Multifunctionality at the landscape* level – paths towards transition - The call is closed

The overarching objective of this call is to initiate research advancing mainstreaming of biodiversity across sectors as the foundation for sustainable development at the landscape level while addressing synergies and conflicting objectives with other values. 

Our aim is to fund a research programme focusing on human-biodiversity interactions at the landscape level encompassing diverse aspects of land use, i.e. conservation, business, management, drivers and pressures. Through a comprehensive system analysis taking off in the ecosystem approach¹, knowledge advancement is expected across the following facets:

• how the main drivers, barriers and leverage points of transformative change can be identified and addressed,
• how biodiversity targets can be achieved while maintaining societal functions,
• how to ensure a just and inclusive transition based on the value of biodiversity,
• and, how the change process can be assessed and evaluated.

The target groups for the programme’s results are organisations and individuals within land and water use sectors, conservation, and management. In the public sector, the results are anticipated to be useful for the implementation of water resource plans, restoration plans and nature-based solutions, implementation of green infrastructure, climate adaptation, outdoor recreation and, in the wider context for societal transformation. 

The ecological structures and functions of various landscapes are used by humans with concurring effects on the ecosystems. The need for change required to reduce biodiversity loss is widely recognised in society. However, there is still a lack of a deeper understanding of how different anthropogenic and ecological processes are intertwined and affect each other on different scales. This call features on how nature-derived functions and processes in the landscape interact with human activities (in comparison the Landscape Convention²). The challenge is to foster multifunctionality within the landscape’s carrying capacity - i.e. its biodiversity and ecosystems – and thereby determine when synergies between different benefits and objectives occur and when trade-offs need to be considered.

More specifically, there is a lack of knowledge and experience into designing policy measures generating incentives for the sustainable use and management of multiple landscape values and benefits. What is hindering or enabling different actors to collaborate in the shared ordinary landscapes, both in terms of current and historical landscape perspectives³, and in terms of how different outlooks can meet within natural and social sciences, research, indigenous and local knowledge as well as innovation and customs.

Assessments of environmental objectives at global, EU and national levels unanimously demonstrate a downward trend in biodiversity with few targets being achieved⁴. A global assessment recently identified several different leverage points as essential for transitioning towards reduced biodiversity loss or even increased biodiversity⁵.

The supporting document summarises⁶ a subset of relevant policy reports on biodiversity at national, global and EU levels⁷ including the link between biodiversity and climate change⁸, and the necessity of a holistic approach between the three sustainability dimensions⁹ in relation to experiences from co-creative learning from biosphere reserves¹⁰.

The role of the authorities includes governing from a top-down perspective, such as drafting regulations and prescribing general recommendations. There is often a gap between these legislative perspectives and other responsibilities such as promoting, communicating, and interacting with actors in society to obtain adaptive management related to sustainable use of multiple values in a landscape perspective.

The identified knowledge needs for transitions regarding multifunctionality and biodiversity at the landscape-level are in short:

• the social science perspective of multifunctionality in the landscape around issues of governance, driving forces, behaviour, dialogue and collaboration,
• improved outreach and communication of environmental monitoring results to increase understanding of the linkage between the biophysical and the intangible aspects of the landscape¹¹,
• improved implementation of governance models in all geographical areas where a number of ecological and socio-economic structures and processes interact,
• impacts upon ecosystem services and biodiversity arising from climate change, land use change and development projects,
• nature-based solutions¹² to meet diverse societal challenges
• how regional action plans for green infrastructure could be further integrated into planning and decision making.

More specifically, there are also knowledge gaps related to: water resource management, spatial planning, actions towards wild pollinators and beneficial insects, genetic variation and recreation. Additional perspectives include development of widely recognised ecological targets for different types of landscapes, conservation priorities of common and/or rare species, and safeguarding connectivity between habitats.

In the long-term perspective, there is a need for new and developed tools for sustainable landscape management over time, with regard to, for example, future land and water use in a changing climate. Examples include scenario development, digital tools, modelling, and forecasting tools, which could eventually be the basis for the development of sustainability indicators at landscape level. Such tools would need to be linked to the frameworks that govern objectives and decision-making in Sweden and the EU.

