Convergence between the study of ecosystem services and nuclear technology – a necessary approach

Elaine Aparecida Rodrigues; Afonso Rodrigues Aquino; Amanda Rodrigues de Carvalho

doi:10.15392/bjrs.v9i1A.1567

Autores

Elaine Aparecida Rodrigues Instituto Florestal
Afonso Rodrigues Aquino Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares - IPEN
Amanda Rodrigues de Carvalho Universidade de Brasília; Bolsista PIBI/CNPq-IF

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15392/bjrs.v9i1A.1567

Palavras-chave:

Nuclear Science, Sustainable Development Goals, Human well-being

Resumo

If in the 19^th century scientific knowledge moved from a generalist perspective to a growing specialization, in recent decades, problems that transcend disciplinary and political boundaries have required solutions based on interdisciplinary research and global actions, which led to the establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Viewing from the latter perspective, the study of ecosystem services has converged on a fast-growing, transdisciplinary area of knowledge, at the same time that the advances in the nuclear field have enabled applications in industry, health, agriculture and the environment. Considering the development of these two areas of knowledge, the objective of this study is to evaluate the correlation between Ecosystem Services (ES) and Nuclear Science and Technology (NST), by means of category building and content analysis applied to articles compiled from Web of Science. From 1980 to June 2020, 27,301 records (articles and reviews) were listed for the term “Ecosystem Service*”. When refining the result with the application of descriptors related to the nuclear field, correspondences were found for “Uranium”=14; “Nuclear Power”=6; “Nuclear Energy”=3; “Nuclear Technology*”=1; “Nuclear Fuel*”=1; “Nuclear Material*”=1; “Radiation”=7; “Isotope*”=188, totalizing 221 correspondences. On the other hand, 9,949 records were obtained for the same time interval, when using the descriptors for the nuclear field, plus the terms “Nature” or “Ecosystem*” or “Environment”. Despite attesting that NST truly converges on ES, this correlation needs to be made more explicit in ES studies, in order to expand the perspectives for the conservation, preservation and recovery of the ecosystem services and their contribution to human well-being.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Biografia do Autor

Elaine Aparecida Rodrigues, Instituto Florestal

Possui graduação em Administração e mestrado em Integração da América Latina (USP). É doutor em Tecnologia Nuclear pelo Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares (IPEN / USP). É pesquisadora científica do Instituto Florestal desde 2004, atuando como diretora administrativa de 2009 a 2012. Trabalha com a aplicação de métodos de avaliação e valoração de serviços ecossistêmicos e com abordagens de integração de serviços ecossistêmicos em políticas públicas. Destaca-se a executar processos de criação de unidades de conservação, avaliação de serviços ecossistêmicos, estudos sobre reservas da biosfera e sobre a Reserva da Biosfera do Cinturão Verde da Cidade de São Paulo,e incorporação de avaliação de serviços ecossistêmicos na elaboração de planos de manejo de unidades de conservação e sua incorporação no aperfeiçoamento de políticas públicas de ordenamento territorial. Desde 2006 a 2016, coordena atividades de iniciação científica júnior e popularização da ciência no Instituto Florestal / Reserva da Biosfera do Cinturão Verde da Cidade de São Paulo, com reconhecimento nacional e internacional como ação de popularização da ciência. Foi coordenadora da Reserva da Biosfera Verde da Cidade de São Paulo, com destaque para iniciativas de avaliação de ecossistemas, protagonismo juvenil, planejamento e ordenamento territorial e criação de áreas protegidas. coordene atividades de iniciação científica júnior e popularização da ciência no Instituto Florestal / Reserva da Biosfera Verde de Cinturão da Cidade de São Paulo, com reconhecimento nacional e internacional como ação de popularização da ciência. Foi coordenadora da Reserva da Biosfera Verde da Cidade de São Paulo, com destaque para iniciativas de avaliação de ecossistemas, protagonismo juvenil, planejamento e ordenamento territorial e criação de áreas protegidas. coordene atividades de iniciação científica júnior e popularização da ciência no Instituto Florestal / Reserva da Biosfera Verde da Cidade de São Paulo, com reconhecimento nacional e internacional como ação de popularização da ciência. Foi coordenador da Reserva da Biosfera Verde da Cidade de São Paulo, com destaque para iniciativas de avaliação de ecossistemas, protagonismo juvenil, planejamento e ordenamento territorial e criação de áreas protegidas.

