Alessandro Filazzola, Garland Xie, Katie Birchard, Namrata Shrestha, Danny Brown, J. S. Macivor
Parks are an integral component of cities. Ensuring city residents have equitable and easy access to parks is crucial for human well‐being. In temperate climates, park accessibility is particularly important in the summer months when these green spaces provide an area to recreate, exercise and escape indoor temperatures and heat emanating from paved and built surfaces. However, there are well‐known disparities in park accessibility in cities globally that may threaten the health of city residents, especially with global warming. We examined some of the largest city parks (>50 ha) in Toronto, Canada, by comparing park activity, housing demographics and daily weather patterns. We found that parks that provided more green space area per resident were situated in neighbourhoods that had higher proportions of single‐detached housing, higher automobile use and fewer multistorey apartments. We also found a strong correlation between park activity with population density and the number of amenities in the park. Surprisingly, we found no relationship between park activity and daily weather patterns, although park use was higher on weekends and holidays. These results suggest denser communities are at a disadvantage because they have proportionately less park area within walking distance in addition to having no private green spaces (e.g. backyards). We recommend revising municipal zoning around certain parks and the creation of new green spaces as methods to balance park provisioning in the city. Our findings suggest that designing and maintaining accessible, amenity‐rich parks is an important strategy for promoting health and well‐being in urban populations. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Using anonymized mobility data to reduce inequality in the availability and use of urban parks","authors":"Alessandro Filazzola, Garland Xie, Katie Birchard, Namrata Shrestha, Danny Brown, J. S. Macivor","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10623","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10623","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Parks are an integral component of cities. Ensuring city residents have equitable and easy access to parks is crucial for human well‐being. In temperate climates, park accessibility is particularly important in the summer months when these green spaces provide an area to recreate, exercise and escape indoor temperatures and heat emanating from paved and built surfaces. However, there are well‐known disparities in park accessibility in cities globally that may threaten the health of city residents, especially with global warming.\u0000\u0000We examined some of the largest city parks (>50 ha) in Toronto, Canada, by comparing park activity, housing demographics and daily weather patterns.\u0000\u0000We found that parks that provided more green space area per resident were situated in neighbourhoods that had higher proportions of single‐detached housing, higher automobile use and fewer multistorey apartments. We also found a strong correlation between park activity with population density and the number of amenities in the park. Surprisingly, we found no relationship between park activity and daily weather patterns, although park use was higher on weekends and holidays. These results suggest denser communities are at a disadvantage because they have proportionately less park area within walking distance in addition to having no private green spaces (e.g. backyards).\u0000\u0000We recommend revising municipal zoning around certain parks and the creation of new green spaces as methods to balance park provisioning in the city. Our findings suggest that designing and maintaining accessible, amenity‐rich parks is an important strategy for promoting health and well‐being in urban populations.\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":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140229346","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}
M. R. Peck, M. Desselas, S. Bonilla‐Bedoya, G. Redín, J. Durango‐Cordero
Global emergence of Rights of Nature (RoN) has gained momentum since Ecuador became the first country to constitutionally recognize it in 2008. The shift from perceiving nature as an object, to granting it legal subjecthood, can revolutionize protection of ecological systems. In 2021, Ecuador's Constitutional Court issued a landmark ruling, halting mining in the Los Cedros Protected Forest. Three pillars form the basis for legal protection of Los Cedros: (i) the right to timely, Free Prior Informed Environmental Consultation, (ii) application of the Precautionary Principle in risk to RoN, and (iii) the Right to Water. We analyse the Court ruling to identify legal frameworks applied then map and rank mining risk to other protected forests, Indigenous territories, unprotected native ecosystems, biodiversity and areas of water resource conflict to determine potential scale of conflict between mining and RoN. 7813 mining concessions of 22,812km2 overlay 9.2% of Ecuadorian mainland, 2323 concessions (29.7%) overlap 16,081km2 of protected forest (4781 km2, 20%), Indigenous territory (6473 km2, 8%) and native vegetation outside protected areas and Indigenous territories (13,390 km2, 9%). With 80% of their protected forests at risk from large‐scale mining, the most impacted Indigenous communities are the Shuar. Synthesis and applications: The Los Cedros legal case in Ecuador sets a precedent for using RoN to challenge mining in 4781 km2 of similar