Publications by year
2024
Clements HS, Biggs R, Hamann M, Selomane O, Sitas N (2024). Social-Ecological Systems Thinking and Biodiversity. In (Ed) Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, Elsevier, 50-63.
Clements HS, Do Linh San E, Hempson G, Linden B, Maritz B, Monadjem A, Reynolds C, Siebert F, Stevens N, Biggs R, et al (2024). The bii4africa dataset of faunal and floral population intactness estimates across Africa's major land uses.
Sci Data,
11(1).
Abstract:
The bii4africa dataset of faunal and floral population intactness estimates across Africa's major land uses.
Sub-Saharan Africa is under-represented in global biodiversity datasets, particularly regarding the impact of land use on species' population abundances. Drawing on recent advances in expert elicitation to ensure data consistency, 200 experts were convened using a modified-Delphi process to estimate 'intactness scores': the remaining proportion of an 'intact' reference population of a species group in a particular land use, on a scale from 0 (no remaining individuals) to 1 (same abundance as the reference) and, in rare cases, to 2 (populations that thrive in human-modified landscapes). The resulting bii4africa dataset contains intactness scores representing terrestrial vertebrates (tetrapods: ±5,400 amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals) and vascular plants (±45,000 forbs, graminoids, trees, shrubs) in sub-Saharan Africa across the region's major land uses (urban, cropland, rangeland, plantation, protected, etc.) and intensities (e.g. large-scale vs smallholder cropland). This dataset was co-produced as part of the Biodiversity Intactness Index for Africa Project. Additional uses include assessing ecosystem condition; rectifying geographic/taxonomic biases in global biodiversity indicators and maps; and informing the Red List of Ecosystems.
Abstract.
Author URL.
Wu T, Rocha JC, Berry K, Chaigneau T, Hamann M, Lindkvist E, Qiu J, Schill C, Shepon A, Crépin AS, et al (2024). Triple Bottom Line or Trilemma? Global Tradeoffs Between Prosperity, Inequality, and the Environment.
World Development,
178Abstract:
Triple Bottom Line or Trilemma? Global Tradeoffs Between Prosperity, Inequality, and the Environment
A key aim of sustainable development is the joint achievement of prosperity, equality, and environmental integrity: in other words, material living standards that are high, broadly-distributed, and low-impact. This has often been called the “triple bottom line”. But instead, what if there is a “trilemma” that inhibits the simultaneous achievement of these three goals? We analysed international patterns and trends in the relationships between per-capita gross national income, the Gini coefficient for income distribution, and per-capita ecological footprint from 1995 to 2017, benchmarking them against thresholds from the existing literature. A “dynamic” analysis of the trajectories of 59 countries and a “static” analysis of a larger sample of 140 countries found that none met the triple bottom line, and that instead there were widespread tradeoffs among the three indicators. These tradeoffs, leading to divergent national trajectories and country clusters, show that common pair-wise explanations such as Kuznets Curves do not adequately capture important development dynamics. In particular, while only a few countries simultaneously met the thresholds for prosperity and equality on the one hand and equality and environment on the other, none did for prosperity and environment. Moreover, inequality likely makes resolving this critical tradeoff more difficult. Our findings suggest that mitigating the sustainability trilemma may require countries – especially those that are already prosperous – to prioritize economic redistribution and environmental stewardship over further growth.
Abstract.
2023
Feagan M, Fork M, Gray G, Hamann M, Hawes JK, Hiroyasu EHT, Wilkerson B (2023). Critical pedagogical designs for SETS knowledge co-production: online peer- and problem-based learning by and for early career green infrastructure experts.
Urban Transform,
5(1).
Abstract:
Critical pedagogical designs for SETS knowledge co-production: online peer- and problem-based learning by and for early career green infrastructure experts.
