Sustainable products (provisioning ecosystem services) are delivered In the context of sustainable development of entire social-ecological systems like, e.g., watersheds. To this end, an adaptive approach still provides a fundamental framework for the implementation and adaptation of land management and polices of humans-in-nature over time as more information is collected. A crucial issue then could be developing landscape planning and management that might accommodate for surprises and for variation of land-use pattern and water cycle as humans will change land-use to adjust to climate change. In this respect, new conceptual frameworks for the design of landscape sustainability are emerging to establish how landscape condition can be made sustainable in face of unpredictable disturbance and change (e.g., Olsson et al., 2004; Folke et al., 2005; Musacchio, 2009; Opdam et al., 2009; Ostrom, 2009; Benayas and Bullock 2012; Zurlini et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2013).
Strategies to this end could involve the design and management of landscape elements and structure to create less contagious and more heterogeneous rural landscapes enhancing biodiversity-oriented connectivity. In this respect, smallholder farming systems are crucial for rural sustainability and for the delivery of sustainable products. This can imply the strategic maintenance and new placement of managed and semi-natural ecosystems in landscapes to reduce water stress intensity, so the services of natural ecosystems (e.g., commodities, water availability, pollination, reduced land erosion, soil formation) can be even enhanced (Jones et al., 2013). Land separation and land sharing are examples of such strategies (Benayas and Bullock, 2012). The first involves restoring or creating non-farmland habitat in agricultural landscapes through, for example, woodlands, natural grasslands, hedgerows, wetlands, and meadows on arable lands (Benayas and Bullock, 2012), or riparian habitats (Jones et al., 2010) to benefit wildlife and specific services. Land sharing involves the adoption of biodiversity-based agricultural practices, learning from traditional farming practices, transformation of conventional agriculture into organic agriculture and of „„simple‟‟ crops and pastures into agro-forestry systems for timber and biomass for energy production. Some existing smallholder farming systems already have high water-, nutrient-, and energy-use efficiencies and conserve resources and biodiversity without losing yield (Kiers et al., 2008).
A key aspect is to implement monitoring programs to evolve iteratively as new information emerges and research and managing questions change. This helps evaluate how environmental targets and ecosystem services respond to specific landscape pattern designs, and whether or not certain landscape patterns at multiple scales result in synergies and trade-offs among different types of ecosystem services like the delivery of provisioning services like food, water, timber. In a nutshell, learning from what we are doing and from what we have already done.
Sustainable products (provisioning ecosystem services) are delivered In the context of sustainable development of entire social-ecological systems like, e.g., watersheds. To this end, an adaptive approach still provides a fundamental framework for the implementation and adaptation of land management and polices of humans-in-nature over time as more information is collected. A crucial issue then could be developing landscape planning and management that might accommodate for surprises and for variation of land-use pattern and water cycle as humans will change land-use to adjust to climate change. In this respect, new conceptual frameworks for the design of landscape sustainability are emerging to establish how landscape condition can be made sustainable in face of unpredictable disturbance and change (e.g., Olsson et al., 2004; Folke et al., 2005; Musacchio, 2009; Opdam et al., 2009; Ostrom, 2009; Benayas and Bullock 2012; Zurlini et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2013).
Strategies to this end could involve the design and management of landscape elements and structure to create less contagious and more heterogeneous rural landscapes enhancing biodiversity-oriented connectivity. In this respect, smallholder farming systems are crucial for rural sustainability and for the delivery of sustainable products. This can imply the strategic maintenance and new placement of managed and semi-natural ecosystems in landscapes to reduce water stress intensity, so the services of natural ecosystems (e.g., commodities, water availability, pollination, reduced land erosion, soil formation) can be even enhanced (Jones et al., 2013). Land separation and land sharing are examples of such strategies (Benayas and Bullock, 2012). The first involves restoring or creating non-farmland habitat in agricultural landscapes through, for example, woodlands, natural grasslands, hedgerows, wetlands, and meadows on arable lands (Benayas and Bullock, 2012), or riparian habitats (Jones et al., 2010) to benefit wildlife and specific services. Land sharing involves the adoption of biodiversity-based agricultural practices, learning from traditional farming practices, transformation of conventional agriculture into organic agriculture and of „„simple‟‟ crops and pastures into agro-forestry systems for timber and biomass for energy production. Some existing smallholder farming systems already have high water-, nutrient-, and energy-use efficiencies and conserve resources and biodiversity without losing yield (Kiers et al., 2008).
A key aspect is to implement monitoring programs to evolve iteratively as new information emerges and research and managing questions change. This helps evaluate how environmental targets and ecosystem services respond to specific landscape pattern designs, and whether or not certain landscape patterns at multiple scales result in synergies and trade-offs among different types of ecosystem services like the delivery of provisioning services like food, water, timber. In a nutshell, learning from what we are doing and from what we have already done.
The main difficulty arises from the fact that the definition of "sustainability" changes both in time and space... One and the same product could be "sustainable" in one place and could be not "green" in other... This applies also when and how the evaluation is performed... As René Scheumann has very correctly mentioned - the question is easy, but the answer although seeming straightforward is not easy at all!
The use of a good product sustainable design model can be the solution!
Dear @Doris, I find this resource may be helpful for your research:"Developing sustainable products and services"!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652602001646
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09596526/11/8
- Badges
- Science topic