Protected Forest, with potential to protect an additional 16,081 km2 of Indigenous lands and biologically important ecosystems. However, lack of biological data for these areas will necessitate extensive data collection, possibly through community‐empowering citizen science. Our study emphasizes the urgent need to integrate indigenous and traditional ecological knowledge (ITEK), law and ecology. We propose a new transdisciplinary field of ‘ecological forensics’ to support nature protection within the RoN framework. Our research also identifies areas where RoN could effectively protect nature and that are likely to be of high investment risk for the mining industry. The final recommendation is to reconsider mining concessions in Ecuador, especially in ecologically sensitive areas, Indigenous territories, high biodiversity areas, and regions with water resource conflicts, to maintain ecological integrity and social harmony. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
自 2008 年厄瓜多尔成为第一个在宪法上承认自然权利 (RoN) 的国家以来，自然权利 (RoN) 在全球的兴起势头迅猛。从将自然视为客体到赋予其法律主体地位的转变，可以彻底改变对生态系统的保护。2021 年，厄瓜多尔宪法法院做出了一项具有里程碑意义的裁决，停止了在洛斯塞德罗斯保护林区的采矿活动。洛斯塞德罗斯保护林区的法律保护有三大支柱：(i) 及时、自由、事先知情的环境咨询权；(ii) 在保护林区面临风险时适用预防原则；(iii) 水权。我们对法院裁决进行分析，以确定适用的法律框架，然后对其他受保护森林、土著领地、未受保护的原生生态系统、生物多样性和水资源冲突地区的采矿风险进行绘图和排序，以确定采矿与 RoN 之间冲突的潜在规模。在厄瓜多尔，22812 平方公里的采矿特许权覆盖了 9.2% 的厄瓜多尔大陆，2323 个特许权（29.7%）覆盖了 16081 平方公里的保护林（4781 平方公里，20%）、土著领地（6473 平方公里，8%）以及保护区和土著领地以外的原生植被（13390 平方公里，9%）。由于 80% 的受保护森林面临大规模采矿的风险，受影响最大的土著社区是舒阿尔人：厄瓜多尔的洛斯塞德罗斯法律案件开创了利用 RoN 挑战 4781 平方公里类似受保护森林采矿的先例，有可能保护另外 16081 平方公里的土著土地和具有重要生物意义的生态系统。然而，由于缺乏这些地区的生物数据，因此有必要进行广泛的数据收集，可能的话通过社区赋权的公民科学来进行。我们的研究强调了整合土著和传统生态知识 (ITEK)、法律和生态学的迫切需要。我们提出了一个新的跨学科领域 "生态法医学"，以支持 RoN 框架内的自然保护。我们的研究还确定了 RoN 可以有效保护自然的领域，以及采矿业可能面临高投资风险的领域。最后的建议是重新考虑厄瓜多尔的采矿特许权，尤其是在生态敏感区、土著领地、生物多样性高发区和水资源冲突地区，以保持生态完整性和社会和谐。
{"title":"The conflict between Rights of Nature and mining in Ecuador: Implications of the Los Cedros Cloud Forest case for biodiversity conservation","authors":"M. R. Peck, M. Desselas, S. Bonilla‐Bedoya, G. Redín, J. Durango‐Cordero","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10615","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Global emergence of Rights of Nature (RoN) has gained momentum since Ecuador became the first country to constitutionally recognize it in 2008. The shift from perceiving nature as an object, to granting it legal subjecthood, can revolutionize protection of ecological systems. In 2021, Ecuador's Constitutional Court issued a landmark ruling, halting mining in the Los Cedros Protected Forest.\u0000\u0000Three pillars form the basis for legal protection of Los Cedros: (i) the right to timely, Free Prior Informed Environmental Consultation, (ii) application of the Precautionary Principle in risk to RoN, and (iii) the Right to Water.\u0000\u0000We analyse the Court ruling to identify legal frameworks applied then map and rank mining risk to other protected forests, Indigenous territories, unprotected native ecosystems, biodiversity and areas of water resource conflict to determine potential scale of conflict between mining and RoN.\u0000\u00007813 mining concessions of 22,812km2 overlay 9.2% of Ecuadorian mainland, 2323 concessions (29.7%) overlap 16,081km2 of protected forest (4781 km2, 20%), Indigenous territory (6473 km2, 8%) and native vegetation outside protected areas and Indigenous territories (13,390 km2, 9%). With 80% of their protected forests at risk from large‐scale mining, the most impacted Indigenous communities are the Shuar.\u0000\u0000Synthesis and applications: The Los Cedros legal case in Ecuador sets a precedent for using RoN to challenge mining in 4781 km2 of similar Protected Forest, with potential to protect an additional 16,081 km2 of Indigenous lands and biologically important ecosystems. However, lack of biological data for these areas will necessitate extensive data collection, possibly through community‐empowering citizen science. Our study emphasizes the urgent need to integrate indigenous and traditional ecological knowledge (ITEK), law and ecology. We propose a new transdisciplinary field of ‘ecological forensics’ to support nature protection within the RoN framework. Our research also identifies areas where RoN could effectively protect nature and that are likely to be of high investment risk for the mining industry. The final recommendation is to reconsider mining concessions in Ecuador, especially in ecologically sensitive areas, Indigenous territories, high biodiversity areas, and regions with water resource conflicts, to maintain ecological integrity and social harmony.\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":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140228125","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}
Gardens hold untapped potential for participatory biodiversity conservation. Conservation gardening has recently emerged as a way to foster declining native plant species in urban and rural green spaces. But the impact of cultivating these species on population trends in the broader landscape remains underexplored. This study examines the effects of cultivating herbaceous native plants on their long‐term population trends and endangerment, using Rothmaler's ‘Herbaceous Ornamental and Crop Plants’ in Germany, along with the German Red List of 1998 and 2018. It investigates whether native plants under cultivation are less endangered, examines the long‐term population trends relative to cultivation frequency and assesses the potential role of cultivation in improving Red List status. The findings reveal that cultivated species, especially