An important starting point is how biodiversity better can be considered in relation to sustainable development at the landscape level. Additionally, how biodiversity to a greater extent can be regarded as a measure for problem solving concerning different societal challenges. The system analysis should be linked to case studies in geographically defined areas. The ecological dimension should be addressed via several of both terrestrial and aquatic processes** and may include marine processes, across different types of landscapes and/or land and water use. What do the system dynamics and capacity look like, and what are the leverage points for a transformative change.

To meet the objectives of the call – uncovering transitional pathways towards management according to the ecosystem approach in landscapes – an integrated approach to how a selection (more than two) of the following perspectives relate to and interact with each other is required:

• Policy tools and incentives – development, efficiency and effectiveness
• Development of governance models in a landscape perspective
• Stakeholders in the landscape  –  behaviour, attitudes, dialogue, values and norms
• Socio-economic aspects and equal distribution – local engagement and  accessibility, supply and demand, inequality, externalities and mandate
• Development of environmental monitoring, impact assessment of conservation interventions, and indicators of ecological processes
• Knowledge exchange – intergenerational, and between local, traditional and scientific knowledge carriers
• Justice and social inclusiveness - indigenous people, minority groups and gender aspects
• Prosperity – health, outdoor recreation, experiential interactions
• Nature-based solutions with a focus on climate adaptation.

Consequently, a successful proposal addresses at least three of the following aspects:

Our aim is to fund a research programme focusing on human-biodiversity interactions at the landscape level encompassing diverse aspects of land use, i.e. conservation, business, management, drivers and pressures. Through a comprehensive system analysis taking off in the ecosystem approach, knowledge advancement is expected across the following facets:

• Social sciences,
• Humanities and sociology,
• Ecological processes,
• Ecological effects of conservation interventions.

It is important that the relevance for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management is clearly stated in the application. It is desirable that the work that the authorities do in green infrastructure, urban and regional planning and environmental analysis is reflected in the application.

Researchers who are granted funding are expected, in collaboration with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, to arrange an annual meetings with relevant parts of the programme and stakeholders, and to allocate resources for this purpose.

Eligible applicants are researchers at universities, colleges, research institutes or government authorities holding a PhD and who conduct research as part of their employment. The main applicant, the leading communication officer, and the subproject leaders must be affiliated to an organisation with a Swedish organisation number.

If the main and co-applicants have granted research funding from the Swedish EPA within earlier calls, any due final report should have been submitted and approved in order to be considered for funding within this call.

The program description in stage 1 must contain (see further: Instructions for applicants (pdf 238 kB)).

• Coordinating project – program manager (main applicant), program administrator and program communicator (co-applicant, nominative),
• Program description – basic framing of research question, description of coordination and communication,
• Subprojects - topic, scientific objectives, subproject leader and subproject participants (including others involved),
• Scientific and societal relevance

The stage 1 review will in particular consider:

• compliance with the call,
• how far the programme has a solid and coherent concept,
• the ability of all subprojects to contribute to the program entirety,
• competence (focus on transdisciplinary added value),
• impact (focus on stakeholder relevance),
• prioritisation between subproject facets and entirety (coordination, budget and communication),
• relevance and scientific quality of focus on sub-projects including contributions to the overarching framing of research question.

Applicants of a proposal proceeding to stage 2 after the review process are invited to submit a full proposal.

A mid-term review of a funded programme will determine if funding of the final years will be recommended.

The application is made electronically via the Swedish EPA's application portal Prisma. The application should preferably be written in English since it is reviewed by international experts. For further instructions see “Instructions for applicants- programme”, Please take note of the Swedish EPA’ policy for further use of data and information.

The last day to apply for stage 1 is October 15th, 2021. A limited number of applications are selected to proceed from stage one to stage two. Stage 2 opens in December 2021 and closes February 15th, 2022. At the end of this process, the funds are intended to be allocated to one research programme.

