, 2016. doi:10.1007/s10640-015-9921-1), we provide arguments with regard to the suitability of particular valuation approaches. Generally, we agree that respective valuation methods need to produce values that are consistent with national accounting standards such as representing exchange values. However, we disagree with their conclusions regarding specific valuation techniques. Firstly, the circumstance that methods used for estimating shadow prices can also be used to derive consumer surplus does not justify the general exclusion of all shadow pricing methods for valuation of ecosystem services for national accounts, especially for public ecosystem services. Secondly, that preference-based methods can also be used to assess welfare changes does not imply that cost-based methods are generally better suited for ecosystem accounting. To the contrary, we see an essential need for preference information in accounting contexts. Thirdly, that accounting standards use a written-down replacement cost approach, does not mean ecosystem accounting requires to employ a replacement cost approach. To the contrary, we argue that assessing ecosystem degradation through restoration costs would be in line with writing down depreciation, but we also point to its limits.

Portugal has a unitary system in which the central government transfers funds to lower government levels for their public functions. In 2007, Portugal introduced Ecological Fiscal Transfers (EFT), where municipalities receive transfers for hosting protected areas (PA). We study whether introducing EFT in Portugal incentivized municipalities to designate PA and has led to a decentralization of conservation decisions. We employ a Bayesian structural time series approach to estimate the effect of introducing EFT in comparison to a simulated counterfactual time series. Quantitative results show a significant increase in the ratio of municipal and national PA designations following Portugal’s EFT introduction—which we infer to be a causal consequence. The analysis furthermore places emphasis on the importance of relevant municipal conservation competencies for the functioning of the instrument. Results have important implications for conservation policy-making in terms of allocating budgets and competencies in multi-level governments.

Riparian buffer zones (RBZs) are an important instrument for environmental policies for water and biodiversity protection in managed forests. We investigate the variation of the cost of implementing RBZs within different property size classes across the size range of non-industrial forest owner properties in Southern Sweden. Using the Heureka PlanWise decision support system, we quantified the cost of setting aside RBZs or applying alternative management in them, as the relative loss of harvest volume and of net present value per property. We did this for multiple simulated as well as real-world property distributions. The variation of cost distribution among small properties was 4.2–6.9 times higher than among large properties. The interproperty cost inequality decreased non-linearly with increasing property size and levelled off from around 200 ha. We conclude that RBZs, due to the irregular distribution of streams, cause highly unequal financial consequences for owners, with some small property owners bearing a disproportionally high cost. This adds to previous studies showing how environmental considerations differentially affect property owners. We recommend decision makers to stimulate the uptake of RBZs by alleviating these inequalities between forest owners by including appropriate cost sharing or compensation mechanisms in their design.