UNLABELLED: Despite a growing understanding of the importance of knowledge co-production for just and sustainable urban transformations, early career green infrastructure experts typically lack opportunities to practice transdisciplinary knowledge co-production approaches within their normal training and professional development. However, using online collaboration technologies combined with peer- and problem-based learning can help address this gap by putting early career green infrastructure experts in charge of organizing their own knowledge co-production activities. Using the case study of an online symposia series focused on social-ecological-technological systems approaches to holistic green infrastructure implementation, we discuss how critical pedagogical designs help create favorable conditions for transdisciplinary knowledge co-production. Our work suggests that the early career position offers a unique standpoint from which to better understand the limitations of current institutional structures of expertise, with a view towards their transformation through collective action. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42854-023-00051-1.
Abstract.
Author URL.
Biggs R, Reyers B, Blanchard R, Clements H, Cockburn J, Cumming GS, Cundill G, de Vos A, Dziba L, Esler KJ, et al (2023). The Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society: an emergent community of practice.
Ecosystems and People,
19(1).
Abstract:
The Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society: an emergent community of practice
Sustainability-focused research networks and communities of practice have emerged as a key response and strategy to build capacity and knowledge to support transformation towards more sustainable, just and equitable futures. This paper synthesises insights from the development of a community of practice on social-ecological systems (SES) research in southern Africa over the past decade, linked to the international Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS). This community consists of a network of researchers who carry out place-based SES research in the southern African region. They interact through various cross-cutting working groups and also host a variety of public colloquia and student and practitioner training events. Known as the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society (SAPECS), its core objectives are to: (1) derive new approaches and empirical insights on SES dynamics in the southern African context; (2) have a tangible impact by mainstreaming knowledge into policy and practice; and (3) grow the community of practice engaged in SES research and governance, including researchers, students and practitioners. This paper reflects on experiences in building the SAPECS community, with the aim of supporting the development of similar networks elsewhere in the world, particularly in the Global South.
Abstract.
2022
Meacham M, Norström AV, Peterson GD, Andersson E, Bennett EM, Biggs R, Crouzat E, Cord AF, Enfors E, Felipe-Lucia MR, et al (2022). Advancing research on ecosystem service bundles for comparative assessments and synthesis.
Ecosystems and People,
18(1), 99-111.
Abstract:
Advancing research on ecosystem service bundles for comparative assessments and synthesis
Social-ecological interactions have been shown to generate interrelated and reoccurring sets of ecosystem services, also known as ecosystem service bundles. Given the potential utility of the bundles concept, along with the recent surge in interest it is timely to reflect on the concept, its current use and potential for the future. Based on our ecosystem service bundle experience, expertise, and ecosystem service bundle analyses, we have found critical elements for advancing the utility of ecosystem service bundle concept and deepening its impact in the future. In this paper we 1) examine the different conceptualizations of the ecosystem service bundle concept; 2) show the range of benefits of using a bundles approach; 3) explore key issues for improving research on ecosystem service bundles, including indicators, scale, and drivers and relationships between ecosystem services; and 4) outline priorities for the future by facilitating comparisons of ecosystem service bundle research.
Abstract.
Wu T, Rocha J, Berry K, Chaigneau T, Lindvist E, Hamann M, Qiu J, Schill C, Shepon A, Crépin A-S, et al (2022). Global tradeoffs between prosperity, inequality, and the environment.
Hamann M, Hichert T, Sitas N (2022). Participatory scenario planning Participatory research methods for sustainability - toolkit #3.
GAIA-ECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY,
31(3), 175-177.
Author URL.
Biggs R, Clements HS, Cumming GS, Cundill G, de Vos A, Hamann M, Luvuno L, Roux DJ, Selomane O, Blanchard R, et al (2022). Social-ecological change: insights from the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society.
Ecosystems and People,
18(1), 447-468.
Abstract:
Social-ecological change: insights from the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society
Social-ecological systems (SES) research has emerged as an important area of sustainability science, informing and supporting pressing issues of transformation towards more sustainable, just and equitable futures. To date, much SES research has been done in or from the Global North, where the challenges and contexts for supporting sustainability transformations are substantially different from the Global South. This paper synthesises emerging insights on SES dynamics that can inform actions and advance research to support sustainability transformations specifically in the southern African context. The paper draws on work linked to members of the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society (SAPECS), a leading SES research network in the region, synthesizing key insights with respect to the five core themes of SAPECS: (i) transdisciplinary and engaged research, (ii) ecosystem services and human well-being, (iii) governance institutions and management practices, (iv) spatial relationships and cross-scale connections, and (v) regime shifts, traps and transformations. For each theme, we focus on insights that are particularly novel, interesting or important in the southern African context, and reflect on key research gaps and emerging frontiers for SES research in the region going forward. Such place-based insights are important for understanding the variation in SES dynamics around the world, and are crucial for informing a context-sensitive global agenda to foster sustainability transformations at local to global scales.
