BESAFE
BESAFE Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Arguments for our future Environment
| Coordinatore | STICHTING DIENST LANDBOUWKUNDIG ONDERZOEK
Organization address
address: Costerweg 50 contact info |
| Nazionalità Coordinatore | Netherlands [NL] |
| Totale costo | 3˙775˙337 € |
| EC contributo | 3˙009˙972 € |
| Programma | FP7-ENVIRONMENT
Specific Programme "Cooperation": Environment (including Climate Change) |
| Code Call | FP7-ENV-2011 |
| Funding Scheme | CP-FP |
| Anno di inizio | 2011 |
| Periodo (anno-mese-giorno) | 2011-09-01 - 2015-08-31 |
Partecipanti
| # | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
STICHTING DIENST LANDBOUWKUNDIG ONDERZOEK
Organization address
address: Costerweg 50 contact info |
NL (WAGENINGEN) | coordinator | 565˙381.25 |
| 2 |
AARHUS UNIVERSITET
Organization address
address: Nordre Ringgade 1 contact info |
DK (AARHUS C) | participant | 248˙844.50 |
| 3 |
ECONOMICS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT CONSULTANCY LIMITED
Organization address
address: MORTIMER STREET 73-75 contact info |
UK (LONDON) | participant | 215˙700.00 |
| 4 |
SVERIGES LANTBRUKSUNIVERSITET
Organization address
address: ARRHENIUSPLAN 4 contact info |
SE (UPPSALA) | participant | 201˙028.00 |
| 5 |
THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
Organization address
address: University Offices, Wellington Square contact info |
UK (OXFORD) | participant | 199˙536.00 |
| 6 |
Nome Ente NON disponibile
Organization address
address: KAPITELGASSE 4-6 contact info |
AT (SALZBURG) | participant | 197˙478.00 |
| 7 |
Vlaams Gewest
Organization address
address: KONING ALBERT II LAAN 20 contact info |
BE (BRUSSEL) | participant | 197˙478.00 |
| 8 |
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH COUNCIL
Organization address
address: Polaris House, North Star Avenue contact info |
UK (SWINDON WILTSHIRE) | participant | 193˙640.75 |
| 9 |
STIFTELSEN NORSK INSTITUTT FOR NATURFORSKNING NINA
Organization address
address: HOGSKOLERINGEN 9 contact info |
NO (TRONDHEIM) | participant | 171˙159.00 |
| 10 |
SUOMEN YMPARISTOKESKUS
Organization address
address: Mechelininkatu 34a contact info |
FI (HELSINKI) | participant | 157˙785.00 |
| 11 |
JRC -JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE- EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Organization address
address: Rue de la Loi 200 contact info |
BE (BRUSSELS) | participant | 137˙710.40 |
| 12 |
HELMHOLTZ-ZENTRUM FUER UMWELTFORSCHUNG GMBH - UFZ
Organization address
address: Permoser Strasse 15 contact info |
DE (LEIPZIG) | participant | 127˙999.75 |
| 13 |
Pensoft Publishers Ltd
Organization address
address: UL. GEO MILEV 13a contact info |
BG (Sofia) | participant | 127˙200.00 |
| 14 |
SZENT ISTVAN UNIVERSITY
Organization address
address: Pater Karoly utca 1 contact info |
HU (GODOLLO) | participant | 126˙172.00 |
| 15 |
UNIVERSITATEA DIN BUCURESTI
Organization address
address: MIHAIL KOGALNICEANU STREET 36-46 SECTOR V contact info |
RO (BUCURESTI) | participant | 87˙900.00 |
| 16 |
Nome Ente NON disponibile
Organization address
address: YLIOPISTONRANTA 1 E contact info |
FI (Kuopio) | participant | 54˙960.00 |
Mappa
Word cloud
Esplora la "nuvola delle parole (Word Cloud) per avere un'idea di massima del progetto.
Obiettivo del progetto (Objective)
'In order to protect biodiversity, policy makers increasingly require demonstration of its value. BESAFE will use case studies to investigate how much importance people attribute to alternative arguments for the protection of biodiversity and in particular how this relates to ecosystem services. It will focus on the arguments used at different governance levels and in different ecological, socio-economic, spatial and temporal contexts. BESAFE will examine the interactions of environmental protection policies between governance scales. This will lead to an assessment of the transferability of arguments across scales. The Project will consider the contribution that valuing ecosystem services can make in demonstrating the value of biodiversity. The results will be used to produce a framework that will give guidance on the effectiveness of alternative arguments and protection strategies in various contexts. The framework will be made accessible through a web-based public access database with associated toolkit. To ensure practical usability, the toolkit and database interface will be developed in cooperation with stakeholders.'
Introduzione (Teaser)
Arguments for protecting biodiversity
Descrizione progetto (Article)
Policymakers are increasingly requiring that the value of ecosystems and biodiversity be demonstrated for them to be protected. The 'Biodiversity and ecosystem services: Arguments for our future environment' (http://www.besafe-project.net (BESAFE)) project helped to address this issue.
The definition of an effective argument is one that encourages people to value biodiversity and to invest and participate in its protection. Clear communication, education and public awareness are therefore crucial to achieving this goal.
A case study approach has helped investigate how much importance people attribute to different arguments for protecting biodiversity and the services provided by ecosystems. The consortium focused on arguments employed by policymakers at different government levels and under different ecological and socioeconomic contexts.
BESAFE is developing a framework that sums up the observed and potential effectiveness of different ways to argue for biodiversity protection. The framework will offer insights into the changing effectiveness of different types of arguments. It will be disseminated via a publicly available database with the aid of a user-friendly tool, which was developed in cooperation with stakeholders.
The system will be used to clearly demonstrate to policymakers the value of biodiversity. This will be achieved by leading them through the use and effectiveness of the different arguments in a range of scenarios.
Argument maps based on documents and interviews with EU informants were used to provide a visual representation of the structure of the argument. The criteria for the selection of detailed case studies were also outlined together with a supporting text.
The project will increase awareness of the importance of persuasive arguments for policymakers and stakeholders, the implementation of policy, and communication and participation.