Linking sufficiency and the protection of biodiversity: An issue of political implications, framing, descriptiveness and interdisciplinarity?

Marianne Hachtmann
{"title":"Linking sufficiency and the protection of biodiversity: An issue of political implications, framing, descriptiveness and interdisciplinarity?","authors":"Marianne Hachtmann","doi":"10.3897/natureconservation.55.118243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dramatic loss of biodiversity is caused by the use of resources and land. One strategy aiming at reducing the use of resources and land is sufficiency, which consequently could be a strategy for protecting biodiversity. This article therefore examines the extent to which sufficiency in the context of biodiversity conservation is already being addressed by nature conservation associations and the scientific community. To this end, publications were analysed firstly with regards to the understanding of sufficiency, secondly with regards to the considered links between sufficiency and biodiversity as well as thirdly with regards to the considered fields of action. The systematic identification and evaluation of scientific publications (for the years 2017–2021) and publications by German and international nature conservation associations shows that few publications address the link between sufficiency and biodiversity. And when they do, the link often remains unspecific. Possible reasons are that sufficiency potentially has broader political implications, that the term is not descriptive and that other terms are used to describe similar strategies. Other potential explanations are that several framings for the need for sufficiency are possible and that linking sufficiency and biodiversity requires interdisciplinarity. Drawing on the results and the discussion, an argument in favour of using the term ‘sufficiency’ and further research is presented. Moreover, a sufficiency typology is developed and questions are raised that could form the basis for future research on linking biodiversity conservation and the various aspects of sufficiency.","PeriodicalId":501054,"journal":{"name":"Nature Conservation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.55.118243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dramatic loss of biodiversity is caused by the use of resources and land. One strategy aiming at reducing the use of resources and land is sufficiency, which consequently could be a strategy for protecting biodiversity. This article therefore examines the extent to which sufficiency in the context of biodiversity conservation is already being addressed by nature conservation associations and the scientific community. To this end, publications were analysed firstly with regards to the understanding of sufficiency, secondly with regards to the considered links between sufficiency and biodiversity as well as thirdly with regards to the considered fields of action. The systematic identification and evaluation of scientific publications (for the years 2017–2021) and publications by German and international nature conservation associations shows that few publications address the link between sufficiency and biodiversity. And when they do, the link often remains unspecific. Possible reasons are that sufficiency potentially has broader political implications, that the term is not descriptive and that other terms are used to describe similar strategies. Other potential explanations are that several framings for the need for sufficiency are possible and that linking sufficiency and biodiversity requires interdisciplinarity. Drawing on the results and the discussion, an argument in favour of using the term ‘sufficiency’ and further research is presented. Moreover, a sufficiency typology is developed and questions are raised that could form the basis for future research on linking biodiversity conservation and the various aspects of sufficiency.
将充足性与保护生物多样性联系起来:政治影响、框架、描述性和跨学科性问题?
资源和土地的使用造成了生物多样性的急剧丧失。旨在减少资源和土地使用的一项战略是 "充足",这也是保护生物多样性的一项战略。因此,本文探讨了自然保护协会和科学界在多大程度上已经开始关注生物多样性保护方面的充足性问题。为此,文章首先分析了出版物对充足性的理解,其次分析了充足性与生物多样性之间的联系,第三分析了所考虑的行动领域。对科学出版物(2017-2021 年)以及德国和国际自然保护协会出版物的系统识别和评估表明,很少有出版物涉及充足性与生物多样性之间的联系。即使有,联系也往往不具体。可能的原因是,"充足 "可能具有更广泛的政治含义,该术语不具有描述性,而且其他术语也被用于描述类似的战略。其他可能的解释是,对充足性的需求可能有多种框架,将充足性与生物多样性联系起来需要跨学科性。根据结果和讨论,提出了支持使用 "充足 "一词和进一步研究的论点。此外,还提出了一种 "充足 "类型学,并提出了一些问题,这些问题可作为今后将生物多样性保护与 "充足 "的各个方面联系起来进行研究的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信