those commonly grown in gardens, were less likely to be endangered. Moreover, commonly cultivated species had fewer declining and more positive long‐term population trends compared to non‐cultivated species. Some evidence suggests that commonly cultivated plants recorded on the 1998 Red List as threatened are more likely to improve their status, yet still a considerable proportion is in decline. These findings hint at a promising role of gardens as a means to support native species populations, but they also underscore the need for a nuanced understanding of which species are most likely to benefit from cultivation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Gardens as drivers of native plant species dispersal and conservation","authors":"Ingmar R. Staude","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10627","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Gardens hold untapped potential for participatory biodiversity conservation. Conservation gardening has recently emerged as a way to foster declining native plant species in urban and rural green spaces. But the impact of cultivating these species on population trends in the broader landscape remains underexplored.\u0000\u0000This study examines the effects of cultivating herbaceous native plants on their long‐term population trends and endangerment, using Rothmaler's ‘Herbaceous Ornamental and Crop Plants’ in Germany, along with the German Red List of 1998 and 2018. It investigates whether native plants under cultivation are less endangered, examines the long‐term population trends relative to cultivation frequency and assesses the potential role of cultivation in improving Red List status.\u0000\u0000The findings reveal that cultivated species, especially those commonly grown in gardens, were less likely to be endangered. Moreover, commonly cultivated species had fewer declining and more positive long‐term population trends compared to non‐cultivated species. Some evidence suggests that commonly cultivated plants recorded on the 1998 Red List as threatened are more likely to improve their status, yet still a considerable proportion is in decline.\u0000\u0000These findings hint at a promising role of gardens as a means to support native species populations, but they also underscore the need for a nuanced understanding of which species are most likely to benefit from cultivation.\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":"2024-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140234634","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}
Marilou Demongeot, Y. Hmimsa, D. McKey, Y. Aumeeruddy‐Thomas, Delphine Renard
Much evidence supports the ecological and agronomic benefits of diversity, of both crops and environments, for building resilience and sustainability in agroecosystems. Farmers' knowledge about crop diversity is well‐documented, but aside from studies on how farmers exchange seeds and knowledge through networks, the interactions of social factors and the diversity of crops and cultivated environments have been mainly overlooked. One factor receiving attention is farmers' access to land, but in only one of its dimensions, the security of access. Here we address the different strategies by which farmers gain access to land. How does the plurality of modes of access to land influence crop choices, and thereby crop diversity? How does this plurality influence the range of environments available to individual farmers for cultivating crop diversity? Analysing data from 51 interviews with farmers and 312 plots in agrosilvopastoral systems in northwestern Morocco, we described eight different modes of access. Each mode offers different opportunities and constraints concerning the kind of crops that can be grown on the plot. We found that an increase in the number of modes of access to land increases the crop diversity of farmers' holdings, regardless of the total area each farmer cultivates. Accessing additional plots contributed to both environmental heterogeneity and to crop diversity of farms. In striving to gain access to land and to grow diverse crops, farmers are motivated by their notion of what it means to be a ‘real farmer’, that is, the relation to their identity. Farmers mobilize not only their economic power but also their social relationships to gain access to plots of land. Their choices are also based on their relationships to tree crops such as olive, which are economic and cultural keystone species, as well as markers of land ownership and control. Multiple modes of access to land characterize many smallholder farming systems, which support a large fraction of the world's population. Recognizing diverse social practices of access to land that allow farmers to continue to mobilize multiple modes of access can increase resilience against unpredictable events and help maintain sustainable agroecosystems. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Social strategies to access land influence crop diversity in northwestern Morocco","authors":"Marilou Demongeot, Y. Hmimsa, D. McKey, Y. Aumeeruddy‐Thomas, Delphine Renard","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10617","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10617","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Much evidence supports the ecological and agronomic benefits of diversity, of both crops and environments, for building resilience and sustainability in agroecosystems. Farmers' knowledge about crop diversity is well‐documented, but aside from studies on how farmers exchange seeds and knowledge through networks, the interactions of social factors and the diversity of crops and cultivated environments have been mainly overlooked. One factor receiving attention is farmers' access to land, but in only one of its dimensions, the security of access. Here we address the different strategies by which farmers gain access to land. How does the plurality of modes of access to land influence crop choices, and thereby crop diversity? How does this plurality influence the range of environments available to individual farmers for cultivating crop diversity?