Next Article in Journal
Quantitative Determination of Some Parameters in the Tennant Method and Its Application to Sustainability: A Case Study of the Yarkand River, Xinjiang, China
Previous Article in Journal
Examining the Density and Diversity of Human Activity in the Built Environment: The Case of the Pearl River Delta, China
Article

Science–Policy Interfaces Related to Biodiversity and Nature Conservation: The Case of Natural Capital Germany—TEEB-DE

Research area “Landscape Change and Management”, Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, 01217 Dresden, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(9), 3701; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093701
Received: 9 April 2020 / Revised: 23 April 2020 / Accepted: 28 April 2020 / Published: 3 May 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Urban and Rural Development)
Responding to the UN programme “The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity” (TEEB), TEEB-DE (2012–2018) was a science–policy interface (SPI) set up in Germany with the objective of mobilising scientific expertise for a better consideration of biodiversity and ecosystem services in political and corporate decision-making. The aim of this paper is to contribute to an assessment of TEEB-DE by analysing its objectives, structure, processes and outputs. The analysis is guided by a theoretical framework that takes credibility, relevance and legitimacy (CRELE) as normative criteria for examining SPIs. Methodologically, the paper relies on a fine-grained analysis of published documents and interviews with key figures of TEEB-DE. The results allow for a preliminary assessment of TEEB-DE in regard to CRELE and illuminate how its conceptual foundation—namely the ecosystem services concept—was discussed in the public realm. We also consider a number of trade-offs which the coordinators of TEEB-DE had to negotiate. In conclusion, we identify some proposals for designing future SPIs in the domain of biodiversity and nature conservation in Germany such as paying greater attention to policy windows, broadening the thematic scope beyond economics and providing better opportunities for debate and contestation. View Full-Text
Keywords: ecosystem services; biodiversity; credibility; relevance; legitimacy; policymaking; environmental economics; trade-offs; social sciences ecosystem services; biodiversity; credibility; relevance; legitimacy; policymaking; environmental economics; trade-offs; social sciences
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Leibenath, M.; Kurth, M.; Lintz, G. Science–Policy Interfaces Related to Biodiversity and Nature Conservation: The Case of Natural Capital Germany—TEEB-DE. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093701

AMA Style

Leibenath M, Kurth M, Lintz G. Science–Policy Interfaces Related to Biodiversity and Nature Conservation: The Case of Natural Capital Germany—TEEB-DE. Sustainability. 2020; 12(9):3701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093701

Chicago/Turabian Style

Leibenath, Markus; Kurth, Markus; Lintz, Gerd. 2020. "Science–Policy Interfaces Related to Biodiversity and Nature Conservation: The Case of Natural Capital Germany—TEEB-DE" Sustainability 12, no. 9: 3701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093701

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop