This overview represents the spectrum of arguments for biodiversity collected through an extensive review of grey (including web content) and scientific literature as well as policy texts. While the review had the capacity to identify arguments against biodiversity (i.e. a negative stance), all items in the review database relate to arguments for biodiversity (i.e. a positive stance).
This brief gives a summary of BESAFE's results and offers links to the project's final brochure and final publishable summary
THEMATIC BRIEF: This brief provides some basic guidelines on how to improve your skills of communicating biodiversity and evidence-based information to wider audiences. Particularly, it highlights techniques relevant to biodiversity protection argumentation aimed at policy/decision-makers and other stakeholder audiences, reflecting the insights gained from the FP7 project BESAFE.
THEMATIC BRIEF: Although the aim of working with stakeholders varies greatly according to the issue or project and why stakeholders are being involved in the first place, the work floor may best be described as a construction site where work is in progress. Working with stakeholders in a formal situation implies placing all the different arguments on table, ensuring that the variety of their views is identified and also identifying and encouraging synergies. Within the dialogue process it is essential that all groups are listened to and that stakeholders are given sufficient time to construct their arguments and to build their cases. Construction sites tend to be there over a long time before being finished. This is also the case for working within stakeholder forums and events – the process demands time, management and follow-up.
THEMATIC BRIEF: This brief highlights benefits of using combinations (bundles) of arguments to improve the effectiveness of argumentation for biodiversity protection. Different stakeholders and actors often have different beliefs and interests and each may require more than one argument to be convinced, so that single arguments in isolation may be insufficient. Using argument bundles also provides actors with a more nuanced picture, showing them new angles and increasing their knowledge. It therefore also helps to facilitate discussions and better considered decisions.
THEMATIC BRIEF: This brief explains how the argument process, involving multiple exchanges of views between actors along a timeline, creates a basis for human interactions that can be as influential on the effectiveness of the argument as its content. Particular aspects are illustrated by reference to some selected examples from the BESAFE case studies.
CASE STUDY BRIEF: This study examines the arguments used for and against Natura 2000 by different stakeholder groups in policy formulation and implementation phases and different policy levels (national and local). The main focus of the case study was to understand the institutional context of argumentation in Hungary. A large number and diversity of arguments in relation to Natura 2000 was evaluated according to their effectiveness and context of argumentation. Results show that the arguments are framed and conditioned by habits, law and other institutions and reveal the argumentative strategies that were applied.
THEMATIC BRIEF: This brief explains how ideas and instruments for species protection have evolved and contribute to an integrated biodiversity conservation strategy in Europe. The brief considers the roles of Red Lists of threatened species and the legal priority given to species listed in the Annexes of the European Commission Habitats and Birds Directives and the Appendices of the Bern Convention of the Council of Europe.
THEMATIC BRIEF: Biodiversity and biodiversity related ecosystem services give rise to a wide range of different values of which some can be classified as economic while others are classified as non-economic. Both types of values are important, but the methods suitable for assessing the two types of values are fundamentally different and build on different ethical/theoretical approaches. In this brief the focus is restricted to methods relevant for assessing the economic values of biodiversity and biodiversity related ecosystem services. The brief provides an overview of available methods, and the pros and con of each of the methods are discussed. Which method to use in a given context is shown to depend on several factors including the type of value being assessed, data and resource availability and the intended use of the valuation results.
THEMATIC BRIEF: This brief provides an overview of and brief introduction to the wide range of values associated with ecosystems and landscapes, or sub-sets of the two. It is highlighted that value is a multidimensional concept encompassing human as well as non-human values. Furthermore it is shown how human values can be divided into economic and non-economic values, and it is emphasised that total economic value is by no means the same as total value, a common misconception often causing conflicts between economists, ecologists and other stakeholders. It is discussed how joint consideration of all types of values are important to ensure that natural systems are managed in a way consistent with maximising the total value of the systems. Hence, while there may be synergies between the provision/production of some values, other values may be mutually exclusive implying that trade-offs need to be made. Joint consideration of all the different types is not straightforward as there exists no common measuring rod according to which all values can be assessed. Accordingly, any assessment of total value is inherently subjective.