scholarly journals GI Guidelines for the Metropolitan City of Cagliari (Italy): A Method for Implementing Green Areas

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 10863
Author(s):  
Giovanna Calia ◽  
Antonio Ledda ◽  
Vittorio Serra ◽  
Giulio Senes ◽  
Andrea De Montis

The decline of natural capital resulting from urbanization has triggered phenomena such as landscape fragmentation and loss of biodiversity. European institutions have published documents and strategies with the purpose of counteracting such phenomena. In this regard, in 2020 the European Commission released the European Biodiversity Strategy 2030, which defines biodiversity conservation objectives and promotes the implementation of green infrastructures (GIs) designed to supply ecosystem services, which can increase people’s well-being. The scientific literature has scarcely dealt with methods for drafting guidance documents (guidelines) to support public administrations in the implementation of GIs. In this study, we aim at designing and applying a method for drafting GI guidelines. We apply the method to the Metropolitan City of Cagliari, the main urbanized area—which partially includes the former Province of Cagliari—of Sardinia (Italy). According to the findings, a proposal of GI guidelines should be rooted in context analysis and consistency checks and should be tailored to specific geographical and institutional contexts. The preliminary guidelines described in this study are designed to provide public administrations with GI guidelines based on scientific, technical, and cultural considerations, and are aimed at supporting an effective implementation of GIs and a GI network.

1982 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward M. Bennett

The paper identifies and examines some of the economic, political, religious and social structures created by the dominant white culture and their effects on the mental well-being of the Cree and Ojibwa people residing in Northwestern Ontario. Two major clusters of problems are identified: (i) community power-loss and disenfranchisement and (ii) the establishment of norms which diminish the identity and self-esteem of native persons. Actions which deal with both kinds of power-loss are suggested. The range of goals for these activities include more effective integration, cross cultural considerations and native control over community and resource development. Important functions are identified for community psychologists in program and community assessment and development, public education and advocacy.


2020 ◽  

Ecosystems are critically important components of Earth’s biological diversity and as the natural capital that sustains human life and well-being. Yet all of the world’s ecosystems show hallmarks of human influence, and many are under acute risks of collapse, with consequences for habitats of species, genetic diversity, ecosystem services, sustainable development and human well-being. The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology is a hierarchical classification system that, in its upper levels, defines ecosystems by their convergent ecological functions and, in its lower levels, distinguishes ecosystems with contrasting assemblages of species engaged in those functions. This report describes the three upper levels of the hierarchy, which provide a framework for understanding and comparing the key ecological traits of functionally different ecosystems and their drivers. An understanding of these traits and drivers is essential to support ecosystem management.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Brilha

<p>The concept of geodiversity, despite being in use for almost 30 years, still has little impact on society. It is not easy to explain the reason for this dissociation, considering that the elements that constitute geodiversity are intrinsically part of nature, play an essential role in ecosystem services and, consequently, in human well-being.</p><p>During the last decade we have seen a great development in the interest of the geoscientific community in this subject, represented by the increase in the publication of papers and doctoral and master theses all over the world. One of the main challenges is now to transpose all this scientific knowledge into society. Obviously, theoretical and conceptual discussions about geodiversity are an integral part of science and must continue, but if we want that society recognizes the importance and value of geodiversity, we must be able to demonstrate clearly how geodiversity can help to solve some of the problems we face today.</p><p>Among other priorities, the geoscientific community has to be able to demonstrate in an structured way:</p><ul><li>The importance of geodiversity in implementing nature conservation actions and its direct relationship with biodiversity;</li> <li><span>The contribution of geodiversity for ecosystems restoration and its accounting as part of natural capital;</span></li> <li><span>The need to quantify the role of geodiversity in ecosystem services;</span></li> <li><span>The urgency of make environmental impact assessments including all possible effects that may affect geodiversity elements and processes;</span></li> <li><span>The importance of integrate the concept of geodiversity in pre-university education curricula;</span></li> <li><span>That the information and environmental interpretation provided to visitors of protected areas and other conservation areas should always include geodiversity.</span></li> </ul><p>Once the importance of geodiversity is fully recognized by policy-makers, managers, and the society in general, the fulfilment of the UN Sustainable Development Goals will be for sure closer than it is today.</p>


2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 575-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion B. Potschin ◽  
Roy H. Haines-Young

