•
6.1 How do protected areas benefit biodiversity and humans?
•
6.2 Can economic incentives benefit biodiversity and local communities?
•
6.3 How can invasive species be addressed?
•
6.4 How do protected areas benefit biodiversity and humans?
•
6.4.1 Strategies for integrating biodiversity issues in production sectors
•
6.4.2 Contributions of the private sector to biodiversity objectives
•
6.5 What governance approaches can promote biodiversity conservation?
•
6.6 What are the key factors of success of conservation actions?
•
6.7 How could important drivers of biodiversity loss be addressed?
The source document for this Digest states:
[INDENT]
•
Biodiversity loss is driven by local, regional, and global factors, so responses are also needed at all scales.
•
Responses need to acknowledge multiple stakeholders with different needs.
•
Given certain conditions, many effective responses are available to address the issues identified.
•
Responses designed to address biodiversity loss will not be sustainable or sufficient unless relevant direct and indirect drivers of change are addressed.
•
Further progress in reducing biodiversity loss will come through greater coherence and synergies among sectoral responses and through more systematic consideration of trade-offs among ecosystem services or between biodiversity conser­vation and other needs of society.
Some drivers of biodiversity loss are localized, such as overexploitation. Others are global, such as climate change, while many operate at a variety of scales, such as the local impacts of invasive species through global trade. Most of the responses assessed here were designed to address the direct drivers of biodiversity loss. However, these drivers are better seen as symptoms of the indirect drivers, such as unsustainable patterns of consumption, demographic change, and globalization.
At the local and regional scale, responses to the drivers may promote both local biodiversity and human well-being by acting on the synergies between maintenance of local biodiversity and provision of key ecosystem services. Responses promoting local management for global biodiversity values depend on local “capture” of the global values in a way that provides both ongoing incentives for management and support for local well-being (R5).
At the global scale, effective responses set priorities for conservation and development efforts in different regions and create shared goals or programs, such as the biodiversity-related conventions and the Millennium Development Goals. Effective trade-offs and synergies will be promoted when different strategies or instruments are used in an integrated, coordinated way (R5).
The MA assessment of biodiversity responses places human well-being as the central focus for assessment, recognizing that people make decisions concerning ecosystems based on a range of values related to well-being, including the use and non-use values of biodiversity and ecosystems. The assessment therefore has viewed biodiversity responses as addressing values at different scales, with strong links to ecosystem service values and well-being arising at each of these scales. The well-being of local people dominates the assessment of many responses, including those relating to protected areas, governance, wild species management, and various responses related to local capture of benefits.
Focusing exclusively on values at only one level often hinders responses that could promote values at all levels or reconcile conflicts between the levels. Effective responses function across scales, addressing global values of biodiversity while identifying opportunity costs or synergies with local values. Local consideration of global biodiversity recognizes the value of what is unique at a place (or what is not yet protected elsewhere). The values of ecosystem services, on the other hand, do not always depend on these unique elements. Effective biodiversity responses recognize both kinds of values. These considerations guide the assessment summarized in this section of a range of response strategies that to varying degrees integrate global and local values and that seek effective trade-offs and synergies for biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being.
Difficulties in measuring biodiversity have complicated assessments of the impact of response strategies. Developing better indicators of biodiversity would enhance integration among strategies and instruments. For example, existing measures often focus on local biodiversity and do not estimate the marginal gains in regional or global biodiversity values. Similarly, biodiversity gains from organic farming are typically expressed only as localized species richness, with no consideration of the degree of contribution to regional or global biodiversity or the trade-offs with high-productivity industrial agriculture.
[/INDENT]
•
6.1 How do protected areas benefit biodiversity and humans?
•
6.2 Can economic incentives benefit biodiversity and local communities?
•
6.3 How can invasive species be addressed?
•
6.4 How do protected areas benefit biodiversity and humans?
•
6.4.1 Strategies for integrating biodiversity issues in production sectors
•
6.4.2 Contributions of the private sector to biodiversity objectives
•
6.5 What governance approaches can promote biodiversity conservation?
•
6.6 What are the key factors of success of conservation actions?
•
6.7 How could important drivers of biodiversity loss be addressed?
The source document for this Digest states:
•
Biodiversity loss is driven by local, regional, and global factors, so responses are also needed at all scales.
•
Responses need to acknowledge multiple stakeholders with different needs.
