A deterioração das florestas nativas, apesar de já ter motivado preocupações relacionadas à sustentabilidade e incentivado a aplicação de práticas de Gerenciamento Sustentável na Produção de Madeira - GSPM (Sustained Yield Timber Management – SYTM), está ocorrendo a substituição desse conceito pelo conceito de Gerenciamento Florestal Sustentável - GFS (Sustainable Forest Management – SFM). O GFS se diferencia do GSPM, pois extrapola a concepção de produção. Ele é orientado para a gestão das florestas numa perspectiva global, incluindo a preocupação com as gerações futuras e integrando os aspectos sociais e ecológicos, numa ótica de “reflorestamento sustentável”. Como decorrência desses movimentos, as agroindústrias florestais vêm sendo pressionadas a tomar decisões baseadas em princípios de sustentabilidade e, em face do conceito de cadeias produtivas, impulsionam todos os demais elos da cadeia à certificação, orientada pelos mesmos princípios. No Brasil, atualmente, acontece um processo que espelha este momento no Sistema Agroindustrial de Acácia Negra, situado unicamente no Rio Grande do Sul. Porém, isso ocorre num contexto complexo, implicando em decisões ambíguas e arriscadas no âmbito dos ecossistemas florestais que, quando orientadas à sustentabilidade, devem contemplar outros valores e racionalidades, evoluindo da lógica econômica tradicional para a lógica da Economia Ecológica. Assim, parte-se da seguinte questão: existe uma pluralidade de motivações ou unicamente o auto-interesse rege os produtores florestais na tomada de decisão acerca da certificação FSC? O objetivo é analisar a tomada de decisão de acacicultores, fornecedores do Grupo SETA S.A., diante da necessidade de adaptação das unidades de manejo à certificação. Como metodologia incorpora-se a Post-normal science, a ciência que atribui à decisão um papel de extrema relevância no tratamento dos problemas atuais — onde os fatos são incertos, os valores divergentes, os riscos altos e as decisões urgentes. Como resultado identificam-se decisões fundamentadas especialmente com base na maximização do auto-interesse, mas que incluem também o empenho por objetivos desvinculados a este. / The deterioration of native forests, although having caused sustainability-related concerns and, consequently, the application of Sustained Yield Timber Management – SYTM - practices, is giving way to the replacement of such concept with that of Sustainable Forest Management – SFM. SFM differs from SYTM in that it goes beyond the concept of production. It is dedicated to forest management under a global perspective, including the concern for future generations and the integration of social and ecological aspects based on a "sustainable reforestation" viewpoint. As a result of these movements, forest agro-industries have been under pressure to make decisions based on sustainability principles and, due to the concept of production chains, led the other links in the chain towards certification guided by the same principles. In Brazil, nowadays, a process reflecting this moment happens in the Black Acacia Agro-Industrial System, located exclusively in Rio Grande do Sul. However, it takes place in a complex system that requires ambiguous, bold decisions regarding forest ecosystems which, when directed towards sustainability, must take into consideration other values and rationales, evolving from the conventional economic logic to Ecological Economics. Hence, we start with the following question: is there plurality of reasons or does self-interest alone rule over forest producers in their decision making regarding FSC certification? The purpose is to analyze decisions made by acacia planters, suppliers of the Grupo SETA S.A., in face of the need to adapt management units to certification requirements. As for methods, we incorporate the Post-normal science, a science which ascribes to decision making a highly relevant role in the handling of current problems — in which facts are uncertain, values diverge, risks are high and decisions are urgent. As a result, we have identified that decisions are made primarily based on the maximization of self-interest, but also include efforts dedicated to objectives unrelated to it.

