Explore the vast range of titles available.

ContextLocal scale assessments of ecosystem/landscape services in Africa are insufficient and lack relevance in landscape management. Also, few studies have explored the potential benefits of PGIS/PPGIS approaches for landscape management and stewardship among the participating stakeholders.ObjectivesOur aim is (1) to establish an understanding of the realization of landscape services at the local scale across three multifunctional rural landscapes in Tanzania through PGIS/PPGIS approaches and (2) to create an understanding of these approaches’ potential to support participatory spatial planning.MethodsSemi-structured surveys (n = 313) including participatory mapping of provisioning and cultural landscape services were organised to characterise their spatial patterns. The survey results were shared with the communities (n = 97) in workshops where services were ranked and the participants interviewed about their map-reading capacity, personal learning experiences, and their ability to use maps to express opinions.ResultsThe most abundant landscape services are sites for social gatherings and cultivation. The spatial patterns of provisioning services are realizations of human benefits from the patterns of the biophysical landscape. Overall, cultural landscape services show clustering and small spatial extent (except aesthetics). The PGIS/PPGIS approach allows for local-level, spatially specific discussions between stakeholders. The visual power of maps and satellite images is particularly emphasised.ConclusionIn the data-scarce context common in the Global South, the participatory mapping of landscape services has the potential to advance understanding of the benefits that the landscape has for the local communities and how this information, when mapped spatially, can be integrated with local-level planning practices.

The scale, pace, and intensity of human activity on the planet demands radical departures from the status quo to remain within planetary boundaries and achieve sustainability. The steering arms of society including embedded financial, legal, political, and governance systems must be radically realigned and recognize the connectivity among social, ecological, and technological domains of urban systems to deliver more just, equitable, sustainable, and resilient futures. We present five key principles requiring fundamental cognitive, behavioral, and cultural shifts including rethinking growth, rethinking efficiency, rethinking the state, rethinking the commons, and rethinking justice needed together to radically transform neighborhoods, cities, and regions.

The human relationship with nature is a topic that has been explored throughout human history. More recently, the idea of connection to nature has merged as an important transdisciplinary field of study. Despite increased scholarly attention to connection to nature, the notion of disconnection from nature remains undertheorized and understudied. In this perspective article, we argue for a more comprehensive understanding of disconnection from nature to strengthen theories of human‐nature relationships that goes beyond individual relationships and considers social and collective factors of disconnection, including institutional, socio‐cultural and power dimensions. Drawing on case insights, we present the ‘wheel of disconnection’ to illustrate how disconnections from nature manifest across individual or societal meaning‐making processes, thereby problematizing existing research that seeks to create dualisms between human positive and negative impacts on the environment in isolation from cultural or political contexts. We do not seek to discount research or important practical efforts to foster an individual's connection to nature by elevating disconnection. Instead, we hope that creating greater awareness and understanding of disconnection will be able to guide opportunities going forward for strengthening a connection to nature along a continuum from the individual to the social. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

We develop a landscape stewardship classification which distinguishes between farmers' understanding of landscape stewardship, their landscape values, and land management actions. Forty semi-structured interviews were conducted with small-holder (<5 acres), medium-holders (5-100 acres), and large-holders (>100 acres) in South-West Devon, UK. Thematic analysis revealed four types of stewardship understandings: (1) an environmental frame which emphasized the farmers' role in conserving or restoring wildlife; (2) a primary production frame which emphasized the farmers' role in taking care of primary production assets; (3) a holistic frame focusing on farmers' role as a conservationist, primary producer, and manager of a range of landscape values, and; (4) an instrumental frame focusing on the financial benefits associated with compliance with agri-environmental schemes. We compare the landscape values and land management actions that emerged across stewardship types, and discuss the global implications of the landscape stewardship classification for the engagement of farmers in landscape management.

Context Human–nature interactions are reflected in the values people assign to landscapes. These values shape our understanding and actions as landscape co-creators, and need to be taken into account to achieve an integrated management of the landscape that involves civil society. Objectives The aim of this research was to increase the current knowledge on the most and least common landscape values perceived by local stakeholders, the patterns in the spatial distribution of values, and their connection to different socio-economic backgrounds and landscape characteristics across Europe. Methods The research consisted of a cross-site comparison study on how landscape values are perceived in six areas of Europe using Public Participation GIS surveys. Answers were analysed combining contingency tables, spatial autocorrelation and bivariate correlation methods, kernel densities, land cover ratios, and viewshed analyses. Results were discussed in the light of findings derived from other European participatory mapping studies. Results We identified shared patterns in the perception of landscape values across Europe. Recreation, aesthetics, and social fulfilment were the most common values. Landscape values showed common spatial patterns mainly related to accessibility and the presence of water, settlements, and cultural heritage. However, respondents in each study site had their own preferences connected to the intrinsic characteristics of the local landscape and culture. Conclusions The results encourage land planners and researchers to approach landscape values in relation to socio-cultural and bio-physical land characteristics comprehensibly, acknowledging the complexity in the relationship between people’s perception and the landscape, to foster more effective and inclusive landscape management strategies.

Identifying research gaps and priorities is paramount to advance sustainability science and contribute to a sustainable future. This editorial contributes to this effort by contemplating the sustainability science research agenda and aligning it with recent changes in global dynamics. Drawing on consultations with the editorial board members of the Sustainability Science journal and a review of relevant literature, we identified 12 key research topics. These topics are interpreted within a strategic framework encompassing three key themes: (1) goals that drive sustainability science, (2) approaches to attain these goals, and (3) tools to advance sustainability science research. In so doing, this editorial emphasizes a sustainable development agenda extending beyond 2030, fostering equity and justice, and tackling issues related to power dynamics and geopolitical conflicts. It underscores the significance of research approaches to attaining sustainability goals, in particular, theorizing, co-production of knowledge and action, attaining clarity in conceptual descriptions, and developing systems-oriented analytical frameworks. Additionally, it highlights the value of place-based approaches, learning from significant systemic shocks, and nurturing inner transformations. It also underlines the need to explore emerging technologies and data-intensive methodologies as a tool to address sustainability concerns. The systematic contemplation of the sustainability science research agenda presented in this editorial piece aims to invoke further discussion among researchers and practitioners about a fresh and relevant agenda that promotes the sustainable integration of nature and society.

Urban nature is an important source of cultural ecosystem services (CES), providing well‐being benefits. Currently, well‐being is often conceptualized too narrowly to capture the more intangible benefits of urban nature. The concept of eudaimonic well‐being takes a long‐term, value‐based approach to the well‐being effects of the human–nature connection. There is a recognized need to study the deep, qualitative benefits of CES, as well as to understand the role of nature in people's eudaimonic well‐being. We used a qualitatively dominated mixed‐method design to study the eudaimonic well‐being benefits of nature and their links to the CES expressed by youth (ages 15–24) and elderly (age 60+) citizens in a mid‐sized Nordic city. To gain understanding of engagement with outdoor environments, geospatial data were collected via a map‐based survey. After this, in‐depth qualitative data were collected via creative writing. We reflect on the understanding these two data sets provide on the role of nature in both age groups' eudaimonic well‐being and how this could be better recognized in urban planning. We discovered that both age groups gain notable eudaimonic well‐being benefits from urban nature, linked to multiple deep‐level CES. While the groups showed differences in where and how they spend time in urban nature and what benefits they gain, they also shared many perspectives. For both groups, nature supports eudaimonic well‐being by allowing people to connect with deeper values and their most authentic selves. Nature also promotes connection with other people, as well as with other species. The results show two cross‐cutting aspects of eudaimonic well‐being: change and temporality. Both age groups find a feeling of permanence and continuity in nature, contributing to their eudaimonic well‐being. However, eco‐crisis—especially human‐induced change in nature—and the negative emotions related to these changes can hinder these well‐being benefits. This study highlights how urban nature contributes to eudaimonic well‐being, suggesting that planning approaches, which more systematically incorporate these benefits are likely to better support long‐term good life in urban environments. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Abstrakti Kaupunkiluonto on tärkeä kulttuuristen ekosysteemipalveluiden (CES) lähde ja tuottaa hyvinvointihyötyjä. Tällä hetkellä hyvinvointi ymmärretään usein liian kapeasti, jotta kaupunkiluonnon aineettomat hyödyt voitaisiin tavoittaa. Eudaimonisen hyvinvoinnin käsite tarjoaa pitemmälle katsovan, arvolähtöisen näkökulman luonnon hyvinvointivaikutuksiin. Aiempi tutkimus on tunnistanut tarpeen perehtyä CES‐palveluiden syvällisiin, laadullisiin hyötyihin sekä ymmärtää luonnon roolia ihmisten eudaimonisessa hyvinvoinnissa. Käytimme laadullisesti painottunutta monimenetelmällistä tutkimusasetelmaa tutkiaksemme luonnon tuottamia eudaimonisen hyvinvoinnin hyötyjä ja niiden yhteyksiä kulttuurisiin ekosysteemipalveluihin nuorten (15–24‐vuotiaat) ja 60 vuotta täyttäneiden kaupunkilaisten näkökulmasta keskikokoisessa pohjoismaisessa kaupungissa. Ulkoiluympäristöjen käytön ja arvojen ymmärtämiseksi kerättiin paikkatietoa karttapohjaisen kyselyn avulla. Tämän jälkeen kerättiin laadullinen aineisto luovan kirjoittamisen keinoin. Tarkastelemme, millaista ymmärrystä nämä kaksi aineistoa tarjoavat luonnon roolista molempien ikäryhmien eudaimonisessa hyvinvoinnissa, ja miten tämä ymmärrys voitaisiin paremmin huomioida kaupunkisuunnittelussa. Havaitsimme, että molemmat ikäryhmät saavat merkittäviä eudaimonisia hyvinvointihyötyjä kaupunkiluonnosta, ja että nämä hyödyt liittyvät useisiin syvätasoisiin kulttuurisiin ekosysteemipalveluihin. Vaikka ryhmien välillä oli eroja siinä, missä ja miten he viettävät aikaa kaupunkiluonnossa ja mitä hyötyjä he kokevat saavansa, he jakoivat myös monia näkökulmia. Molemmissa ryhmissä luonto tukee eudaimonista hyvinvointia mahdollistamalla yhteyden omiin syviin arvoihin ja autenttiseen minään. Luonto edistää myös yhteyttä muihin ihmisiin sekä muihin eliölajeihin. Tuloksissa näkyy kaksi eudaimonisen hyvinvoinnin poikkileikkaavaa ulottuvuutta: muutos ja ajallisuus. Molemmat ikäryhmät kokevat luonnossa pysyvyyttä ja jatkuvuutta, mikä vahvistaa heidän eudaimonista hyvinvointiaan. Ekologinen kriisi—erityisesti ihmisen aiheuttama luonnonmuutos—ja siihen liittyvät kielteiset tunteet voivat kuitenkin heikentää näitä hyvinvointihyötyjä. Tämä tutkimus kuvaa, miten kaupunkiluonto edistää eudaimonista hyvinvointia. Suunnittelukäytännöt, jotka systemaattisemmin huomioivat nämä hyödyt, tukevat todennäköisesti paremmin hyvää ja kestävää elämää kaupunkiympäristöissä. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

