Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Community-based responses for tackling environmental and socio-economic change and impacts in mountain social–ecological systems

  • Review
  • Published:
Ambio Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mountain social–ecological systems (SES) are often rich in biological and cultural diversity with sustained human–nature interactions. Many mountain SES are experiencing rapid environmental and socio-economic change, demanding viable action for conservation to sustain ecosystem services for the benefit of their communities. This paper is a synthesis of 71 case studies of mountain-specific SES, submitted to the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI) that identifies major drivers of change, associated impacts, and response strategies. We find that overexploitation, land use change, demographic change, and the regional economy are the most prevalent drivers of change in the IPSI mountain SES, leading to negative consequences for biodiversity, livelihoods, indigenous knowledge, and culture. To counter these challenges in the study SES, stakeholders from the public, private, and civil society sectors have been implementing diverse legal, behavioral, cognitive, technological, and economic response strategies, often with strong community participation. We outline the lessons learned from the IPSI case studies to show how community-based approaches can contribute meaningfully to the sustainable management of mountain landscapes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Social-ecological Systems (SES) consist of human and ecological elements that are tightly interlinked and closely interacting (Berkes and Folke 1998). In SES, ecosystem processes and functions and services both affect and are affected by human activity, and vice versa. As a result, in order to understand the function of (and change in) SES, it is important to understand their ecological and human dimensions, as well as their interrelations. Over time, SES concept has evolved to cover interdependence, mutual dependence, and interactions between social and ecological systems (Colding and Barthel 2019).

  2. For the purpose of this paper, we define “mountain communities” as the indigenous or local communities settled in mountain SES. Many mountain communities depend directly on forest-, livestock- and agriculture-based production systems for their livelihoods. However, mountain communities are quite diverse and in some geographical or socio-economic contexts they might depend on other means of livelihood such as tourism.

  3. Community-based approaches to the conservation and management of SES are essentially voluntary initiatives of “natural resources or biodiversity protection conducted by, for, and with the local community” (Western et al. 1994) aiming “to enhance wildlife/biodiversity conservation and to provide incentives, normally economic, for local people” (Campbell and Vainio-Mattila 2003). Even though there is no single definition or “model” to community-based approaches, they are generally characterized by high levels of community engagement through local stakeholder involvement, public participation and TLK mobilization (Ruiz-Mallén and Corbera 2013; Delgado-Serrano et al. 2015).

  4. IPSI members include academia, government, private sector and civil society. These members submit case studies presenting the outcomes of implementation of local-level projects to conserve or restore SES in manner of living in harmony with nature.

  5. Afforestation refers to planting new forests, while reforestation refers to replanting degraded forests that were lost due to developmental and other human or natural activities.

References

  • Akramov, K. T., B. Yu, and S. Fan. 2010. Mountains, global food prices, and food security in the developing world. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00989. International Food Policy Research Institute.

  • Alessa, L., A. Kliskey, J. Gosz, D. Griffith, and A. Ziegler. 2018. MtnSEON and social–ecological systems science in complex mountain landscapes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 16: S4–S10. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Améztegui, A., L. Brotons, and L. Coll. 2010. Land-use changes as major drivers of mountain pine (Pinus uncinata Ram.) expansion in the Pyrenees. Global Ecology and Biogeography 19: 632–641. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00550.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann, F., A. Maharjan, S. Thieme, R. Fleiner, and S. Wymann Von Dach, ed. 2019. Migration and sustainable mountain development: Turning challenges into opportunities. Application/pdf. Bern: Centre for Development and Environment (CDE).

  • Bajracharya, S.B., P.A. Furley, and A.C. Newton. 2006. Impacts of community-based conservation on local communities in the annapurna conservation area, Nepal. Biodiversity & Conservation 15: 2765–2786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-1343-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beniston, M. 2003. Climatic change in mountain regions: A review of possible impacts. Climatic Change 59: 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024458411589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., and C. Folke, eds. 1998. Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezák, P., and J. Mitchley. 2014. Drivers of change in mountain farming in Slovakia: From socialist collectivisation to the Common Agricultural Policy. Regional Environmental Change 14: 1343–1356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0580-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonn, A., T. Allott, H. Klaus, and J. Stewart. 2009. Drivers of environmental change in uplands. Abington: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Briner, S., R. Huber, P. Bebi, C. Elkin, D.R. Schmatz, and A. Grêt-Regamey. 2013. Trade-offs between ecosystem services in a mountain region. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05576-180335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L.M., and A. Vainio-Mattila. 2003. Participatory development and community-based conservation: Opportunities missed for lessons learned? Human Ecology 31: 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025071822388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catalan, J., J. M. Ninot, and M. M. Aniz, ed. 2017. The high mountain conservation in a changing world. In High mountain conservation in a changing world. Advances in Global Change Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55982-7_1.

