People and Nature最新文献

{"title":"Predicting animal abundance through local ecological knowledge: An internal validation using consensus analysis","authors":"Franciany Braga‐Pereira, Pedro Mayor, T. Morcatty, Pedro Pérez‐Peña, M. Bowler, Marina A. R. de Mattos Vieira, Rômulo Romeu da Nóbrega Alves, Julia E. Fa, Carlos A. Peres, A. S. Tavares, Carla Mere-Roncal, C. González‐Crespo, C. Bertsch, Claudia Ramos Rodriguez, Claudio Bardales‐Alvites, Eduardo von Muhlen, F. Paim, Jhancy Segura Tamayo, J. Valsecchi, J. Gonçalves, Leon Torres‐Oyarce, L. P. Lemos, Michael P. Gilmore, Miguel Antúnez Correa, Natalia Carolina Angulo Perez, Pablo Puertas, Hani R. El Bizri","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10587","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Given the ongoing environmental degradation from local to global scales, it is fundamental to develop more efficient means of gathering data on species and ecosystems. Local ecological knowledge, in which local communities can consistently provide information on the status of animal species over time, has been shown to be effective. Several studies demonstrate that data gathered using local ecological knowledge (LEK)‐based methods are comparable with data obtained from conventional methods (such as line transects and camera traps).\u0000\u0000Here, we employ a consensus analysis to validate and evaluate the accuracy of interview data on LEK. Additionally, we investigate the influence of social and bioecological variables on enhancing data quality. We interviewed 323 persons in 19 villages in the Western and Central Amazon to determine the level of consensus on the abundance of hunted and non‐hunted forest species. These villages varied in size, socio‐economic characteristics and in the experience with wildlife of their dwellers. Interviewees estimated the relative abundance of 101 species with a broad spectrum of bioecological characteristics using a four‐point Likert scale.\u0000\u0000High consensus was found for species population abundance in all sampled villages and for 79.6% of interviewees. The village consensus of all species abundance pooled was negatively correlated with village population size. The consensus level was high regardless of the interviewees' hunting experience. Species that are more frequently hunted or are more apparent had greater consensus values; only two species presented a low consensus level, which are rare and solitary species.\u0000\u0000We show in our study in the Amazon that information gathered by local peoples, Indigenous as well as non‐Indigenous, can be useful in understanding the status of animal species found within their environment. The high level of cultural consensus we describe likely arises from knowledge sharing and the strong connection between the persons interviewed and the forest. We suggest that consensus analysis can be used to validate LEK‐generated data instead of comparing these types of data with information obtained by conventional methods.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139777423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Peopled landscapes: Questions of coexistence in invasive plant management and rewilding","authors":"Jennifer Atchison, Jenny Pickerill, C. Arnold, Leah M. Gibbs, Nic Gill, E. Hubbard, Jamie Lorimer, Matt Watson","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10598","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000The concept of ‘peopled landscapes’ is based on the notion that it is not possible, nor socially or politically desirable, to remove people from the environment in the era of the Anthropocene. As such, it is necessary to document and develop ways to coexist and flourish.\u0000\u0000This review examines emergent scholarship about peopled landscapes and biodiversity conservation by considering invasive plant management and rewilding as social processes. While invasive plant management and rewilding are often understood as separate, thinking through social scientific research and examples from Australia and the UK, we demonstrate how both forms of human action in landscapes can be more usefully understood as social relations with nature involving social change and social action.\u0000\u0000Drawing attention to agency, practices and capacity, we show how diverse forms of human and nonhuman actions are recognised, attributed or acknowledged in biodiversity conservation in peopled landscapes.\u0000\u0000In practice, centring the idea of peopled landscapes (rather than conceiving of the environment as where the impact of people is minimised) shows how invasive plant management and rewilding can be understood as related responses to environmental problems.\u0000\u0000Flourishing and coexistence in peopled landscapes require recognition of the diverse human and nonhuman agencies that shape the politics of acceptable action, and illustrate the inseparability of environmental and social justice.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139777886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Interdisciplinary insights into navigating the maze of landscape multifunctionality","authors":"Hanna Fors, A. Berlin, Uliana Gottlieb, Mari Kågström, James Weldon, Jasmine Zhang","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10610","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10610","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Increasing demands for land to deliver multiple and sometimes conflicting services to people and nature have led to the development of an extensive body of research focussed on multifunctional landscapes. However, this has created both insight and confusion, as authors from a variety of disciplines have independently tackled the question of how to manage the trade‐offs and synergies inherent in landscapes that are required to produce multiple functions and services.\u0000\u0000We employed an interdisciplinary perspective to formulate some key questions that researchers of multifunctional landscapes can use to identify blind spots.\u0000\u0000Our process resulted in a question‐based analysis support scheme that supports reflection and recursive thinking about multifunctional landscapes, beginning with objective setting and visions for addressing it, grounded in baseline mapping, then assessing landscape functions and their single and multiple interactions; as well as the analysis of sensitivity to spatial and temporal dimensions.\u0000\u0000Other key points identified are the need for clarity and examination of unstated assumptions, from aims to definitions; accounting for scale; incorporating stakeholder needs throughout the process and applying suitable methods of measurement and aggregation. The focus on asking guided questions derives from the insight that there is no universal correct approach to multifunctional landscapes; the aim should instead be to find the most appropriate methods for the given circumstances and goals.\u0000\u0000Policy implications. Tackling current and future socio‐ecological challenges is an interdisciplinary undertaking, necessitating collaborative efforts between research fields that each bring valuable and distinct insights. To effectively combat these challenges, multifunctional landscapes require a clear process and focused objective in their implementation. Multifunctionality should be seen as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139777900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Peopled landscapes: Questions of coexistence in invasive plant management and rewilding","authors":"Jennifer Atchison, Jenny Pickerill, C. Arnold, Leah M. Gibbs, Nic Gill, E. Hubbard, Jamie Lorimer, Matt Watson","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10598","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000The concept of ‘peopled landscapes’ is based on the notion that it is not possible, nor socially or politically desirable, to remove people from the environment in the era of the Anthropocene. As such, it is necessary to document and develop ways to coexist and flourish.\u0000\u0000This review examines emergent scholarship about peopled landscapes and biodiversity conservation by considering invasive plant management and rewilding as social processes. While invasive plant management and rewilding are often understood as separate, thinking through social scientific research and examples from Australia and the UK, we demonstrate how both forms of human action in landscapes can be more usefully understood as social relations with nature involving social change and social action.\u0000\u0000Drawing attention to agency, practices and capacity, we show how diverse forms of human and nonhuman actions are recognised, attributed or acknowledged in biodiversity conservation in peopled landscapes.\u0000\u0000In practice, centring the idea of peopled landscapes (rather than conceiving of the environment as where the impact of people is minimised) shows how invasive plant management and rewilding can be understood as related responses to environmental problems.\u0000\u0000Flourishing and coexistence in peopled landscapes require recognition of the diverse human and nonhuman agencies that shape the politics of acceptable action, and illustrate the inseparability of environmental and social justice.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139837642","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Interdisciplinary insights into navigating the maze of landscape multifunctionality","authors":"Hanna Fors, A. Berlin, Uliana Gottlieb, Mari Kågström, James Weldon, Jasmine Zhang","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10610","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10610","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Increasing demands for land to deliver multiple and sometimes conflicting services to people and nature have led to the development of an extensive body of research focussed on multifunctional landscapes. However, this has created both insight and confusion, as authors from a variety of disciplines have independently tackled the question of how to manage the trade‐offs and synergies inherent in landscapes that are required to produce multiple functions and services.\u0000\u0000We employed an interdisciplinary perspective to formulate some key questions that researchers of multifunctional landscapes can use to identify blind spots.\u0000\u0000Our process resulted in a question‐based analysis support scheme that supports reflection and recursive thinking about multifunctional landscapes, beginning with objective setting and visions for addressing it, grounded in baseline mapping, then assessing landscape functions and their single and multiple interactions; as well as the analysis of sensitivity to spatial and temporal dimensions.\u0000\u0000Other key points identified are the need for clarity and examination of unstated assumptions, from aims to definitions; accounting for scale; incorporating stakeholder needs throughout the process and applying suitable methods of measurement and aggregation. The focus on asking guided questions derives from the insight that there is no universal correct approach to multifunctional landscapes; the aim should instead be to find the most appropriate methods for the given circumstances and goals.\u0000\u0000Policy implications. Tackling current and future socio‐ecological challenges is an interdisciplinary undertaking, necessitating collaborative efforts between research fields that each bring valuable and distinct insights. To effectively combat these challenges, multifunctional landscapes require a clear process and focused objective in their implementation. Multifunctionality should be seen as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139837450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Predicting animal abundance through local ecological knowledge: An internal validation using consensus analysis","authors":"Franciany Braga‐Pereira, Pedro Mayor, T. Morcatty, Pedro Pérez‐Peña, M. Bowler, Marina A. R. de Mattos Vieira, Rômulo Romeu da Nóbrega Alves, Julia E. Fa, Carlos A. Peres, A. S. Tavares, Carla Mere-Roncal, C. González‐Crespo, C. Bertsch, Claudia Ramos Rodriguez, Claudio Bardales‐Alvites, Eduardo von Muhlen, F. Paim, Jhancy Segura Tamayo, J. Valsecchi, J. Gonçalves, Leon Torres‐Oyarce, L. P. Lemos, Michael P. Gilmore, Miguel Antúnez Correa, Natalia Carolina Angulo Perez, Pablo Puertas, Hani R. El Bizri","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10587","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Given the ongoing environmental degradation from local to global scales, it is fundamental to develop more efficient means of gathering data on species and ecosystems. Local ecological knowledge, in which local communities can consistently provide information on the status of animal species over time, has been shown to be effective. Several studies demonstrate that data gathered using local ecological knowledge (LEK)‐based methods are comparable with data obtained from conventional methods (such as line transects and camera traps).\u0000\u0000Here, we employ a consensus analysis to validate and evaluate the accuracy of interview data on LEK. Additionally, we investigate the influence of social and bioecological variables on enhancing data quality. We interviewed 323 persons in 19 villages in the Western and Central Amazon to determine the level of consensus on the abundance of hunted and non‐hunted forest species. These villages varied in size, socio‐economic characteristics and in the experience with wildlife of their dwellers. Interviewees estimated the relative abundance of 101 species with a broad spectrum of bioecological characteristics using a four‐point Likert scale.\u0000\u0000High consensus was found for species population abundance in all sampled villages and for 79.6% of interviewees. The village consensus of all species abundance pooled was negatively correlated with village population size. The consensus level was high regardless of the interviewees' hunting experience. Species that are more frequently hunted or are more apparent had greater consensus values; only two species presented a low consensus level, which are rare and solitary species.\u0000\u0000We show in our study in the Amazon that information gathered by local peoples, Indigenous as well as non‐Indigenous, can be useful in understanding the status of animal species found within their environment. The high level of cultural consensus we describe likely arises from knowledge sharing and the strong connection between the persons interviewed and the forest. We suggest that consensus analysis can be used to validate LEK‐generated data instead of comparing these types of data with information obtained by conventional methods.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139837053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"What monarch butterfly waystation names and characteristics can reveal about program participants","authors":"Emily A. Geest, Orley R. Taylor, Kristen A. Baum","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10586","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) have undergone large scale population declines leading to multiple conservation organizations encouraging the creation of monarch butterfly habitat. Monarch Watch encourages volunteers to create and register monarch habitat as Monarch Waystations.\u0000\u0000During registration waystations can be named. Names reflect personal meanings, community attachments, and cultural insights and waystation names in particular can provide insights into what ideas and concepts volunteers associate with a habitat creation program.\u0000\u0000A total of 37,916 registered waystation names were examined to determine most commonly used names, words and word themes. The most common types of waystations were medium‐sized suburban gardens in the United States.\u0000\u0000The most common waystation names referenced yard placement with My Backyard the most frequently used. Place‐themed words were the most used followed by animal‐themed words. Within animal‐themed words, insect words were the most used followed by mammals and birds.\u0000\u0000Theological/mortality themed words were present with memorial the most common word, implying a permanence of waystations.\u0000\u0000The most common familial terms included mom and grandma suggesting inter‐generational gardening is occurring, which is known to strengthen communities and build well‐being.\u0000\u0000The frequency of positive emotion/feeling words implies that participating in habitat creation programs is a positive experience and participation may reduce conservation apathy.\u0000\u0000Further research into habitat creation programs and the longevity of habitat created as well as the motivations and demographics of participants can help tailor habitat volunteer programs to desired audiences and increase overall participation.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139781833","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"What monarch butterfly waystation names and characteristics can reveal about program participants","authors":"Emily A. Geest, Orley R. Taylor, Kristen A. Baum","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10586","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) have undergone large scale population declines leading to multiple conservation organizations encouraging the creation of monarch butterfly habitat. Monarch Watch encourages volunteers to create and register monarch habitat as Monarch Waystations.