Abstract.
2021
Hamel P, Hamann M, Kuiper JJ, Andersson E, Arkema KK, Silver JM, Daily GC, Guerry AD (2021). Blending Ecosystem Service and Resilience Perspectives in Planning of Natural Infrastructure: Lessons from the San Francisco Bay Area.
FRONTIERS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE,
9 Author URL.
Preiser R, Biggs R, Hamann M, Sitas N, Selomane O, Waddell J, Clements H, Hichert T (2021). Co-exploring relational heuristics for sustainability transitions towards more resilient and just Anthropocene futures.
SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE,
38(5), 625-634.
Author URL.
Hamann M, Johnson JA, Chaigneau T, Chaplin-Kramer R, Mandle L, Rieb JT (2021). Ecosystem service modelling. In (Ed) The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods for Social-Ecological Systems, 426-439.
Hamel P, Guerry AD, Polasky S, Han B, Douglass JA, Hamann M, Janke B, Kuiper JJ, Levrel H, Liu H, et al (2021). Mapping the benefits of nature in cities with the InVEST software. npj Urban Sustainability, 1(1).
Sitas N, Selomane O, Hamann M, Gajjar SP (2021). Towards Equitable Urban Resilience in the Global South Within a Context of Planning and Management. In (Ed)
Cities and Nature, 325-345.
Abstract:
Towards Equitable Urban Resilience in the Global South Within a Context of Planning and Management
Abstract.
2020
McDonald RI, Mansur AV, Ascensao F, Colbert M, Crossman K, Elmqvist T, Gonzalez A, Guneralp B, Haase D, Hamann M, et al (2020). Research gaps in knowledge of the impact of urban growth on biodiversity.
NATURE SUSTAINABILITY,
3(1), 16-24.
Author URL.
Hamann M, Biggs R, Pereira L, Preiser R, Hichert T, Blanchard R, Warrington-Coetzee H, King N, Merrie A, Nilsson W, et al (2020). Scenarios of Good Anthropocenes in southern Africa.
Futures,
118Abstract:
Scenarios of Good Anthropocenes in southern Africa
In the rapidly changing and uncertain world of the Anthropocene, positive visions of the future could play a crucial role in catalysing deep social-ecological transformations to help guide humanity towards more sustainable and equitable futures. This paper presents the outcomes from a novel visioning process designed to elicit creative and inspirational future scenarios for southern Africa. The approach based scenario development on “seeds of good Anthropocenes”, i.e. existing initiatives or technologies that represent current, local-scale innovations for sustainability. A selection of seeds was used to create four distinct, positive visions in a participatory workshop process. Common themes that independently emerged in all four visions were i) decentralized governance and decision-making; ii) a strong emphasis on equity and empathy; iii) high levels of connectedness between people; and iv) a reinforced, respectful relationship with nature. The visions mainly differ in the extent of fusion between people and technology in everyday life, and how much nature plays a role in defining the human experience. The narratives presented here describe worlds that have undergone a more significant paradigm shift towards shared human values and stewardship of resources than is explored in most other ambient narratives for the region. These “Good Anthropocene” scenarios therefore demonstrate more radical, previously unimagined ways of thinking about sustainability futures on the African continent and beyond.
Abstract.
Fazey I, Schäpke N, Caniglia G, Hodgson A, Kendrick I, Lyon C, Page G, Patterson J, Riedy C, Strasser T, et al (2020). Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth: Visions of future systems and how to get there.
Energy Research and Social Science,
70Abstract:
Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth: Visions of future systems and how to get there
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
Abstract.