  • CBD. 2010. Decision adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its Tenth Meeting X/32. Sustainable use of biodiversity. In https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-10/cop-10-dec-32-en.pdf. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

  • CBD. 2018. Guidelines for ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

  • CBD. 2019a. Indigenous peoples and local communities and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Development of a fully integrated programme of worl on Article 8(j) and related provisions within the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Ad hoc open-ended inter-sessional working group on Article 8(j) and related provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Convention on Biological Diversity.

  • CBD. 2019b. Voluntary guidelines for the design and effective implementation of ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction and supplementary information. Technical Series No. 93. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

  • CBD. 2021. Subsidiary body on scientific, technical and technological advice. Twenty-fourth meeting. CBD/SBSTTA/24/L.3. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

  • Chapagain, P.S., and T.H. Aase. 2020. Changing forest coverage and understanding of deforestation in Nepal Himalayas. Geographical Journal of Nepal 13: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3126/gjn.v13i0.28133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhary, S., D. Tshering, T. Phuntsho, K. Uddin, B. Shakya, and N. Chettri. 2017. Impact of land cover change on a mountain ecosystem and its services: Case study from the Phobjikha valley, Butan. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability 3: 1393314. https://doi.org/10.1080/20964129.2017.1393314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clerici, N., D. Armenteras, P. Kareiva, R. Botero, J.P. Ramírez-Delgado, G. Forero-Medina, J. Ochoa, C. Pedraza, et al. 2020. Deforestation in Colombian protected areas increased during post-conflict periods. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61861-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cocca, G., E. Sturaro, L. Gallo, and M. Ramanzin. 2012. Is the abandonment of traditional livestock farming systems the main driver of mountain landscape change in Alpine areas? Land Use Policy 29: 878–886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.01.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colding, J., and S. Barthel. 2019. Exploring the social–ecological systems discourse 20 years later. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10598-240102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado-Serrano, M.M., E. Oteros-Rozas, P. Vanwildemeersch, C. Ortíz-Guerrero, S. London, and R. Escalante. 2015. Local perceptions on social–ecological dynamics in Latin America in three community-based natural resource management systems. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07965-200424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz, S., J. Fargione, F.S.C. Iii, and D. Tilman. 2006. Biodiversity loss threatens human well-being. PLoS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO. 2015a. Mapping the vulnerability of mountain peoples to food insecurity. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

  • FAO. 2015b. In Understanding mountain soils: A contribution from mountain areas to the International Year of Soils 2015, ed. R. Romeo, A. Vita, S. Manuelli, E. Zanini, M. Freppaz, and S. Stanchi. Rome: Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations.

  • FAO. 2017. Mountains under pressure: Climate, hunger and migration. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

  • Grêt-Regamey, A., S.H. Brunner, and F. Kienast. 2012. Mountain ecosystem services: Who cares? Mountain Research and Development 32: S23–S34. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-10-00115.S1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, H., and S. Subramanian. 2014. Drivers of change in socio-ecological production landscapes: Implications for better management. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06283-190141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J., N.D. Burgess, J. Lovett, B. Mbilinyi, and R.E. Gereau. 2009. Conservation implications of deforestation across an elevational gradient in the Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Biological Conservation 142: 2510–2521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, R., G. Rasul, C. Adler, B. Cáceres, S. Gruber, Y. Hirabayashi, M. Jackson, A. Kääb, et al. 2019. High Mountain Areas. In IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, ed. H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, M. Tignor, E. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, et al.

  • Hunzai, K., J.-Y. Gerlitz, and B. Hoermann. 2011. Understanding mountain poverty in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas—Regional report for Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ICIMOD. 2010. Climate Change Vulnerability of Mountain Ecosystems in the Eastern Himalayas. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.

  • ICIMOD. 2015. Increasing migration from the hills: remittance and increased resilience.

  • IIED. 2016. Landscape approaches for mountain community sustainable development in a time of climate change: Policy consultation and South-South exchange workshop. International Institute for Environment and Development.

  • Imperiale, A.J., and F. Vanclay. 2016. Experiencing local community resilience in action: Learning from post-disaster communities. Journal of Rural Studies 47: 204–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingty, T. 2017. High mountain communities and climate change: Adaptation, traditional ecological knowledge, and institutions. Climatic Change 145: 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-2080-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPBES. 2018a. The IPBES assessment report on land degradation and restoration. Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3237392.

  • IPBES. 2018b. The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Asia and the Pacific (version Report). Bonn: Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3237373.

  • IPBES. 2019a. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn: IPBES Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPBES. 2019b. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn: IPBES Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC. 2019. Climate change and land: An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems.

  • IPSI Secretariat. 2010. Charter: International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative. United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies in Sustainability.

  • IPSI Secretariat. 2020. CASE STUDY | International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative. https://satoyama-initiative.org/case_study/. Accessed April 11.

  • Jacobs, P. 2021. Identification of global priorities for new mountain protected and conserved areas. International Union for Conservation of Nature and World Commission on Protected Areas—Mountain Protected Area Specialist Group.