ABSTRACT Public green spaces (PGS) have the capacity to fulfil the needs and interests of diverse groups of urban dwellers and thus contribute to their well-being. However, PGS designers and managers usually lack spatially disaggregated information on how PGS is used, by whom, and for what reasons. This study aims to assess spatial PGS visitation and avoidance patterns and their respective determinants using the city of Bochum, Germany as a case study. The research design consists of the design and application of an online map-based survey (public participation GIS – PPGIS) targeting residents and subsequent statistical and spatial analyses. Survey data include 807 completed surveys with 1084 marked visited points and 329 marked avoided points across the study area. Our results show both spatial clusters and co-occurrence of PGS visitation and avoidance. Respondents visit and avoid PGS for different reasons, which are linked to societal determinants (e.g. exercising or resting and relaxing), physical determinants (e.g. amount of grassy area or presence of trash) and sociodemographic background. Although reasons for PGS visitation and avoidance show limited spatial variation across different PGS, we find variation when disaggregating by gender and age. Insights generated can provide useful guidance for urban planners and policy makers for prioritising design and management actions to address reasons for avoidance of PGS, enhance their perceived quality and benefits, and craft PGS management concepts that better address place-specific conditions and preferences of different sociodemographic groups.

Multifunctional landscapes provide critical benefits and are essential for human well‐being. The relationship between multifunctional landscapes and well‐being has mostly been studied using ecosystem services as a linkage. However, there is a challenge of concretizing what human well‐being exactly is and how it can be measured, particularly in relation to ecosystem services, landscape values and related discussions. In this paper, we measure self‐reported well‐being through applying an inductive free‐listing approach to the exploration of the relationships between landscape multifunctionality and human well‐being across 13 rural and peri‐urban sites in Europe. We developed a face‐to‐face online survey (n = 2,301 respondents) integrating subjective perceptions of well‐being (free‐listing method) with mapping perceived ecosystem service benefits (Public Participation GIS, PPGIS approach). Applying content analysis and diverse statistical methods, we explore the links between well‐being (i.e. perceived well‐being items such as tranquillity, social relations and health) and social‐ecological properties (i.e. respondents' sociocultural characteristics and perception of ecosystem service benefits). We identify 40 different well‐being items highlighting prominently landscape values. The items form five distinct clusters: access to services; tranquillity and social capital; health and nature; cultural landscapes; and place attachment. Each cluster is related to specific study sites and explained by certain social‐ecological properties. Results of our inductive approach further specify pre‐defined conceptualizations on well‐being and their connections to the natural environment. Results suggest that the well‐being contributions of multifunctional landscapes are connected to therapeutic well‐being effects, which are largely neglected in the ecosystem services literature. Our results further point to the context‐specific character of linkages between landscapes and human well‐being. The clusters highlight that landscape‐supported well‐being is related to multiple interlinked items that can inform collective visions of well‐being in the future. For landscape planning and management, we highlight the need for place‐specific analysis and consideration of perceptions of local people to identify the contributions to their well‐being. Future research would benefit from considering the experiential qualities of value and well‐being as they relate to direct experiences with the landscape and wider psychological needs, specifically over time. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

Current sustainability challenges demand approaches that acknowledge a plurality of human–nature interactions and worldviews, for which biocultural approaches are considered appropriate and timely. This systematic review analyses the application of biocultural approaches to sustainability in scientific journal articles published between 1990 and 2018 through a mixed methods approach combining qualitative content analysis and quantitative multivariate methods. The study identifies seven distinct biocultural lenses, that is, different ways of understanding and applying biocultural approaches, which to different degrees consider the key aspects of sustainability science—inter‐ and transdisciplinarity, social justice and normativity. The review suggests that biocultural approaches in sustainability science need to move from describing how nature and culture are co‐produced to co‐producing knowledge for sustainability solutions, and in so doing, better account for questions of power, gender and transformations, which has been largely neglected thus far. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.