Zinngrebe, Yves

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","511"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Sustainability"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","10"],["dc.contributor.author","Rodríguez, Lily"],["dc.contributor.author","Cisneros, Elías"],["dc.contributor.author","Pequeño, Tatiana"],["dc.contributor.author","Fuentes, Maria"],["dc.contributor.author","Zinngrebe, Yves"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:45:09Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:45:09Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.description.abstract","Building resilient sustainable social-ecological systems (SES) requires communities to enhance their adaptive capacities. Communal participative land-use planning (Zonificación Participativa Comunal—ZPC) is a tool designed for communities to integrating local and scientific knowledge to sustainably organize and manage their SES. Between 2006 and 2011, a ZPC was developed with communities in the buffer zone of Cordillera Azul National Park (Peru), where rapid demographic changes are converting pre-montane seasonally dry forest into agricultural land. Herein, we analyse how the ZPC enhanced adaptive capacity, enabling the SES to cope with environmental, political and economic changes. Based on qualitative, semi-structured interviews, communities are analysed along their capacities in the dimensions social capital, learning, adaptive management and governance. An analysis of yearly high-resolution forest cover data supports our findings. Deforestation activities in biologically sensitive zones decreased rapidly during the time of the ZPC implementation. We find that particularly the long-term presence of the bridging institution and the continuous testing and reflection of the integrated “hybrid knowledge” enabled communities to develop adaptive capacities. The analysis of ZPC our results reveals the enabling conditions for promoting the learning process to develop a sustainable land-use management in the context of migration and rapid changes."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3390/su10020511"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15045"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59169"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","MDPI"],["dc.relation.eissn","2071-1050"],["dc.relation.issn","2071-1050"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"],["dc.subject.ddc","630"],["dc.title","Building Adaptive Capacity in Changing Social-Ecological Systems: Integrating Knowledge in Communal Land-Use Planning in the Peruvian Amazon"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","517"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Conservation Letters"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","530"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","10"],["dc.contributor.author","Pe'er, Guy"],["dc.contributor.author","Zinngrebe, Yves"],["dc.contributor.author","Hauck, Jennifer"],["dc.contributor.author","Schindler, Stefan"],["dc.contributor.author","Dittrich, Andreas"],["dc.contributor.author","Zingg, Silvia"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.author","Oppermann, Rainer"],["dc.contributor.author","Sutcliffe, Laura M.E."],["dc.contributor.author","Sirami, Clélia"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmidt, Jenny"],["dc.contributor.author","Hoyer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Schleyer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Lakner, Sebastian"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:44:51Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:44:51Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) are one of the three new greening measures of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). We used an interdisciplinary and European-scale approach to evaluate ecological effectiveness and farmers’ perception of the different EFA options. We assessed potential benefits of EFA options for biodiversity using a survey among 88 ecologists from 17 European countries. We further analyzed data on EFA uptake at the EU level and in eight EU Member States, and reviewed socio-economic factors influencing farmers’ decisions. We then identified possible ways to improve EFAs. Ecologists scored field margins, buffer strips, fallow land, and landscape features as most beneficial whereas farmers mostly implemented “catch crops and green cover,” nitrogen-fixing crops, and fallow land. Based on the expert inputs and a review of the factors influencing farmers’ decisions, we suggest that EFA implementation could be improved by (a) prioritizing EFA options that promote biodiversity (e.g., reducing the weight or even excluding ineffective options); (b) reducing administrative constraints; (c) setting stricter management requirements (e.g., limiting agrochemical use); and (d) offering further incentives for expanding options like landscape features and buffer strips. We finally propose further improvements at the next CAP reform, to improve ecological effectiveness and cost-effectiveness."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/conl.12333"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14928"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59112"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation","info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/308454/EU//EU BON"],["dc.relation.issn","1755-263X"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"],["dc.subject.ddc","630"],["dc.title","Adding Some Green to the Greening: Improving the EU's Ecological Focus Areas for Biodiversity and Farmers"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]