\u0000\u0000Analysing data from 51 interviews with farmers and 312 plots in agrosilvopastoral systems in northwestern Morocco, we described eight different modes of access. Each mode offers different opportunities and constraints concerning the kind of crops that can be grown on the plot. We found that an increase in the number of modes of access to land increases the crop diversity of farmers' holdings, regardless of the total area each farmer cultivates. Accessing additional plots contributed to both environmental heterogeneity and to crop diversity of farms.\u0000\u0000In striving to gain access to land and to grow diverse crops, farmers are motivated by their notion of what it means to be a ‘real farmer’, that is, the relation to their identity. Farmers mobilize not only their economic power but also their social relationships to gain access to plots of land. Their choices are also based on their relationships to tree crops such as olive, which are economic and cultural keystone species, as well as markers of land ownership and control.\u0000\u0000Multiple modes of access to land characterize many smallholder farming systems, which support a large fraction of the world's population. Recognizing diverse social practices of access to land that allow farmers to continue to mobilize multiple modes of access can increase resilience against unpredictable events and help maintain sustainable agroecosystems.\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":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140257134","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}
E. Browning, M. Christie, M. Czajkowski, A. Chalak, R. Drummond, N. Hanley, K. Jones, J. Kuyer, A. Provins
Accounting for the values placed on nature by the public is key to successful policies in reversing ongoing biodiversity declines. However, biodiversity values are rarely included in policy decisions, resulting in poorer outcomes for people and nature. Our paper addresses an important evidence gap related to the non‐availability of values for appraising large‐scale policies and investment programmes for species recovery and habitat improvement at the national level. We use a stated preference choice modelling approach to estimate household preferences and Willingness to Pay for species recovery and habitat improvement over a wide range of habitats in England. The framing of our stated preference study is crucial to the evidence we develop. Within the study, we define species recovery as incremental improvements to habitat quality and present respondents with choices between conservation policy options that improve different habitat types. We then use the response data to estimate values for habitat quality improvements, and the associated improvements to species presence and abundance. We are thus able to estimate economic benefits for ‘wild species recovery’ simultaneously across a wide range of habitat types. Willingness to pay values for habitat improvement was found to be highest for improvements from ‘moderate’ to ‘full’ species recovery by 2042; and for habitat types which have relatively low current extents in England, such as lowland fens. Policy Implications: biodiversity policy designers can make use of stated preference methods to guide decisions over which aspects of biodiversity targets to focus more resources on, since this enables policy to reflect public preferences, and thus engages higher public support for conservation. In our specific data and context, this implies prioritising the restoration of species recovery to high levels and focussing resources on scarcer rather than more abundant habitat types. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Valuing the economic benefits of species recovery programmes","authors":"E. Browning, M. Christie, M. Czajkowski, A. Chalak, R. Drummond, N. Hanley, K. Jones, J. Kuyer, A. Provins","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10626","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10626","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Accounting for the values placed on nature by the public is key to successful policies in reversing ongoing biodiversity declines. However, biodiversity values are rarely included in policy decisions, resulting in poorer outcomes for people and nature.\u0000\u0000Our paper addresses an important evidence gap related to the non‐availability of values for appraising large‐scale policies and investment programmes for species recovery and habitat improvement at the national level.\u0000\u0000We use a stated preference choice modelling approach to estimate household preferences and Willingness to Pay for species recovery and habitat improvement over a wide range of habitats in England.\u0000\u0000The framing of our stated preference study is crucial to the evidence we develop. Within the study, we define species recovery as incremental improvements to habitat quality and present respondents with choices between conservation policy options that improve different habitat types. We then use the response data to estimate values for habitat quality improvements, and the associated improvements to species presence and abundance. We are thus able to estimate economic benefits for ‘wild species recovery’ simultaneously across a wide range of habitat types.