•
Given certain conditions, many effective responses are available to address the issues identified.
•
Responses designed to address biodiversity loss will not be sustainable or sufficient unless relevant direct and indirect drivers of change are addressed.
•
Further progress in reducing biodiversity loss will come through greater coherence and synergies among sectoral responses and through more systematic consideration of trade-offs among ecosystem services or between biodiversity conser­vation and other needs of society.
Some drivers of biodiversity loss are localized, such as overexploitation. Others are global, such as climate change, while many operate at a variety of scales, such as the local impacts of invasive species through global trade. Most of the responses assessed here were designed to address the direct drivers of biodiversity loss. However, these drivers are better seen as symptoms of the indirect drivers, such as unsustainable patterns of consumption, demographic change, and globalization.
At the local and regional scale, responses to the drivers may promote both local biodiversity and human well-being by acting on the synergies between maintenance of local biodiversity and provision of key ecosystem services. Responses promoting local management for global biodiversity values depend on local “capture” of the global values in a way that provides both ongoing incentives for management and support for local well-being (R5).
At the global scale, effective responses set priorities for conservation and development efforts in different regions and create shared goals or programs, such as the biodiversity-related conventions and the Millennium Development Goals. Effective trade-offs and synergies will be promoted when different strategies or instruments are used in an integrated, coordinated way (R5).
The MA assessment of biodiversity responses places human well-being as the central focus for assessment, recognizing that people make decisions concerning ecosystems based on a range of values related to well-being, including the use and non-use values of biodiversity and ecosystems. The assessment therefore has viewed biodiversity responses as addressing values at different scales, with strong links to ecosystem service values and well-being arising at each of these scales. The well-being of local people dominates the assessment of many responses, including those relating to protected areas, governance, wild species management, and various responses related to local capture of benefits.
Focusing exclusively on values at only one level often hinders responses that could promote values at all levels or reconcile conflicts between the levels. Effective responses function across scales, addressing global values of biodiversity while identifying opportunity costs or synergies with local values. Local consideration of global biodiversity recognizes the value of what is unique at a place (or what is not yet protected elsewhere). The values of ecosystem services, on the other hand, do not always depend on these unique elements. Effective biodiversity responses recognize both kinds of values. These considerations guide the assessment summarized in this section of a range of response strategies that to varying degrees integrate global and local values and that seek effective trade-offs and synergies for biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being.
Difficulties in measuring biodiversity have complicated assessments of the impact of response strategies. Developing better indicators of biodiversity would enhance integration among strategies and instruments. For example, existing measures often focus on local biodiversity and do not estimate the marginal gains in regional or global biodiversity values. Similarly, biodiversity gains from organic farming are typically expressed only as localized species richness, with no consideration of the degree of contribution to regional or global biodiversity or the trade-offs with high-productivity industrial agriculture.
Legend. Thanks so much. I am going to copy and paste this and hand it in. Cheers
Hey lol don't do that. You don't know if that was also copy pasted from somewhere else. And it's a ****ing to copy paste somebody else's work
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Why not man?
Are you allowed to copy-paste? Then yeah do it.
I would advise against handing in that essay.
No problem mate. Should get full marks
Posted from TSR Mobile
Cheating is not copying and pasting an essay from the internet.
Cheating is not getting a friend to do it for you.
Cheating is pretending you understand when you don't. That's when you're cheating yourself.
Woah deep man.
I did! thank you so much!
I would advise against handing in that essay.
I Handed it in copied and pasted and got full marks!
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- psychology or biology?
- AQA Biology essay predictions
- should I either pick biology or sociology a-level?
- A Level Choices for Law
- What A levels to pick with biology and psychology?
- Psychology degree questions
- What A levels should I choose?
- dentistry
- Can I get a philosphy/anthropology degree, for example, with science alevels?
- Are these options good for a level?
- Can someone rank these subjects FOR AS in order from easiest to hardest.
- Not choosing English even for Law??
- What Alevels should I choose?
- I need HELP picking A-level subjects
- A Level bio or psych
- Urgent Help : A Levels for Bsc Economics at LSE
- A-level choices for Cambridge law
- A-level French
- A levels
- Land Economy Cambridge
Latest
Trending
Last reply 20 hours ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 1 (9PL0 01) - 21st May 2024 [Exam Chat]10
Trending
Last reply 20 hours ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 1 (9PL0 01) - 21st May 2024 [Exam Chat]10
