Towards transformative change for biodiversity

What can we learn from case studies in Germany?

verfasst von

Vera Schreiner, Marion Mehring, Janina Kleemann, Jennifer Hauck, Stefan Knauß, Christian Poßer, Christian Schleyer, Thomas Potthast, Karsten Grunewald, Christine Fürst, Jennifer Müller, Christian Albert, Monika Egerer, Dagmar Haase, Sonja C. Jähnig, Josef Kaiser, Tanja GM Sanders, Pia Sommer, Thilo Wellmann, Peter Keil, Heidi Wittmer

Abstract

Current human activities have led to fundamental changes in ecosystems, including the loss of biodiversity, which increasingly leads to irreversible negative impacts on society. Although called for in many policy documents, the debate on how to initiate, promote and specifically support socio-ecological transformations for the conservation and restoration of biodiversity is still in its early stages. So far, efforts to protect biodiversity were only partially successful. Therefore, there is a need for approaches to promote societal change for the benefit of biodiversity. We analysed 22 case studies of biodiversity-enhancing societal processes and projects in Germany to understand barriers and success factors and to identify features that support transformative change towards sustainability and biodiversity mainstreaming. Following Wittmer et al. (2021), the following topics were analysed: a) orientation towards a shared and compelling vision that enables biodiversity conservation or enhancement (transformative vision), b) the role of (different types of) knowledge about how to change the system (transformative knowledge), c) navigating the dynamics inherent in changing development pathways (transformational dynamics), d) enabling emancipated action and opening spaces for creative participation of different social groups (emancipation and agency), and e) targeted interventions that aim to enable governance for transformation. This article discusses lessons learned from examples in Germany to support future transformative processes for biodiversity conservation, restoration and biodiversity mainstreaming. It identifies 16 features, enabling transformative change for biodiversity, many of which may be applicable in other countries with similar governance contexts. These characteristics suggest that a structured and well-informed approach, based on a broad range of communication, engagement, negotiation, and stakeholder involvement efforts throughout the process, is well-suited for developing and implementing proposals. While in some small cases indirect drivers were addressed, achieving this on a broader scale is the largest remaining challenge.

Organisationseinheit(en)

Institut für Umweltplanung

Externe Organisation(en)

Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg
Institut für sozial-ökologische Forschung GmbH (ISOE)
LOEWE Center for Translational Biodiversity Genomics
Deutsches Zentrum für integrative Biodiversitätsforschung (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig
CoKnow Consulting - Coproducing Knowledge for Sustainability
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung (UFZ)
Fachhochschule Erfurt (FHE)
Universität Innsbruck
Universität Kassel
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Leibniz-Institut für ökologische Raumentwicklung (IÖR) e.V.
Technische Universität München (TUM)
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (HU Berlin)
Leibniz-Institut für Gewässerökologie und Binnenfischerei (IGB)
Thünen-Institut für Waldökosysteme (WO)
Universität Rostock
Biologische Station Westliches Ruhrgebiet e.V.

Typ

Artikel

Journal

Journal of Environmental Management

Band

386

ISSN

0301-4797

Publikationsdatum

06.2025

Publikationsstatus

Veröffentlicht

Peer-reviewed

Ja

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Environmental engineering, Abfallwirtschaft und -entsorgung, Management, Monitoring, Politik und Recht

Elektronische Version(en)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125663 (Zugang: Offen)