\u0000\u0000Willingness to pay values for habitat improvement was found to be highest for improvements from ‘moderate’ to ‘full’ species recovery by 2042; and for habitat types which have relatively low current extents in England, such as lowland fens.\u0000\u0000Policy Implications: biodiversity policy designers can make use of stated preference methods to guide decisions over which aspects of biodiversity targets to focus more resources on, since this enables policy to reflect public preferences, and thus engages higher public support for conservation. In our specific data and context, this implies prioritising the restoration of species recovery to high levels and focussing resources on scarcer rather than more abundant habitat types.\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":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140259519","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}
There is growing evidence that interacting and connecting with nature are essential to maintain human health and well‐being. The benefits of specific nature experiences and the cultural ecosystem services they provide are increasingly being recognized, but many others remain to be discovered and explored. In this perspective piece, I argue that there is a need to better explore the pivotal role of nature experiences in shaping human time perception—our sense of time. Specifically, I outline the main elements of human time perception and the key factors that shape it, describe recent evidence showing that human time perception changes between urban and natural environments and discuss the potential societal gains from developing a better understanding of this relationship. Human time perception is complex and involves at least three key dimensions related to temporal succession, temporal duration and temporal perspective. Time perception is shaped by various contextual factors, including the contents of the time period and the cognitive, emotional and bodily characteristics of the experiencer. There is growing evidence that nature experiences can influence human sense of time by (i) extending human perception of temporal duration and (ii) shifting time perspectives. People who spend time in nature tend to overestimate the length of that experience and show a more positive outlook of the past, present and future, with less focus on a single‐time perspective. In the context of increasing time scarcity in modern urban societies with dire consequences for human health and well‐being, I argue we need a better understanding of how nature experiences shape our sense of time and suggest how future research can provide actionable insights to help restore a healthier and more balanced relationship with time and nature. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Acknowledging and understanding the contributions of nature to human sense of time","authors":"Ricardo A. Correia","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10601","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10601","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000There is growing evidence that interacting and connecting with nature are essential to maintain human health and well‐being. The benefits of specific nature experiences and the cultural ecosystem services they provide are increasingly being recognized, but many others remain to be discovered and explored.\u0000\u0000In this perspective piece, I argue that there is a need to better explore the pivotal role of nature experiences in shaping human time perception—our sense of time. Specifically, I outline the main elements of human time perception and the key factors that shape it, describe recent evidence showing that human time perception changes between urban and natural environments and discuss the potential societal gains from developing a better understanding of this relationship.\u0000\u0000Human time perception is complex and involves at least three key dimensions related to temporal succession, temporal duration and temporal perspective. Time perception is shaped by various contextual factors, including the contents of the time period and the cognitive, emotional and bodily characteristics of the experiencer.\u0000\u0000There is growing evidence that nature experiences can influence human sense of time by (i) extending human perception of temporal duration and (ii) shifting time perspectives. People who spend time in nature tend to overestimate the length of that experience and show a more positive outlook of the past, present and future, with less focus on a single‐time perspective.\u0000\u0000In the context of increasing time scarcity in modern urban societies with dire consequences for human health and well‐being, I argue we need a better understanding of how nature experiences shape our sense of time and suggest how future research can provide actionable insights to help restore a healthier and more balanced relationship with time and nature.\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":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140264158","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}
H. F. Williams, K. L. Leneuiyia, B. Mwalavu, G. Serem, V. Sempeyo, F. Pope, L. E. King, D. Veríssimo
Conflict between humans and elephants is one of the more complex examples of human‐wildlife conflict, a key challenge for wildlife conservation. While interventions exist to separate humans from elephants, few exist aimed at bringing the two species closer together. This study assesses if a natural history film, The Elephant Queen (TEQ), makes communities living around elephants more tolerant of conflict with elephants. Questionnaires and interviews were conducted before and after seeing the film screened on a mobile cinema in Southern Kenya. A double robust ordinal regression analysis using 357 matching specifications to measure the effect size of viewing TEQ on the six criteria identified as being drivers of tolerance of a wild animal by the Hazard Acceptance model. This study found that students aged between 16 and 18 gained knowledge (mean effect size = 0.27) and affection (mean effect size = 0.17) towards elephants and felt the benefits of elephants more keenly (mean effect size = 0.26) following viewing TEQ. Community members aged between 16–80 also gained knowledge (mean effect size = 0.21) and saw the benefits of elephants (mean effect size = 0.15) but felt the costs of living with elephants more profoundly after viewing TEQ (mean effect size = −0.11). After 90 days a follow‐up survey also showed a significant increase in community “affection” towards elephants (mean effect size = 0.11), however the costs, benefits and knowledge gained had been reduced to a statistically insignificant level compared to baseline. Our results suggest that natural history films can serve as a valuable tool in inspiring young minds. When shown to an adult audience, changes were more nuanced and some of the changes were short lived (<3 months). Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"The Elephant Queen: Can a nature documentary help to increase tolerance towards elephants?","authors":"H. F. Williams, K. L. Leneuiyia, B. Mwalavu, G. Serem, V. Sempeyo, F. Pope, L. E. King, D. Veríssimo","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10599","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10599","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Conflict between humans and elephants is one of the more complex examples of human‐wildlife conflict, a key challenge for wildlife conservation. While interventions exist to separate humans from elephants, few exist aimed at bringing the two species closer together.\u0000\u0000This study assesses if a natural history film, The Elephant Queen (TEQ), makes communities living around elephants more tolerant of conflict with elephants. Questionnaires and interviews were conducted before and after seeing the film screened on a mobile cinema in Southern Kenya. A double robust ordinal regression analysis using 357 matching specifications to measure the effect size of viewing TEQ on the six criteria identified as being drivers of tolerance of a wild animal by the Hazard Acceptance model.\u0000\u0000This study found that students aged between 16 and 18 gained knowledge (mean effect size = 0.27) and affection (mean effect size = 0.17) towards elephants and felt the benefits of elephants more keenly (mean effect size = 0.26) following viewing TEQ. Community members aged between 16–80 also gained knowledge (mean effect size = 0.21) and saw the benefits of elephants (mean effect size = 0.15) but felt the costs of living with elephants more profoundly after viewing TEQ (mean effect size = −0.11). After 90 days a follow‐up survey also showed a significant increase in community “affection” towards elephants (mean effect size = 0.11), however the costs, benefits and knowledge gained had been reduced to a statistically insignificant level compared to baseline.\u0000\u0000Our results suggest that natural history films can serve as a valuable tool in inspiring young minds. When shown to an adult audience, changes were more nuanced and some of the changes were short lived (<3 months).\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":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140265396","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}
Elizabeth J. Carlen, Cesar O. Estien, Tal Caspi, Deja Perkins, Benjamin R. Goldstein, Samantha E. S. Kreling, Yasmine Hentati, Tyus D. Williams, Lauren A. Stanton, Simone Des Roches, Rebecca F. Johnson, Alison N Young, Caren Cooper, Christopher J. Schell
Contributory science—including citizen and community science—allows scientists to leverage participant‐generated data while providing an opportunity for engaging with local community members. Data yielded by participant‐generated biodiversity platforms allow professional scientists to answer ecological and evolutionary questions across both geographic and temporal scales, which is incredibly valuable for conservation efforts. The data reported to contributory biodiversity platforms, such as eBird and iNaturalist, can be driven by social and ecological variables, leading to biased data. Though empirical work has highlighted the biases in contributory data, little work has articulated how biases arise in contributory data and the societal consequences of these biases. We present a conceptual framework illustrating how social and ecological variables create bias in contributory science data. In this framework, we present four filters—participation, detectability, sampling and preference—that ultimately shape the type and location of contributory biodiversity data. We leverage this framework to examine data from the largest contributory science platforms—eBird and iNaturalist—in St. Louis, Missouri, the United States, and discuss the potential consequences of biased data. Lastly, we conclude by providing several recommendations for