Vargas Leonardo, Willemen Louise, Hein Lars
1Environmental Systems Analysis Group, Wageningen University and Research, PO Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands.
2Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), University of Twente, PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands.
Reg Environ Change. 2018;18(5):1521-1534. doi: 10.1007/s10113-018-1282-1. Epub 2018 Feb 12.
Economic development has increased pressures on natural resources during the last decades. The concept of planetary boundaries has been developed to propose limits on human activities based on earth processes and ecological thresholds. However, this concept was not developed to downscale planetary boundaries to sub-global level. The absence of boundaries at sub-global levels constrains the use of the concept in environmental governance and natural resource management, because decisions are typically taken at these levels. Decisions at the national level are currently supported, among others, by statistical frameworks in particular the System of National Accounts. However, statistical frameworks were not developed to compile environmental information, hindering environmental decision making. Our study examines if and how ecosystem accounting can be used in combination with the concept of planetary boundaries in guiding human activities at the level of a river basin. We assess the applicability of both frameworks for natural resource management in the Orinoco river basin, based on adaptive management components. Our analysis indicates that differences in the purpose of analysis, information provided, and methods constrain the potential integration of both frameworks. Nevertheless, the way both frameworks conceptualize the social system and the interactions between social and ecological systems can facilitate translating planetary boundaries into indicators considered in ecosystem accounting. The information recorded in national ecosystem accounts can support establishing ecological thresholds and, more fundamentally, to relate ecological thresholds to human impacts on ecosystem condition. Capitalizing on these synergies requires further exchange of experiences between the communities working on ecosystem accounting and planetary boundaries.
在过去几十年中，经济发展给自然资源带来了越来越大的压力。“地球边界”概念的提出是为了基于地球过程和生态阈值对人类活动设定限制。然而，该概念并非用于将地球边界细化到全球以下层面。全球以下层面缺乏边界限制，这制约了该概念在环境治理和自然资源管理中的应用，因为决策通常在这些层面做出。目前，国家层面的决策尤其得到统计框架（特别是国民账户体系）的支持。然而，统计框架并非为汇编环境信息而设计，这阻碍了环境决策。我们的研究探讨了生态系统核算能否以及如何与地球边界概念相结合，以指导流域层面的人类活动。我们基于适应性管理要素，评估了这两个框架在奥里诺科河流域自然资源管理中的适用性。我们的分析表明，分析目的、所提供信息和方法上的差异限制了这两个框架的潜在整合。尽管如此，这两个框架对社会系统以及社会与生态系统之间相互作用的概念化方式，有助于将地球边界转化为生态系统核算中考虑的指标。国家生态系统账户中记录的信息能够支持确立生态阈值，更重要的是，能将生态阈值与人类对生态系统状况的影响联系起来。利用这些协同效应需要从事生态系统核算和地球边界研究的群体之间进一步交流经验。