A deterioração das florestas nativas, apesar de já ter motivado preocupações relacionadas à sustentabilidade e incentivado a aplicação de práticas de Gerenciamento Sustentável na Produção de Madeira - GSPM (Sustained Yield Timber Management – SYTM), está ocorrendo a substituição desse conceito pelo conceito de Gerenciamento Florestal Sustentável - GFS (Sustainable Forest Management – SFM). O GFS se diferencia do GSPM, pois extrapola a concepção de produção. Ele é orientado para a gestão das florestas numa perspectiva global, incluindo a preocupação com as gerações futuras e integrando os aspectos sociais e ecológicos, numa ótica de “reflorestamento sustentável”. Como decorrência desses movimentos, as agroindústrias florestais vêm sendo pressionadas a tomar decisões baseadas em princípios de sustentabilidade e, em face do conceito de cadeias produtivas, impulsionam todos os demais elos da cadeia à certificação, orientada pelos mesmos princípios. No Brasil, atualmente, acontece um processo que espelha este momento no Sistema Agroindustrial de Acácia Negra, situado unicamente no Rio Grande do Sul. Porém, isso ocorre num contexto complexo, implicando em decisões ambíguas e arriscadas no âmbito dos ecossistemas florestais que, quando orientadas à sustentabilidade, devem contemplar outros valores e racionalidades, evoluindo da lógica econômica tradicional para a lógica da Economia Ecológica. Assim, parte-se da seguinte questão: existe uma pluralidade de motivações ou unicamente o auto-interesse rege os produtores florestais na tomada de decisão acerca da certificação FSC? O objetivo é analisar a tomada de decisão de acacicultores, fornecedores do Grupo SETA S.A., diante da necessidade de adaptação das unidades de manejo à certificação. Como metodologia incorpora-se a Post-normal science, a ciência que atribui à decisão um papel de extrema relevância no tratamento dos problemas atuais — onde os fatos são incertos, os valores divergentes, os riscos altos e as decisões urgentes. Como resultado identificam-se decisões fundamentadas especialmente com base na maximização do auto-interesse, mas que incluem também o empenho por objetivos desvinculados a este. / The deterioration of native forests, although having caused sustainability-related concerns and, consequently, the application of Sustained Yield Timber Management – SYTM - practices, is giving way to the replacement of such concept with that of Sustainable Forest Management – SFM. SFM differs from SYTM in that it goes beyond the concept of production. It is dedicated to forest management under a global perspective, including the concern for future generations and the integration of social and ecological aspects based on a "sustainable reforestation" viewpoint. As a result of these movements, forest agro-industries have been under pressure to make decisions based on sustainability principles and, due to the concept of production chains, led the other links in the chain towards certification guided by the same principles. In Brazil, nowadays, a process reflecting this moment happens in the Black Acacia Agro-Industrial System, located exclusively in Rio Grande do Sul. However, it takes place in a complex system that requires ambiguous, bold decisions regarding forest ecosystems which, when directed towards sustainability, must take into consideration other values and rationales, evolving from the conventional economic logic to Ecological Economics. Hence, we start with the following question: is there plurality of reasons or does self-interest alone rule over forest producers in their decision making regarding FSC certification? The purpose is to analyze decisions made by acacia planters, suppliers of the Grupo SETA S.A., in face of the need to adapt management units to certification requirements. As for methods, we incorporate the Post-normal science, a science which ascribes to decision making a highly relevant role in the handling of current problems — in which facts are uncertain, values diverge, risks are high and decisions are urgent. As a result, we have identified that decisions are made primarily based on the maximization of self-interest, but also include efforts dedicated to objectives unrelated to it.

Ecological economics has been repeatedly described as transdisciplinary and open to including everything from positivism to relativism. I argue for a revision and rejection of this position in favour of realism and reasoned critique. Looking into the ontological presuppositions and considering an epistemology appropriate for ecological economics to meaningfully exist requires rejecting the form of methodological pluralism which has been advocated since the start of this journal. This means being clear about the differences in our worldview (or paradigm) from others and being aware of the substantive failures of orthodox economics in addressing reality. This paper argues for a fundamental review of the basis upon which ecological economics has been founded and in so doing seeks improved clarity as to the competing and complementary epistemologies and methodologies. In part this requires establishing serious interdisciplinary research to replace superficial transdisciplinary rhetoric. The argument places the future of ecological economics firmly amongst heterodox economic schools of thought and in ideological opposition to those supporting the existing institutional structures perpetuating a false reality of the world's social, environmental and economic systems and their operation.