Referências

UN-CBD. Convention on Biological Diversity. <https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf> (1992)

MILLENNIUM Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. World Resources Institute (2003).

COSTANZA, R. et al. “The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital”. Nature, v. 387, n. 6630, p. 253 (1997)

COSTANZA, R. et al. “Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go?” Ecosystem Services, v. 28, p. 1-16 (2017).

COSTANZA, R.; KUBISZEWSKI, I. “The authorship structure of “ecosystem services” as a transdisciplinary field of scholarship”. Ecosystem Services, v. 1, n. 1, p. 16-25 (2012).

LA NOTTE, A. et al. “Ecosystem services classification: a systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework.” Ecological indicators, v. 74, p. 392-402 (2017).

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES. Ecosystem Services: Science, Policy and Practice. Elsevier. <https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services>

MILLENNIUM Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well Being: Synthesis. Island Press (2008).

UN-CBD. Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica. Repercusiones de las conclusiones de la Evaluación de los Ecosistemas del Milenio para la labor futura del Convenio. Órgano Subsidiario de Asesoramiento Científico, Técnico y Tecnológico. Duodécima Reunión.: UNESCO, Paris, 2-6 de julio de 2007, (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/12/4) (2007).

BENNETT, E. M. “Research frontiers in ecosystem service science”. Ecosystems, v. 20, n. 1 (2017).

IPBES. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. <https://www.ipbes.net/ > (2020).

Díaz, S., et al. “Assessing nature’s contributions to people”. Science 359(6373):270-272 (2018).

Díaz, S., S. et al. “The IPBES conceptual framework - connecting nature and people.” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14:1-16 (2015).

PASCUAL, U. et al. “Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach”. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, v. 26, p. 7-16 (2017).

Díaz, et al. “RE: There is more to nature’s contributions to people than ecosystem services - a response to de Groot et al”. Science E-Letter, 12 March. [online]. <http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6373/270/tab-e-letters> (2019)

Faith, D. P. Avoiding paradigm drifts in IPBES: reconciling “nature’s contributions to people,” biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society 23(2):40 (2018).

AINSCOUGH, Jacob et al. “Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept. Ecosystem Services”, v. 36, p. 100892, 2019.

Spake R, et al. “Unpacking ecosystem service bundles: Towards predictive mapping of synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services”. Global Environmental Change. 47 (2017)

MAES, J.; BURKHARD, B.; GENELETTI, D. “Ecosystem services are inclusive and deliver multiple values. A comment on the concept of nature’s contributions to people”. One Ecosystem, v. 3, p. e24720, (2018).

UNITED NATIONS Development Programme. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Outcome Document for the UN Summit to Adopt the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Draft for Adoption. New York. (2015). (2015).

UN-SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS Knowledge Platform. <https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/ > (2019).

UNITED NATIONS. Sustainable Development Goals. <https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/>. (2019).

LUCAS, P., et al. Future Developments Without Targeted Policies Chapter 21 - Global Environment Outlook (GEO-6): Healthy Planet, Healthy People (2019).

WARD, M. et al. “Food, money and lobsters: Valuing ecosystem services to align environmental management with Sustainable Development Goals”. Ecosystem Services, v. 29, p. 56-69 (2018)

WOOD, S. L. R et al. “Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals”. Ecosystem services, v. 29, p. 70-82 (2018).

DANGLES, O.; CASAS, J. “Ecosystem services provided by insects for achieving sustainable development goals”. Ecosystem services, v. 35, p. 109-115 (2019).