The ‘ecosystem service’ debate has taken on many features of a classic Kuhnian paradigm. It challenges conventional wisdoms about conservation and the value of nature, and is driven as much by political agendas as scientific ones. In this paper we review some current and emerging issues arising in relation to the analysis and assessment of ecosystem services, and in particular emphasize the need for physical geographers to find new ways of characterizing the structure and dynamics of service providing units. If robust and relevant valuations are to be made of the contribution that natural capital makes to human well-being, then we need a deeper understanding of the way in which the drivers of change impact on the marginal outputs of ecosystem services. A better understanding of the trade-offs that need to be considered when dealing with multifunctional ecosystems is also required. Future developments must include methods for describing and tracking the stocks and flows that characterize natural capital. This will support valuation of the benefits estimation of the level of reinvestment that society must make in this natural capital base if it is to be sustained. We argue that if the ecosystem service concept is to be used seriously as a framework for policy and management then the biophysical sciences generally, and physical geography in particular, must go beyond the uncritical ‘puzzle solving’ that characterizes recent work. A geographical perspective can provide important new, critical insights into the place-based approaches to ecosystem assessment that are now emerging.


Author(s):  
Leon C. Braat

The concept of ecosystem services considers the usefulness of nature for human society. The economic importance of nature was described and analyzed in the 18th century, but the term ecosystem services was introduced only in 1981. Since then it has spurred an increasing number of academic publications, international research projects, and policy studies. Now a subject of intense debate in the global scientific community, from the natural to social science domains, it is also used, developed, and customized in policy arenas and considered, if in a still somewhat skeptical and apprehensive way, in the “practice” domain—by nature management agencies, farmers, foresters, and corporate business. This process of bridging evident gaps between ecology and economics, and between nature conservation and economic development, has also been felt in the political arena, including in the United Nations and the European Union (which have placed it at the center of their nature conservation and sustainable use strategies). The concept involves the utilitarian framing of those functions of nature that are used by humans and considered beneficial to society as economic and social services. In this light, for example, the disappearance of biodiversity directly affects ecosystem functions that underpin critical services for human well-being. More generally, the concept can be defined in this manner: Ecosystem services are the direct and indirect contributions of ecosystems, in interaction with contributions from human society, to human well-being. The concept underpins four major discussions: (1) Academic: the ecological versus the economic dimensions of the goods and services that flow from ecosystems to the human economy; the challenge of integrating concepts and models across this paradigmatic divide; (2) Social: the risks versus benefits of bringing the utilitarian argument into political debates about nature conservation (Are ecosystem services good or bad for biodiversity and vice versa?); (3) Policy and planning: how to value the benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services (Will this improve decision-making on topics ranging from poverty alleviation via subsidies to farmers to planning of grey with green infrastructure to combining economic growth with nature conservation?); and (4) Practice: Can revenue come from smart management and sustainable use of ecosystems? Are there markets to be discovered and can businesses be created? How do taxes figure in an ecosystem-based economy? The outcomes of these discussions will both help to shape policy and planning of economies at global, national, and regional scales and contribute to the long-term survival and well-being of humanity.