abstract: For more than 100 years, the Unite States National Park Service (NPS) has been guided by a mandate to preserve parks and their resources for the enjoyment of present and future generations. But all parks are subject to conditions that may frustrate preservation efforts. Climate change is melting the glaciers. Rising seas are sweeping away protected shorelines. Development projects, accompanied by air, water, light, and noise pollution, edge closer to parks and fragment habitats. The number of visitors and vested interests are swelling and diversifying. Resources for preservation, such as funds and staff, seem to be continuously shrinking, at least relative to demand. Still, the NPS remains committed to the preservation of our natural and cultural heritage. Yet the practice of that promise is evolving, slowly and iteratively, but detectably. Through explorations of legal and scholarly literature, as well as interviews across the government, non-profit, and academic sectors, I’ve tracked the evolution of preservation in parks. How is preservation shifting to address socio-ecological change? How has preservation evolved before? How should the NPS preserve parks moving forward? The practice of preservation has come to rely on science, including partnerships with academic researchers, as well as inventory and monitoring programs. That shift has in part been guided by goals that have also become more informed by science, like ecological integrity. While some interviewees see science as a solution to the NPS’s challenges, others wonder how applying science can get “gnarly,” due to uncertainty, lack of clear policies, and the diversity of parks and resources. “Gnarly” questions stem in part from the complexity of the NPS as a socio-ecological system, as well as from disputed, normative concepts that underpin the broader philosophy of preservation, including naturalness. What’s natural in the context of pervasive anthropogenic change? Further, I describe how parks hold deep, sometimes conflicting, cultural and symbolic significance for their local and historical communities and for our nation. Understanding and considering those values is part of the gnarly task park managers face in their mission to preserve parks. I explain why this type of conceptual and values-based uncertainty cannot be reduced through science. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Biology 2019

Ecological economics has been repeatedly described as transdisciplinary and open to including everything from positivism to relativism. I argue for a revision and rejection of this position in favour of realism and reasoned critique. Looking into the ontological presuppositions and considering an epistemology appropriate for ecological economics to meaningfully exist requires rejecting the form of methodological pluralism which has been advocated since the start of this journal. This means being clear about the differences in our worldview (or paradigm) from others and being aware of the substantive failures of orthodox economics in addressing reality. This paper argues for a fundamental review of the basis upon which ecological economics has been founded and in so doing seeks improved clarity as to the competing and complementary epistemologies and methodologies. In part this requires establishing serious interdisciplinary research to replace superficial transdisciplinary rhetoric. The argument places the future of ecological economics firmly amongst heterodox economic schools of thought and in ideological opposition to those supporting the existing institutional structures perpetuating a false reality of the world's social, environmental and economic systems and their operation. (author's abstract) / Series: SRE - Discussion Papers

A complexidade dos problemas socioambientais atuais enfrentados pela humanidade tem demandado abordagens mais participativas de produção científica, como a Ciência Pós-Normal, e de gestão, como a Gestão Baseada em Ecossistemas e a Gestão Costeira Integrada. Todas essas abordagens têm como um de seus princípios a Interdisciplinaridade, reconhecendo que o desenvolvimento de pesquisas científicas que busquem integrar diversas disciplinas, múltiplos sistemas de conhecimento e aproximar ciência e gestão são de fundamental importância em prover soluções às complexas questões postas pela sociedade. Apesar disso, a prática da interdisciplinaridade ainda encontra resistência no meio político-acadêmico onde se insere. Assim, o presente trabalho buscou abordar os desafios e as potencialidades de se desenvolver esse tipo de ciência, com foco em ecossistemas marinhos e costeiros, a partir de duas escalas de planejamento e execução científicas (top-down e bottom-up, respectivamente): i) da perspectiva de agências de fomento à pesquisa no Brasil; e ii) da análise de um projeto de pesquisa oceanográfico que objetivou ter uma abordagem interdisciplinar, como estudo de caso. A partir de entrevistas e análises documentais, buscou-se ainda fornecer subsídios ao desenvolvimento de futuros projetos científicos interdisciplinares e aprimoramento da interface ciência-gestão costeira. / The complexity of current socioenvironmental problems faced by humanity has pushed scientific endeavors towards more participative approaches, such as Post-Normal Science, and management, such as Ecosystem Based Management and Integrated Coastal Management. Interdisciplinarity is understood as one of the key elements of these approaches. Thus developing scientific researches that intend to integrate different disciplines, multiple knowledge systems and bring together policy and science is essential to provide answers to the complexities of societal issues. Nevertheless, the development of interdisciplinary research still faces many political and academic obstacles. Therefore, this study presents the challenges and potential of developing integrated science, focusing on coastal and marine ecosystems. We did that from two different planning and execution scales (top-down and bottom-up, respectively): i) from the perspective of research funding agencies; and ii) from the perspective of researchers of an oceanographic research project that intended to work in an interdisciplinarity manner as a study case. From interviews and document analyses, we provide contributions to the development of future interdisciplinary scientific research projects and to the improvement of science-policy interfaces in coastal zones.

