Fine-scale monitoring and mapping of biodiversity and ecosystem services reveals multiple synergies and few tradeoffs in urban green space management.

Urban watersheds can play a critical role in supporting biodiversity and ecosystem services in a rapidly changing world. However, managing for multiple environmental and social objectives in urban landscapes is challenging, especially if the optimization of one ecosystem service conflicts with another. Urban ecology research has frequently been limited to a few indicators - typically either biodiversity or ecosystem service indices - making tradeoffs and synergies difficult to assess. Through a recently established watershed-scale monitoring network in Central Texas, we address this gap by evaluating biodiversity (flora and fauna), habitat quality, and ecosystem service indices of urban green spaces across the watershed. Our results reveal substantial heterogeneity in biodiversity and ecosystem service levels and multiple synergies (stacked benefits or "win-wins"). For example, we found that carbon sequestration positively correlated with tree species richness and the proportion of native trees in a green space, indicating that biodiversity goals for increased tree diversity can also provide carbon sequestration benefits. We also documented correlations between green spaces with greater riparian forest cover and lower particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations and cooler temperatures. In addition, we found that bee and wasp species richness was positively correlated with carbon sequestration and human visitation rates, meaning that urban green spaces can optimize carbon sequestration goals without losing pollinator habitat or access opportunities for city residents. Overall, our results indicate that many aspects of habitat quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem services can be simultaneously supported in urban green spaces. We conclude that urban design and management can optimize nature-based solutions and strategies to have distinct positive impacts on both people and nature.

A question of fit: reflections on boundaries, organizations and social-ecological systems.

Although there is acknowledgment that the complexity of social-ecological systems governance demands representation from diverse perspectives, there is little agreement in the literature on how to cross both fiat (human-demarcated) and bona fide (physical) boundaries to address such complexities. As a cohort of interdisciplinary scholars, we navigate the boundary between science and practice to address the question of fit regarding the role of organizations in transcending boundaries. We found there is a need to rectify discrepancies between theories about boundaries and theories about organizations. To this end, we propose a conceptual framework to analyze transboundary organizations, an umbrella term to group the literature on boundary organizations, intermediaries and bridging organizations; we introduce this term to illustrate they are not mutually exclusive and to facilitate interdisciplinary research. We first examine social-ecological systems (SES), a framework intended to improve understandings of boundaries and governance. We then continue to unpack the complexity of boundaries and organizations, specifically through important transboundary concepts such as scale and organizational learning. This helps frame our examination of the literature on: 1) boundary organizations; 2) bridging organizations (third-party entities); and 3) intermediaries (distinguished by their position between other actors). Our review identifies a number of discrepancies that pertain to the types of boundaries discussed and the roles assigned to organizations governing SES. Important characteristics have emerged from our review of transboundary organizations including legitimacy, saliency, urgency, and credibility. In developing a conceptual framework, we argue that transboundary organizations: 1) expand upon the boundary spectrum, 2) incorporate transboundary concepts, and 3) hybridize characteristics of boundary, bridging, and intermediary organizations. We conclude with a number of considerations for transboundary organizations and recommendations for further research.

Collaboration and nested environmental governance: Scale dependency, scale framing, and cross-scale interactions in collaborative conservation.

The problem of fit between social institutions and ecological systems is an enduring challenge in natural resource management and conservation. Developments in the science of conservation biology encourage the management of landscapes at increasingly larger scales. In contrast, sociological approaches to conservation emphasize the importance of ownership, collaboration and stewardship at scales relevant to the individual or local community. Despite the proliferation of initiatives seeking to work with local communities to undertake conservation across large landscapes, there is an inherent tension between these scales of operation. Consequently, questions about the changing nature of effective conservation across scales abound. Through an analysis of three nested cases working in a semiautonomous fashion in the Northern Rocky Mountains in North America, this paper makes an empirical contribution to the literature on nested governance, collaboration and communication across scales. Despite different scales of operation, constituencies and scale frames, we demonstrate a surprising similarity in organizational structure and an implicit dependency between these initiatives. This paper examines the different capacities and capabilities of collaborative conservation from the local to regional to supra regional. We draw on the underexplored concept of 'scale-dependent comparative advantage' (Cash and Moser, 2000), to gain insight into what activities take place at which scale and what those activities contribute to nested governance and collaborative conservation. The comparison of these semiautonomous cases provides fruitful territory to draw lessons for understanding the roles and relationships of organizations operating at different scales in more connected networks of nested governance.