2019
Sitas N, Harmackova ZV, Anticamara JA, Arneth A, Badola R, Biggs R, Blanchard R, Brotons L, Cantele M, Coetzer K, et al (2019). Exploring the usefulness of scenario archetypes in science-policy processes: experience across IPBES assessments.
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY,
24(3).
Author URL.
Chaplin-Kramer R, Sharp RP, Weill C, Bennett EM, Pascual U, Arkema KK, Brauman KA, Bryant BP, Guerry AD, Haddad NM, et al (2019). Global modeling of nature's contributions to people.
SCIENCE,
366(6462), 255-+.
Author URL.
Selomane O, Reyers B, Biggs R, Hamann M (2019). Harnessing Insights from Social-Ecological Systems Research for Monitoring Sustainable Development.
SUSTAINABILITY,
11(4).
Author URL.
Selomane O, Reyers B, Biggs R, Hamann M (2019). Harnessing insights from social-ecological systems research for monitoring sustainable development.
Sustainability (Switzerland),
11(4).
Abstract:
Harnessing insights from social-ecological systems research for monitoring sustainable development
The United Nations' Agenda 2030 marks significant progress towards sustainable development by making explicit the intention to integrate previously separate social, economic and environmental agendas. Despite this intention, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which were adopted to implement the agenda, are fragmented in their formulation and largely sectoral. We contend that while the design of the SDG monitoring is based on a systems approach, it still misses most of the dynamics and complexity relevant to sustainability outcomes. We propose that insights from the study of social-ecological systems offer a more integrated approach to the implementation of Agenda 2030, particularly the monitoring of progress towards sustainable development outcomes. Using five key features highlighted by the study of social-ecological systems (SESs) relevant to sustainable development: (1) social-ecological feedbacks, (2) resilience, (3) heterogeneity, (4) nonlinearity, and (5) cross-scale dynamics. We analyze the current set of SDG indicators based on these features to explore current progress in making them operational. Our analysis finds that 59% of the indicators account for heterogeneity, 33% for cross-scale dynamics, 23% for nonlinearities, and 18% and 17%, respectively, for social-ecological feedbacks and resilience. Our findings suggest limited use of complex SES science in the current design of SDG monitoring, but combining our findings with recent studies of methods to operationalize SES features suggests future directions for sustainable development monitoring for the current as well as post 2030 set of indicators.
Abstract.
Masterson VA, Vetter S, Chaigneau T, Daw TM, Selomane O, Hamann M, Wong GY, Mellegard V, Cocks M, Tengö M, et al (2019). Revisiting the relationships between human well-being and ecosystems in dynamic social-ecological systems: Implications for stewardship and development.
Global Sustainability,
2Abstract:
Revisiting the relationships between human well-being and ecosystems in dynamic social-ecological systems: Implications for stewardship and development
Non-technical summary We argue that the ways in which we as humans derive well-being from nature - for example by harvesting firewood, selling fish or enjoying natural beauty - feed back into how we behave towards the environment. This feedback is mediated by institutions (rules, regulations) and by individual capacities to act. Understanding these relationships can guide better interventions for sustainably improving well-being and alleviating poverty. However, more attention needs to be paid to how experience-related benefits from nature influence attitudes and actions towards the environment, and how these relationships can be reflected in more environmentally sustainable development projects. Technical summary in the broad literatures that address the linked challenge of maintaining ecosystem integrity while addressing poverty and inequality, there is still a need to investigate how linkages and feedbacks between ecosystem services and well-being can be taken into account to ensure environmental sustainability and improved livelihoods. We present a conceptual model towards a dynamic and reciprocal understanding of the feedbacks between human well-being and ecosystems. The conceptual model highlights three mechanisms through which people derive benefits from ecosystems (use, money and experience), and illustrates how these benefits can affect values, attitudes and actions towards ecosystems. Institutions and agency determine access to and distribution of benefits and costs, and also present barriers or enabling factors for individual or collective action. The conceptual model synthesises insights from existing but mostly separate bodies of literature on well-being and the benefits humans derive from ecosystems, and reveals gaps and areas for future research. Two case studies illustrate how recognizing the full feedback loop between how ecosystems support human well-being and how people behave towards those ecosystems, as well as intervention points within the loop, can guide better action for sustainable poverty alleviation and stewardship of the biosphere.