A complexidade dos problemas socioambientais atuais enfrentados pela humanidade tem demandado abordagens mais participativas de produção científica, como a Ciência Pós-Normal, e de gestão, como a Gestão Baseada em Ecossistemas e a Gestão Costeira Integrada. Todas essas abordagens têm como um de seus princípios a Interdisciplinaridade, reconhecendo que o desenvolvimento de pesquisas científicas que busquem integrar diversas disciplinas, múltiplos sistemas de conhecimento e aproximar ciência e gestão são de fundamental importância em prover soluções às complexas questões postas pela sociedade. Apesar disso, a prática da interdisciplinaridade ainda encontra resistência no meio político-acadêmico onde se insere. Assim, o presente trabalho buscou abordar os desafios e as potencialidades de se desenvolver esse tipo de ciência, com foco em ecossistemas marinhos e costeiros, a partir de duas escalas de planejamento e execução científicas (top-down e bottom-up, respectivamente): i) da perspectiva de agências de fomento à pesquisa no Brasil; e ii) da análise de um projeto de pesquisa oceanográfico que objetivou ter uma abordagem interdisciplinar, como estudo de caso. A partir de entrevistas e análises documentais, buscou-se ainda fornecer subsídios ao desenvolvimento de futuros projetos científicos interdisciplinares e aprimoramento da interface ciência-gestão costeira. / The complexity of current socioenvironmental problems faced by humanity has pushed scientific endeavors towards more participative approaches, such as Post-Normal Science, and management, such as Ecosystem Based Management and Integrated Coastal Management. Interdisciplinarity is understood as one of the key elements of these approaches. Thus developing scientific researches that intend to integrate different disciplines, multiple knowledge systems and bring together policy and science is essential to provide answers to the complexities of societal issues. Nevertheless, the development of interdisciplinary research still faces many political and academic obstacles. Therefore, this study presents the challenges and potential of developing integrated science, focusing on coastal and marine ecosystems. We did that from two different planning and execution scales (top-down and bottom-up, respectively): i) from the perspective of research funding agencies; and ii) from the perspective of researchers of an oceanographic research project that intended to work in an interdisciplinarity manner as a study case. From interviews and document analyses, we provide contributions to the development of future interdisciplinary scientific research projects and to the improvement of science-policy interfaces in coastal zones.

Le modèle input-output régional environnementalisé développé dans la thèse de M. Cordier suggère qu’il serait possible de restaurer 25% des surfaces naturelles de nourriceries de poissons détruites dans l’estuaire de la Seine entre 1834 et 2004. Le modèle suggère que la mesure de restauration pourrait augmenter de 15% à 23% la biomasse de soles produite dans l’estuaire par rapport à une situation sans mesure. Quant à l’effet des coûts de restauration sur les agrégats macroéconomiques (PIB, emploi, etc.), il génère une diminution qui ne dépasse pas 0,5% par rapport à une situation sans mesure. Le modèle montre cependant que trois secteurs sont particulièrement touchés par la mesure, leur bénéfice étant considérablement réduit. Cela indique le compromis à réaliser entre les objectifs écologiques à long terme et les objectifs économiques sectoriels à court terme. La quantification des compromis par le modèle constitue un atout utile aux processus de décision participatifs multicritère / The regional green input-output model developed in Mateo Cordier's PhD shows that it seems possible to restore 25% of the natural areas of fish nurseries destroyed in the Seine estuary between 1834 and 2004. The model suggests that the restoration measure could increase between 15% and 23% the biomass of sole generated by the estuary compared to a situation without measure. Regarding the impact of restoration costs on macro-economic indicators (GDP, employment, etc.), it generates a decrease that does not exceed 0,5% compared to a situation without measure. However, the model shows that three sectors are particularly impacted by the measure. Their benefits are considerably reduced. This shows the trade-off that occurs between ecological targets on the long run and economic targets on the short run. The quantification of such trade-offs in the model is particularly useful to public participation in decision-making. / Doctorat en Sciences agronomiques et ingénierie biologique / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished