4 pages., via online journal., Given the urgent need to raise public awareness on biodiversity issues, we review the effectiveness of “ecosystem services” as a frame for promoting biodiversity conservation. Since its inception as a communications tool in the 1970s, the concept of ecosystem services has become pervasive in biodiversity policy. While the goal of securing ecosystem services is absolutely legitimate, we argue that it has had limited success as a vehicle for securing public interest and support for nature, which is crucial to securing long-term social mandates for protection. Emerging evidence suggests that focusing on ecosystem services rather than the intrinsic value of nature is unlikely to be effective in bolstering public support for nature conservation. Theory to guide effective communication about nature is urgently needed. In the mean-time, communicators should reflect on their objectives and intended audience and revisit the way nature is framed to ensure maximum resonance.
8 pages., via online journal., Formalised methods to address uncertainty are becoming the norm in hydrological modelling, yet they remain fragmented and highly academic, thus limiting their utility for practitioners. Using a qualitative, empirical study of the PIREN-Seine program in France, this paper explores the proccesses behind this trend in an effort to elucidate its prevalence despite inherent limitations when applied to a decision-making context. We identify: 1/ displacement of ‘uncomfortable knowledge’, 2/ fragmented responsibility, 3/ confidence, and 4/ relational framing as interconnected factors, which concurrently support the production of scientific knowledge and the social construction of ignorance, whether it be wilful or intentional. We posit that ignorance is implicitly negotiated among researchers and practitioners in order to reconcile cognitive dissonance and maintain confidence, thereby allowing water managers to take action in the face of uncertainty. Finally, we put forth the notion that having our ‘eyes wide shut’ can be interpreted in two ways: one facilitates the normalisation of ignorance, leaving us vulnerable to unexpected surprises; the other promotes transparent and explicit communication in support of more adaptive and robust decisions.
