Importance of methodological pluralism in deriving counterfactuals for evidence-based conservation.

Most protected area impact research that uses counterfactuals draws heavily on quantitative methods, data, and knowledge types, making it valuable in producing generalizations but limited in temporal scope, historical detail, and habitat diversity and coverage of ecosystem services. We devised a methodological pluralistic approach, which supports social science qualitative methods, narratives, mixed methods, and interdisciplinarity, to fully unlock the potential of counterfactuals in ensuring a place-based and detailed understanding of the socioecological context and impacts of protected areas. We applied this approach to derive possible counterfactual conditions for the impact of a montane protected area on 40 years of vegetation change in the Cape Floristic Region-a global biodiversity hotspot and UNESCO World Heritage Site in South Africa. We incorporated diverse methods, knowledge, and information sources, drawing on before-after protected area comparisons for inside and outside the protected area. A significant increase in shrubland vegetation (17-30%) was observed and attributed primarily to a decline in frequent burning for grazing. This also occurred outside the protected area and was driven by socioeconomic drivers and not by concerns over biodiversity conservation or land degradation. Had the protected area not been established the area would have seen intensification of cultivation and increased road networks, buildings, and water storage in dams. Our approach increased historical temporal coverage of socioecological change and contextualized assumptions around causality. Protected area impact evaluation should reengage in place-based research that fully incorporates pluralism in methodologies for constructing counterfactuals in a way that builds regional and global understanding from the local level upward. We devised 10 key principles for deriving counterfactuals grounded in methodological pluralism, covering aspects of collaboration, cocreation, inter- and transdisciplinarity, diverse values and lived experiences, multiple knowledge types, multiple possible causal mechanisms, social science qualitative methods, perceptions, perspectives, and narratives.

Importancia del pluralismo metodológico en la derivación de situaciones contrafactuales para la conservación basada en evidencias Resumen La mayoría de las investigaciones sobre el impacto de las áreas protegidas que usan situaciones contrafactuales se basan en gran medida en métodos cuantitativos, datos y tipos de conocimiento, por lo que son muy valiosas para producir generalizaciones, pero limitadas en el enfoque temporal, el detalle histórico y la diversidad de hábitats y cobertura de los servicios ambientales. Diseñamos una estrategia metodológica pluralista, la cual apoya los métodos cualitativos de las ciencias sociales, narrativas, métodos mixtos e interdisciplinarios para utilizar por completo el potencial de las situaciones contrafactuales para asegurar un conocimiento detallado y basado en el lugar del contexto socio ecológico y el impacto de las áreas protegidas. Aplicamos esta estrategia para derivar las posibles condiciones contrafactuales del impacto de un área protegida montañosa sobre 40 años de cambio de vegetación en el reino florístico del Cabo ­ un punto caliente de biodiversidad y Sitio de Patrimonio Mundial de la UNESCO en Sudáfrica. Incorporamos varios métodos, conocimientos y fuentes de información a partir de las comparaciones antes­después dentro y fuera del área protegida. Observamos un incremento significativo en la vegetación del matorral (17­30%), el cual atribuimos principalmente en la disminución de la quema frecuente para el pastoreo. Esto también ocurrió fuera del área protegida y fue causado por factores socioeconómicos y no por preocupación por la conservación de la biodiversidad o por la degradación del suelo. De no haberse establecido el área protegida, la zona habría sufrido una intensificación de cultivos y un incremento de carreteras, edificios y almacenamiento de agua en presas. Nuestra estrategia incrementó la cobertura histórica temporal del cambio socio­ecológico y contextualizó las suposiciones sobre la causalidad. La evaluación del impacto del área protegida debe volver a la investigación basada en el lugar que incorpora de lleno el pluralismo en la metodología para construir situaciones contrafactuales de una forma que genere conocimiento regional y global a partir del nivel local y hacia arriba. Diseñamos diez principios clave para derivar las situaciones contrafactuales basados en el pluralismo metodológico, la cobertura de los aspectos de colaboración, creación conjunta, inter­ y transdisciplinariedad, valores diversos y experiencias vividas, varios tipos de conocimiento, diferentes mecanismos causales posibles, métodos cualitativos de las ciencias sociales, percepciones, perspectivas, historias y narrativas.