ANDERSON, Christopher B. et al. “Determining nature’s contributions to achieve the sustainable development goals.” Sustainability Science, v. 14, n. 2, p. 543-547, (2019).

GEIJZENDORFFER, I. R. et al. “Ecosystem services in global sustainability policies”. Environmental Science & Policy, v. 74, p. 40-48. 25 (2017).

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency. <https://www.iaea.org > (2019).

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency. Climate change and nuclear power (2018).

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power and Sustainable Development (2018).

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Technical Cooperation Programme: Sixty years and beyond – Contributing to development: Proceeding of an International Conference organized by the International Atomic Energy and Held in Vienna, 30 May-1 June 2017: Proceedings Series, IAEA, Vienna (2018).

SCORPUS Database. < https://www.scopus.com/ > (2020)

WEB OF SCIENCE Database. < https://www.webofknowledge.com/ > (2020).

UNITED NATIONS Environment Programme. The IAEA Environment Laboratories: Supporting Member States in the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities. Intergovernmental Review Meeting on the Implementation of Global Programme of Action for the Protection of Marine Environment from Land-based Activities. Fourth session, Bali, Indonesia, 31 October and 1 November 2018

WESTMAN, Walter E. “How much are nature’s services worth?” Science, v. 197, n. 4307, p. 960-964, (1977).

EHRLICH, P. R.; MOONEY, H. “Extinction, substitution, and ecosystem services.” BioScience, v. 33, n. 4, p. 248-254 (1983).

GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN, E. et al. “The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes”. Ecological economics, v. 69, n. 6, p. 1209-1218. (2010).

DAILY, G. C. et al. Nature’s services. Island Press, Washington, DC (1997).

WWF. Living Planet Report - 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M. and Almond, R.E.A.(Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland (2018).

CAVENDER-BARES, J., S. POLASKY, E. KING, and P. BALVANERA. “A sustainability framework for assessing trade-offs in ecosystem services”. Ecology and Society 20(1): 17 (2015).

DAW, T. M. et al. “Evaluating taboo trade-offs in ecosystems services and human wellbeing.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 112, n. 22, p. 6949-6954 (2015).

TURKELBOOM, F. et al. “When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning”. Ecosystem services, v. 29, p. 566-578 (2018).

MILLENNIUM Ecosystem Assessment. <https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.html> (2019).

TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystem & Biodiversity: An Interim Report. A Banson Production, Cambridge, UK (2008).

TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity. < http://www.teebweb.org/ > (2019).

ESP Ecosystem Services Partnership. <https://www.es-partnership.org/> (2019).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Environment. Nature and Biodiversity. Biodiversity Strategy <http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/strategy/> (2019).

Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services – Waves <https://www.wavespartnership.org/ > (2019).

NATURAL Capital Project. <https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/> (2019).

NATURAL Capital Coalition. <https://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/>. (2019).

COMMON International Classification of Ecosystem Services – CICES. <https://cices.eu/> (2019).

COSTANZA, Robert et al. “Changes in the global value of ecosystem services”. Global environmental change, v. 26, p. 152-158, (2014).

IPBES. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services - ADVANCE UNEDITED VERSION – 6 May (2019). <https://www.ipbes.net>

ICSU, ISSC. Review of the sustainable development goals: The science perspective. Paris:

International Council for Science (ICSU) (2015).

ESPA. An environment for wellbeing: Pathways out of poverty – Policy messages from the ESPA Programme. Edinburgh: Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (2018).

LEAL FILHO, W. et al. “Reinvigorating the sustainable development research agenda: the role of the sustainable development goals (SDG)”. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, v. 25, n. 2, p. 131-142, (2018).

NILSSON, M et al. “Mapping interactions between the sustainable development goals: lessons learned and ways forward”. Sustainability science, v. 13, n. 6, p. 1489-1503, (2018).

COSTANZA, R. et al. “Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals.” Ecological Economics, v. 130, p. 350-355, 2016.

UNITED NATIONS Environment Programme. Measuring Progress: Towards Achieving the Environmental Dimension of the SDGs. (2019).