For further instructions see “Instructions for applicants.” Please take note of the Swedish EPA’ policy for further use of data and information:

Instructions for applicants

Prisma

Swedish EPA' policy for further use of data and information 

• Deadline step 1: 15 October 2021, 14:00 C.E.T
• December 2021: Stage two opens
• Deadline step 2: 15 February 2022, 14:00 C.E.T
• Funding decision:  April 2022
• Granted research programme start: May 2022

Senior research officer
Hannah Östergård Roswall
Phone: 010-698 16 81
hannah.ostergard.roswall@naturvardsverket.se

Senior research officer
Neda Farahbakhshazad
Phone: 010-698 12 50
neda.farahba@naturvardsverket.se

Senior research officer
Ulrika Stensdotter Blomberg
ulrika.stensdotter@havochvatten.se

* In this call we aimed to use a broad definition of landscape, thus landscape should be read as ‘scape, sensu IPBES workshop report^13,14 on biodiversity and climate change incorporating both landscape, freshwater and seascape, both above and below the water- or soil surface

** However, see Priorities, a successful proposal shall include both aquatic and terrestrial processes and may include marine processes.

1. The Ecosystem Approach
   The Ecosystem Approach Advanced User Guide
   Ekosystemansatsen – en arbetsmetod för att bevara och hållbart nyttja naturresurser.
2. European Landscape Convention  (ELC):  ELC definition: ”Landscape – means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors” 
3. Including the biological heritage: the presence of ecosystems, biotopes, animal and plant species that have benefited from or co-evolved with human land use where the long-term survival presuppose or is positively affected by the continued semi-natural management, and land- or water use.
4. Fördjupad utvärdering av miljömålen 2019 – med förslag till regeringen från myndigheter i samverkan (Naturvårdsverket, 2019); Regeringens proposition 2013/14:141 - En svensk strategi för biologisk mångfald och ekosystemtjänster; Svenska miljömål - ett gemensamt uppdrag (Prop. 2004/05:150); Miljömålen i nya perspektiv - Betänkande av Utredningen om Miljömålssystemet" (SOU 2009:83); A roadmap - Evaluation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, in prep EC; Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2020) Global Biodiversity Outlook 5. Montreal.
5. Global Biodiversity Outlook 5. Page 181: Table 22.1. Leverage points for transformative change, and their relation to the transitions.
6. Supporting document/Omvärldsbevakning – A summary of contemporary science-policy reports significant to the call (pdf 172 kB)
7. CBD partsmöte 15: Preparations for the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework 
8. IPBES (2019): Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. S. Díaz, et.al. (eds.). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 56 pages; Naturvårdsverket 2020. Global utvärdering av biologisk mångfald och ekosystemtjänster. - Sammanfattning för beslutsfattare, rapport 6917; Bergström, L., et.al. 2020. Klimatförändringar och biologisk mångfald – Slutsatser från IPCC och IPBES i ett svenskt perspektiv. SMHI och Naturvårdsverket. Klimatologi Nr 56.
9. Government Offices 2018. Sweden's Action Plan for Agenda 2030; Government bill 2019/20:188 Sweden's implementation of Agenda 20302018. Sveriges handlingsplan för Agenda 2030;
10. Swedish Biosphere Reserve  
11. Malena Heinrup & Schultz, L. 2017. Swedish Biosphere Reserves as Arenas for Implementing the 2030 Agenda. Naturvårdsverket rapport 6742.
12. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2021. Nature-based solutions – a tool for climate adaptation and other societal challenges. Report 7016.
13. Extrapolating from the term landscape the term 'scape' is used in this
    report to represent the area and structural characteristics of terrestrial,
    marine and freshwater environments (land-, sea-, freshwaterscape). c.f. Pörtner, H.O. et al. 2021. IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop report on biodiversity and climate change; IPBES and IPCC. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.4782538
14. Pörtner, H.O. et al 2021. Scientific outcome of the IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop on biodiversity and climate change; IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany, DOI:10.5281/zenodo.4659158