researchers and institutions to move towards a more inclusive field. With these recommendations, we provide opportunities to ameliorate biases in contributory data and an opportunity to practice equitable biodiversity conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"A framework for contextualizing social‐ecological biases in contributory science data","authors":"Elizabeth J. Carlen, Cesar O. Estien, Tal Caspi, Deja Perkins, Benjamin R. Goldstein, Samantha E. S. Kreling, Yasmine Hentati, Tyus D. Williams, Lauren A. Stanton, Simone Des Roches, Rebecca F. Johnson, Alison N Young, Caren Cooper, Christopher J. Schell","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10592","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10592","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Contributory science—including citizen and community science—allows scientists to leverage participant‐generated data while providing an opportunity for engaging with local community members. Data yielded by participant‐generated biodiversity platforms allow professional scientists to answer ecological and evolutionary questions across both geographic and temporal scales, which is incredibly valuable for conservation efforts.\u0000\u0000The data reported to contributory biodiversity platforms, such as eBird and iNaturalist, can be driven by social and ecological variables, leading to biased data. Though empirical work has highlighted the biases in contributory data, little work has articulated how biases arise in contributory data and the societal consequences of these biases.\u0000\u0000We present a conceptual framework illustrating how social and ecological variables create bias in contributory science data. In this framework, we present four filters—participation, detectability, sampling and preference—that ultimately shape the type and location of contributory biodiversity data. We leverage this framework to examine data from the largest contributory science platforms—eBird and iNaturalist—in St. Louis, Missouri, the United States, and discuss the potential consequences of biased data.\u0000\u0000Lastly, we conclude by providing several recommendations for researchers and institutions to move towards a more inclusive field. With these recommendations, we provide opportunities to ameliorate biases in contributory data and an opportunity to practice equitable biodiversity conservation.\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":"2024-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140267303","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}
Mary K. Burak, Kristy M. Ferraro, Kaggie Orrick, Nathalie R. Sommer, Diego Ellis‐Soto, Oswald J. Schmitz
There is a cross‐sectoral push among conservationists to simultaneously mitigate biodiversity loss and climate change, especially as the latter increasingly threatens the former. Growing evidence demonstrates that animals can have substantial impacts on carbon cycling. As such, there are increasing calls to use animal conservation and rewilding to dually overcome biodiversity loss and mitigate climate change. Specifically, trophic rewilding—which involves restoring intact animal communities, functional roles and trophic structure within food webs, and natural ecosystem processes—utilizes a rewilding framework to simultaneously support biodiversity conservation and carbon capture and storage. Trophic rewilding is a complex conservation approach to mitigating climate change, involving accurate estimations of baseline conditions and continuous monitoring of carbon cycling and species impacts within a system. It is also predicated on garnering social support for both the reintroduction and monitoring of a species, and obtaining the animals themselves. We are excited by the growing interest in this potential, but emphasize that a species' net impact on ecosystem carbon dynamics is context‐dependent. Caution is required whenever biodiversity conservation (including rewilding), climate change mitigation, and human welfare do not readily align. Hence—similar to other nature‐based solutions—these burgeoning efforts must avoid sweeping generalizations. To bolster successful trophic rewilding, we highlight a range of social and ecological context dependencies that can vary outcomes in a rewilded carbon cycle and provide ethical considerations for successful implementation. We conclude with an overview of the available technology to predict and monitor progress toward both biodiversity and climate mitigation goals. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Context matters when rewilding for climate change","authors":"Mary K. Burak, Kristy M. Ferraro, Kaggie Orrick, Nathalie R. Sommer, Diego Ellis‐Soto, Oswald J. Schmitz","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10609","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000There is a cross‐sectoral push among conservationists to simultaneously mitigate biodiversity loss and climate change, especially as the latter increasingly threatens the former. Growing evidence demonstrates that animals can have substantial impacts on carbon cycling. As such, there are increasing calls to use animal conservation and rewilding to dually overcome biodiversity loss and mitigate climate change.\u0000\u0000Specifically, trophic rewilding—which involves restoring intact animal communities, functional roles and trophic structure within food webs, and natural ecosystem processes—utilizes a rewilding framework to simultaneously support biodiversity conservation and carbon capture and storage. Trophic rewilding is a complex conservation approach to mitigating climate change, involving accurate estimations of baseline conditions and continuous monitoring of carbon cycling and species impacts within a system. It is also predicated on garnering social support for both the reintroduction and monitoring of a species, and obtaining the animals themselves.