Benefits of water-related ecological infrastructure investments to support sustainable land-use: a review of evidence from critically water-stressed catchments in South Africa.

Investments to promote sustainable land-use within critical river catchment areas are often undertaken to provide benefits to society. Investments generally aim to protect or restore ecological infrastructure-the underlying framework of ecosystems, functions and processes that supply ecosystem services-for multiple benefits to society. However, the empirical evidence base from studies across the world on both mechanisms and outcomes to support these assumptions is limited. We collate evidence on the benefits of ecological infrastructure interventions, in terms of ecosystem services provided to society, from three major South African water-providing catchments using a novel framework. In these catchments, millions of US Dollars' worth of investments have been made into ecological infrastructure since 1996. We ask the question: is there evidence that ecological infrastructure interventions are delivering the proposed benefits? Results show that even in catchments with substantial, long-term financial investment into ecological infrastructure, research has not empirically confirmed the benefits. Better baseline data collection is required, and monitoring during and after ecological infrastructure interventions, to quantify benefits to society. This evidence is needed to leverage investment into ecological infrastructure interventions at scale. Investment at scale is needed to transition to more sustainable land-use to unlock greater benefits to nature and people.

Spatial variability in sustainable development trajectories in South Africa: provincial level safe and just operating spaces.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represents the first globally agreed framework to address human development and environmental stewardship in an integrated way. One approach to summarising national SDG status is our "barometer for inclusive sustainable development in South Africa". The barometer downscales global social and planetary boundaries to provide status and trends for 20 critical indicators of environmental stress and social deprivation. In this paper, we explore the sub-national heterogeneity in sustainable development indicators by creating barometers defining the 'safe and just operating space' for South Africa's nine provinces. Our results show that environmental stress varies significantly and provinces need to focus on quite different issues. Although generally environmental stress is increasing, there are areas where it is decreasing, most notably, marine harvesting. Social deprivation results show more of a pattern with high levels of deprivation in employment, income and safety across the provinces, and historically disadvantaged provinces showing the most deprivation overall. Although deprivation is generally decreasing, there are notable exceptions such as food security in six provinces. Our provincial barometers and trend plots are novel in that they present comparable environmental and social data on key indicators over time for all South Africa's provinces. They are visual tools that communicate the range of key challenges and risks that provincial governments face, and are non-specialist and accessible to a range of audiences. In addition, the paper provides a critical case study of spatial disaggregation of national data that is required for the SDGs implementation.

Tracking sustainable development with a national barometer for South Africa using a downscaled "safe and just space" framework.

Nations in the 21st century face a complex mix of environmental and social challenges, as highlighted by the on-going Sustainable Development Goals process. The "planetary boundaries" concept [Rockström J, et al. (2009) Nature 461(7263):472-475], and its extension through the addition of social well-being indicators to create a framework for "safe and just" inclusive sustainable development [Raworth K (2012) Nature Climate Change 2(4):225-226], have received considerable attention in science and policy circles. As the chief aim of this framework is to influence public policy, and this happens largely at the national level, we assess whether it can be used at the national scale, using South Africa as a test case. We developed a decision-based methodology for downscaling the framework and created a national "barometer" for South Africa, combining 20 indicators and boundaries for environmental stress and social deprivation. We find that it is possible to maintain the original design and concept of the framework while making it meaningful in the national context, raising new questions and identifying priority areas for action. Our results show that South Africa has exceeded its environmental boundaries for biodiversity loss, marine harvesting, freshwater use, and climate change, and social deprivation is most severe in the areas of safety, income, and employment. Trends since 1994 show improvement in nearly all social indicators, but progression toward or over boundaries for most environmental indicators. The barometer shows that achieving inclusive sustainable development in South Africa requires national and global action on multiple fronts, and careful consideration of the interplay between different environmental domains and development strategies.