Author(s):  
Jean Louis Weber

Environmental accounting is an attempt to broaden the scope of the accounting frameworks used to assess economic performance, to take stock of elements that are not recorded in public or private accounting books. These gaps occur because the various costs of using nature are not captured, being considered, in many cases, as externalities that can be forwarded to others or postponed. Positive externalities—the natural resource—are depleted with no recording in National Accounts (while companies do record them as depreciation elements). Depletion of renewable resource results in degradation of the environment, which adds to negative externalities resulting from pollution and fragmentation of cyclic and living systems. Degradation, or its financial counterpart in depreciation, is not recorded at all. Therefore, the indicators of production, income, consumption, saving, investment, and debts on which many economic decisions are taken are flawed, or at least incomplete and sometimes misleading, when immediate benefits are in fact losses in the long run, when we consume the reproductive functions of our capital. Although national accounting has been an important driving force in change, environmental accounting encompasses all accounting frameworks including national accounts, financial accounting standards, and accounts established to assess the costs and benefits of plans and projects. There are several approaches to economic environmental accounting at the national level. Of these approaches, one purpose is the calculation of genuine economic welfare by taking into account losses from environmental damage caused by economic activity and gains from unrecorded services provided by Nature. Here, particular attention is given to the calculation of a “Green GDP” or “Adjusted National Income” and/or “Genuine Savings” as well as natural assets value and depletion. A different view considers the damages caused to renewable natural capital and the resulting maintenance and restoration costs. Besides approaches based on benefits and costs, more descriptive accounts in physical units are produced with the purpose of assessing resource use efficiency. With regard to natural assets, the focus can be on assets directly used by the economy, or more broadly, on ecosystem capacity to deliver services, ecosystem resilience, and its possible degradation. These different approaches are not necessarily contradictory, although controversies can be noted in the literature. The discussion focuses on issues such as the legitimacy of combining values obtained with shadow prices (needed to value the elements that are not priced by the market) with the transaction values recorded in the national accounts, the relative importance of accounts in monetary vs. physical units, and ultimately, the goals for environmental accounting. These goals include assessing the sustainability of the economy in terms of conservation (or increase) of the net income flow and total economic wealth (the weak sustainability paradigm), in relation to the sustainability of the ecosystem, which supports livelihoods and well-being in the broader sense (strong sustainability). In 2012, the UN Statistical Commission adopted an international statistical standard called, the “System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Central Framework” (SEEA CF). The SEEA CF covers only items for which enough experience exists to be proposed for implementation by national statistical offices. A second volume on SEEA-Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EEA) was added in 2013 to supplement the SEEA CF with a research agenda and the development of tests. Experiments of the SEEA-EEA are developing at the initiative of the World Bank (WAVES), UN Environment Programme (VANTAGE, ProEcoServ), or the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (SEEA-Ecosystem Natural Capital Accounts-Quick Start Package [ENCA-QSP]). Beside the SEEA and in relation to it, other environmental accounting frameworks have been developed for specific purposes, including material flow accounting (MFA), which is now a regular framework at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to report on the Green Growth strategy, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) guidelines for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), reporting greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration. Can be considered as well the Ecological Footprint accounts, which aim at raising awareness that our resource use is above what the planet can deliver, or the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of 2005, which presents tables and an overall assessment in an accounting style. Environmental accounting is also a subject of interest for business, both as a way to assess impacts—costs and benefits of projects—and to define new accounting standards to assess their long term performance and risks.


2020 ◽  
Vol 159 ◽  
pp. 07002
Author(s):  
Galiya Sansyzbayeva ◽  
Laura Ashirbekova ◽  
Kuralay Nurgaliyeva ◽  
Zhuldyz Ametova ◽  
Arailym Asanova

The particular relevance of the study of issues related to global crises is determined by the fact that although they affect the whole of humanity as a whole, the least economically and socially protected layers of the population in the whole world suffer from their consequences. That is why the key concepts of a green economy are natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides. The main priorities of the green economy concept are to increase the well-being of society with minimal impact on the environment. The article discusses the theoretical aspects of the implementation of the concept of “green” economy in Kazakhstan. The main directions of the “green” economy are highlighted and the results of the transition to a green economy are analyzed. The main stages of development of green economy in Kazakhstan are described. The problems of Kazakhstan’s transition to a “green” course of economic development are studied and the need for innovative approaches in the development of green technologies in the country is substantiated.


2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 677-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gretchen C. Daily Gretchen C. Daily ◽  
Ouyang Zhiyun Ouyang Zhiyun ◽  
Zheng Hua Zheng Hua ◽  
Li Shuzhuo Li Shuzhuo ◽  
Wang Yukuan Wang Yukuan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Partha Dasgupta

In this paper, I formalize the idea of sustainable development in terms of intergenerational well-being. I then sketch an argument that has recently been put forward formally to demonstrate that intergenerational well-being increases over time if and only if a comprehensive measure of wealth per capita increases. The measure of wealth includes not only manufactured capital, knowledge and human capital (education and health), but also natural capital (e.g. ecosystems). I show that a country's comprehensive wealth per capita can decline even while gross domestic product (GDP) per capita increases and the UN Human Development Index records an improvement. I then use some rough and ready data from the world's poorest countries and regions to show that during the period 1970–2000 wealth per capita declined in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, even though the Human Development Index (HDI) showed an improvement everywhere and GDP per capita increased in all places (except in sub-Saharan Africa, where there was a slight decline). I conclude that, as none of the development indicators currently in use is able to reveal whether development has been, or is expected to be, sustainable, national statistical offices and international organizations should now routinely estimate the (comprehensive) wealth of nations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document