\u0000\u0000We are excited by the growing interest in this potential, but emphasize that a species' net impact on ecosystem carbon dynamics is context‐dependent. Caution is required whenever biodiversity conservation (including rewilding), climate change mitigation, and human welfare do not readily align. Hence—similar to other nature‐based solutions—these burgeoning efforts must avoid sweeping generalizations.\u0000\u0000To bolster successful trophic rewilding, we highlight a range of social and ecological context dependencies that can vary outcomes in a rewilded carbon cycle and provide ethical considerations for successful implementation.\u0000\u0000We conclude with an overview of the available technology to predict and monitor progress toward both biodiversity and climate mitigation goals.\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":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139774788","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}
Mary K. Burak, Kristy M. Ferraro, Kaggie Orrick, Nathalie R. Sommer, Diego Ellis‐Soto, Oswald J. Schmitz
There is a cross‐sectoral push among conservationists to simultaneously mitigate biodiversity loss and climate change, especially as the latter increasingly threatens the former. Growing evidence demonstrates that animals can have substantial impacts on carbon cycling. As such, there are increasing calls to use animal conservation and rewilding to dually overcome biodiversity loss and mitigate climate change. Specifically, trophic rewilding—which involves restoring intact animal communities, functional roles and trophic structure within food webs, and natural ecosystem processes—utilizes a rewilding framework to simultaneously support biodiversity conservation and carbon capture and storage. Trophic rewilding is a complex conservation approach to mitigating climate change, involving accurate estimations of baseline conditions and continuous monitoring of carbon cycling and species impacts within a system. It is also predicated on garnering social support for both the reintroduction and monitoring of a species, and obtaining the animals themselves. We are excited by the growing interest in this potential, but emphasize that a species' net impact on ecosystem carbon dynamics is context‐dependent. Caution is required whenever biodiversity conservation (including rewilding), climate change mitigation, and human welfare do not readily align. Hence—similar to other nature‐based solutions—these burgeoning efforts must avoid sweeping generalizations. To bolster successful trophic rewilding, we highlight a range of social and ecological context dependencies that can vary outcomes in a rewilded carbon cycle and provide ethical considerations for successful implementation. We conclude with an overview of the available technology to predict and monitor progress toward both biodiversity and climate mitigation goals. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
{"title":"Context matters when rewilding for climate change","authors":"Mary K. Burak, Kristy M. Ferraro, Kaggie Orrick, Nathalie R. Sommer, Diego Ellis‐Soto, Oswald J. Schmitz","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10609","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000There is a cross‐sectoral push among conservationists to simultaneously mitigate biodiversity loss and climate change, especially as the latter increasingly threatens the former. Growing evidence demonstrates that animals can have substantial impacts on carbon cycling. As such, there are increasing calls to use animal conservation and rewilding to dually overcome biodiversity loss and mitigate climate change.\u0000\u0000Specifically, trophic rewilding—which involves restoring intact animal communities, functional roles and trophic structure within food webs, and natural ecosystem processes—utilizes a rewilding framework to simultaneously support biodiversity conservation and carbon capture and storage. Trophic rewilding is a complex conservation approach to mitigating climate change, involving accurate estimations of baseline conditions and continuous monitoring of carbon cycling and species impacts within a system. It is also predicated on garnering social support for both the reintroduction and monitoring of a species, and obtaining the animals themselves.\u0000\u0000We are excited by the growing interest in this potential, but emphasize that a species' net impact on ecosystem carbon dynamics is context‐dependent. Caution is required whenever biodiversity conservation (including rewilding), climate change mitigation, and human welfare do not readily align. Hence—similar to other nature‐based solutions—these burgeoning efforts must avoid sweeping generalizations.\u0000\u0000To bolster successful trophic rewilding, we highlight a range of social and ecological context dependencies that can vary outcomes in a rewilded carbon cycle and provide ethical considerations for successful implementation.\u0000\u0000We conclude with an overview of the available technology to predict and monitor progress toward both biodiversity and climate mitigation goals.\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":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139834270","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：