IPBES, an inclusive institution? Challenging the integration of stakeholders in a science-policy interface

Oubenal Mohamed, Hrabanski Marie, Pesche Denis. 2017. IPBES, an inclusive institution? Challenging the integration of stakeholders in a science-policy interface. Ecology and Society, 22 (1):11, 10 p.

https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08961-220111

Article de revue ; Article de recherche ; Article de revue à facteur d'impact Revue en libre accès total

Prévisualisation

Version publiée - Anglais
Utilisation soumise à autorisation de l'auteur ou du Cirad.
2016_Oubenal et al_IPBES.pdf
Télécharger (361kB) | Prévisualisation

Quartile : Q1, Sujet : ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES / Quartile : Q2, Sujet : ECOLOGY

Résumé : The International Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was launched in 2012. Its objective is to strengthen the science-policy interface for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being, and sustainable development. Nonstate Actors (NSAs) participated in the inception of the platform and are also assumed to play a key role in its coming assessments and reports. In order to encourage NSAs to participate and self-organize, an institutional process has been led by the Secretariat in collaboration with two main organizations: Diversitas-International Council for Science (ICSU) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). We look at the construction of this stakeholder participation process and its effectiveness. To what degree is the stakeholder engagement effective and what are the different forms of involvement? What methods are used by the IPBES's Secretariat and its mandated organizations to encourage stakeholder participation in the Platform? A social network analysis survey revealed four categories of actors in the group of stakeholders: organizers, connected, closely-knit, and peripheral. The ethnographic approach analyzed the way in which the IPBES secretariat organized the stakeholders' days, managed them, and controlled them. Thanks to these two methods, we analyzed the relational structure of the group of stakeholders and their contours of involvement and showed that these two dimensions can combine in a different way. The idea of a group of stakeholders, promoted by IPBES, is accompanied by a leadership/participation model that tends to enroll the stakeholders involved but may conversely marginalize some dissenting voices.

Mots-clés Agrovoc : biodiversité, protection de l'environnement, politique de l'environnement, conservation de la diversité biologique, approche participative, services écosystémiques, groupe éthnique, sociologie rurale, sociologie économique, moyens d'existence durables, savoirs autochtones, gestion des ressources naturelles, communauté rurale, politique de développement, coopération internationale, cooperation public-privé, développement durable