\u0000\u0000During registration waystations can be named. Names reflect personal meanings, community attachments, and cultural insights and waystation names in particular can provide insights into what ideas and concepts volunteers associate with a habitat creation program.\u0000\u0000A total of 37,916 registered waystation names were examined to determine most commonly used names, words and word themes. The most common types of waystations were medium‐sized suburban gardens in the United States.\u0000\u0000The most common waystation names referenced yard placement with My Backyard the most frequently used. Place‐themed words were the most used followed by animal‐themed words. Within animal‐themed words, insect words were the most used followed by mammals and birds.\u0000\u0000Theological/mortality themed words were present with memorial the most common word, implying a permanence of waystations.\u0000\u0000The most common familial terms included mom and grandma suggesting inter‐generational gardening is occurring, which is known to strengthen communities and build well‐being.\u0000\u0000The frequency of positive emotion/feeling words implies that participating in habitat creation programs is a positive experience and participation may reduce conservation apathy.\u0000\u0000Further research into habitat creation programs and the longevity of habitat created as well as the motivations and demographics of participants can help tailor habitat volunteer programs to desired audiences and increase overall participation.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139841800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disentangling the complexity of human–nature interactions","authors":"Elena M. Bennett, Belinda Reyers","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10611","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Human–nature interactions have been identified as an important leverage point for achieving sustainability. Processes to recognize, protect, improve and reimagine human–nature interactions will be central to shift the world to more sustainable and equitable pathways and futures.\u0000\u0000In the context of the interconnected and rapidly changing Anthropocene, work on human–nature interactions must move beyond dominant linear assumptions of a relatively simple and easily and predictably manipulated world to acknowledge and engage with the complex, dynamic, asymmetrical and unequal nature of the interactions connecting people and nature.\u0000\u0000Based on three key features highlighted by the study of complex social–ecological systems (SES)—that these systems are relational, open and dynamic—we propose three new directions for the study and management of human–nature interactions that can help to acknowledge and disentangle the globally intertwined and dynamic nature of these interactions.\u0000\u0000These features suggest new directions and foci for sustainability science: the inseparable and relational qualities of the interactions between people and nature; the cross‐scale nature of these relationships; and the continuously evolving and changing form of these relationships.\u0000\u0000To bridge the gap between the theory of complex, inseparable and unequal human–nature interactions and the reductionist tendencies in research and practice, SES research raises opportunities to connect local action and global learning; to mobilize and develop new cross‐scale and relational capacities to encourage synergies and avoid trade‐offs; and to explore, experiment and learn our way forward onto more sustainable and equitable pathways.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139844045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disentangling the complexity of human–nature interactions","authors":"Elena M. Bennett, Belinda Reyers","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10611","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Human–nature interactions have been identified as an important leverage point for achieving sustainability. Processes to recognize, protect, improve and reimagine human–nature interactions will be central to shift the world to more sustainable and equitable pathways and futures.\u0000\u0000In the context of the interconnected and rapidly changing Anthropocene, work on human–nature interactions must move beyond dominant linear assumptions of a relatively simple and easily and predictably manipulated world to acknowledge and engage with the complex, dynamic, asymmetrical and unequal nature of the interactions connecting people and nature.\u0000\u0000Based on three key features highlighted by the study of complex social–ecological systems (SES)—that these systems are relational, open and dynamic—we propose three new directions for the study and management of human–nature interactions that can help to acknowledge and disentangle the globally intertwined and dynamic nature of these interactions.\u0000\u0000These features suggest new directions and foci for sustainability science: the inseparable and relational qualities of the interactions between people and nature; the cross‐scale nature of these relationships; and the continuously evolving and changing form of these relationships.\u0000\u0000To bridge the gap between the theory of complex, inseparable and unequal human–nature interactions and the reductionist tendencies in research and practice, SES research raises opportunities to connect local action and global learning; to mobilize and develop new cross‐scale and relational capacities to encourage synergies and avoid trade‐offs; and to explore, experiment and learn our way forward onto more sustainable and equitable pathways.\u0000\u0000Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139784047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}