TY - JOUR
T1 - Horizon scanning for South African biodiversity
T2 - A need for social engagement as well as science
AU - Seymour, Colleen L.
AU - Gillson, Lindsey
AU - Child, Matthew F.
AU - Tolley, Krystal A.
AU - Curie, Jock C.
AU - da Silva, Jessica M.
AU - Alexander, Graham J.
AU - Anderson, Pippin
AU - Downs, Colleen T.
AU - Egoh, Benis N.
AU - Ehlers Smith, David A.
AU - Ehlers Smith, Yvette C.
AU - Esler, Karen J.
AU - O’Farrell, Patrick J.
AU - Skowno, Andrew L.
AU - Suleman, Essa
AU - Veldtman, Ruan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - A horizon scan was conducted to identify emerging and intensifying issues for biodiversity conservation in South Africa over the next 5–10 years. South African biodiversity experts submitted 63 issues of which ten were identified as priorities using the Delphi method. These priority issues were then plotted along axes of social agreement and scientific certainty, to ascertain whether issues might be “simple” (amenable to solutions from science alone), “complicated” (socially agreed upon but technically complicated), “complex” (scientifically challenging and significant levels of social disagreement) or “chaotic” (high social disagreement and highly scientifically challenging). Only three of the issues were likely to be resolved by improved science alone, while the remainder require engagement with social, economic and political factors. Fortunately, none of the issues were considered chaotic. Nevertheless, strategic communication, education and engagement with the populace and policy makers were considered vital for addressing emerging issues.
AB - A horizon scan was conducted to identify emerging and intensifying issues for biodiversity conservation in South Africa over the next 5–10 years. South African biodiversity experts submitted 63 issues of which ten were identified as priorities using the Delphi method. These priority issues were then plotted along axes of social agreement and scientific certainty, to ascertain whether issues might be “simple” (amenable to solutions from science alone), “complicated” (socially agreed upon but technically complicated), “complex” (scientifically challenging and significant levels of social disagreement) or “chaotic” (high social disagreement and highly scientifically challenging). Only three of the issues were likely to be resolved by improved science alone, while the remainder require engagement with social, economic and political factors. Fortunately, none of the issues were considered chaotic. Nevertheless, strategic communication, education and engagement with the populace and policy makers were considered vital for addressing emerging issues.
KW - Biodiversity futures
KW - Consensus and scientific knowledge
KW - Delphi approach
KW - Future scenarios
KW - Step changes
KW - Threats and opportunities
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85074053803
U2 - 10.1007/s13280-019-01252-4
DO - 10.1007/s13280-019-01252-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 31564051
AN - SCOPUS:85074053803
SN - 0044-7447
VL - 49
SP - 1211
EP - 1221
JO - Ambio
JF - Ambio
IS - 6
ER -