Abstract.
Keeler BL, Hamel P, McPhearson T, Hamann MH, Donahue ML, Meza Prado KA, Arkema KK, Bratman GN, Brauman KA, Finlay JC, et al (2019). Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature.
Nature Sustainability,
2(1), 29-38.
Abstract:
Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature
Urban nature has the potential to improve air and water quality, mitigate flooding, enhance physical and mental health, and promote social and cultural well-being. However, the value of urban ecosystem services remains highly uncertain, especially across the diverse social, ecological and technological contexts represented in cities around the world. We review and synthesize research on the contextual factors that moderate the value and equitable distribution of ten of the most commonly cited urban ecosystem services. Our work helps to identify strategies to more efficiently, effectively and equitably implement nature-based solutions.
Abstract.
2018
Hamann M, Berry K, Chaigneau T, Curry T, Heilmayr R, Henriksson PJG, Hentati-Sundberg J, Jina A, Lindkvist E, Lopez-Maldonado Y, et al (2018). Inequality and the biosphere.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources,
43, 61-83.
Abstract:
Inequality and the biosphere
Rising inequalities and accelerating global environmental change pose two of the most pressing challenges of the twenty-first century. To explore how these phenomena are linked, we apply a social-ecological systems perspective and review the literature to identify six different types of interactions (or "pathways") between inequality and the biosphere. We find that most of the research so far has only considered one-directional effects of inequality on the biosphere, or vice versa. However, given the potential for complex dynamics between socioeconomic and environmental factors within social-ecological systems, we highlight examples from the literature that illustrate the importance of cross-scale interactions and feedback loops between inequality and the biosphere. This review draws on diverse disciplines to advance a systemic understanding of the linkages between inequality and the biosphere, specifically recognizing cross-scale feedbacks and the multidimensional nature of inequality.
Abstract.
Haider LJ, Hentati-Sundberg J, Giusti M, Goodness J, Hamann M, Masterson VA, Meacham M, Merrie A, Ospina D, Schill C, et al (2018). The undisciplinary journey: early-career perspectives in sustainability science.
SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE,
13(1), 191-204.
Author URL.
Pereira LM, Hichert T, Hamann M, Preiser R, Biggs R (2018). Using futures methods to create transformative spaces: visions of a good Anthropocene in southern Africa.
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY,
23(1).
Author URL.
2017
Balvanera P, Daw TM, Gardner TA, Martin-Lopez B, Norstrom AV, Speranza CI, Spierenburg M, Bennett EM, Farfan M, Hamann M, et al (2017). Key features for more successful place-based sustainability research on social-ecological systems: a Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS) perspective.
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY,
22(1).
Author URL.
2016
Hamann M, Biggs R, Reyers B (2016). An Exploration of Human Well-Being Bundles as Identifiers of Ecosystem Service Use Patterns.
PLOS ONE,
11(10).
Author URL.
2015
Hamann M, Biggs R, Reyers B (2015). Mapping social-ecological systems: Identifying 'green-loop' and 'red-loop' dynamics based on characteristic bundles of ecosystem service use.
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS,
34, 218-226.
Author URL.
Oteros-Rozas E, Martin-Lopez B, Daw TM, Bohensky EL, Butler JRA, Hill R, Martin-Ortega J, Quinlan A, Ravera F, Ruiz-Mallen I, et al (2015). Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research: insights and experiences from 23 case studies.
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY,
20(4).
Author URL.
2012
Hamann MH, Gremillet D, Ryan PG, Bonadonna F, van der Lingen CD, Pichegru L (2012). A hard-knock life: the foraging ecology of Cape cormorants amidst shifting prey resources and industrial fishing pressure.
AFRICAN JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE,
34(2), 233-240.
Author URL.
Cook TR, Hamann M, Pichegru L, Bonadonna F, Gremillet D, Ryan PG (2012). GPS and time-depth loggers reveal underwater foraging plasticity in a flying diver, the Cape Cormorant.
MARINE BIOLOGY,
159(2), 373-387.
Author URL.