  • Jodha, N.S. 2000. Globalization and fragile mountain environments: policy challenges and choices. Mountain Research and Development 20: 296–299. https://doi.org/10.1659/0276-4741(2000)020[0296:GAFME]2.0.CO;2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jodha, N.S. 2005. Adaptation strategies against growing environmental and social vulnerabilities in mountain areas. Himalayan Journal of Sciences 3: 33–42. https://doi.org/10.3126/hjs.v3i5.459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, S.M., S.E. Page, H. Ahmad, and D.M. Harper. 2013. Sustainable utilization and conservation of plant biodiversity in montane ecosystems: The western Himalayas as a case study. Annals of Botany 112: 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mct125.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kideghesho, J.R. 2009. The potentials of traditional African cultural practices in mitigating overexploitation of wildlife species and habitat loss: experience of Tanzania. International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management 5: 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/17451590903065579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler, T., N. Elizbarashvili, G. Meladze, D. Svanadze, and H. Meessen. 2017. The demogeographic crisis in Racha, Georgia: Depopulation in the Central Caucasus Mountains. Mountain Research and Development 37: 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00064.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozar, R., E. Galang, A. Alip, J. Sedhain, S. Subramanian, and O. Saito. 2019. Multi-level networks for sustainability solutions: The case of the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative. Currect Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 39: 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen, P. 2004. The DPSIR Framework—Paper presented at the 27–29 September 2004 workshop on a comprehensive/detailed assessment of the vulnerability of water resources to environmental change in Africa using river basin approach. UNEP Headquarters, Nairobi, Kenya. Nairobi: UNEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • MA. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Biodiversity synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington: World Resources Institute.

  • Makino, Y., S. Manuelli, and L. Hook. 2019. Accelerating the movement for mountain peoples and policies. Science 365: 1084–1086. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay8855.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López, B., I. Leister, P.L. Cruz, I. Palomo, A. Grêt-Regamey, P.A. Harrison, S. Lavorel, B. Locatelli, et al. 2019. Nature’s contributions to people in mountains: A review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeman, R. 2017. Global Land Outlook—Working Paper: Migration and Land Degradation: Recent experience and future trends. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.

  • Mukherjee, P. 2003. Community Forest Management in India: The Van Panchayats of Uttranchal. World Forestry Congress.

  • Nassl, M., and J. Löffler. 2015. Ecosystem services in coupled social–ecological systems: Closing the cycle of service provision and societal feedback. Ambio 44: 737–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0651-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Negi, B.S., D.S. Chauhan, and N.P. Todaria. 2012. Administrative and policy bottlenecks in effective management of Van Panchayats in Uttarakhand, India. Law, Environment and Development Journal 8: 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negi, C.S. 2010. Traditional culture and biodiversity conservation: Examples From Uttarakhand, Central Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development 30: 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-09-00040.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngwenya, S.J., E. Torquebiau, and J.W.H. Ferguson. 2019. Mountains as a critical source of ecosystem services: The case of the Drakensberg, South Africa. Environment, Development and Sustainability 21: 1035–1052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-0071-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nishi, M., S.M. Subramanian, H. Gupta, M. Yoshino, Y. Takahashi, K. Miwa, and T. Takeda. 2021. Synthesis: Conception, approaches and strategies for transformative Change. In Fostering transformative change for sustainability in the context of Socio-Ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS), ed. M. Nishi, S.M. Subramanian, H. Gupta, M. Yoshino, Y. Takahashi, K. Miwa, and T. Takeda, 229–249. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6761-6_13.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 1993. Environment Monographs N83: OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews—A synthesis report by the Group on the State of the Environment. OCDE/GD(93)179. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

  • Oesterwind, D., A. Rau, and A. Zaiko. 2016. Drivers and pressures—Untangling the terms commonly used in marine science and policy. Journal of Environmental Management 181: 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandit, M.K., N.S. Sodhi, L.P. Koh, A. Bhaskar, and B.W. Brook. 2007. Unreported yet massive deforestation driving loss of endemic biodiversity in Indian Himalaya. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9038-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pant, R. 2002. Customs and conservation: Cases of traditional and modern law in India and Nepal. Vol. Community Based Conservation in South Asia: No. 7. Kalpavriksh & International Institute of Environment and Development.

  • Pèlachs, A., R. Pérez-Obiol, J.M. Soriano, R. Cunill, M.-C. Bal, and J.C. García-Codron. 2017. The role of environmental geohistory in high-mountain landscape conservation. In High mountain conservation in a changing world, 107–129. Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Perlik, M., and A. Membretti. 2018. Migration by necessity and by force to mountain areas: An opportunity for social innovation. Mountain Research and Development 38: 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00070.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phuntsho, K., N. Chettri, and K.P. Oli. 2012. Mainstreaming Community-Based Conservation in a Transboundary Mountain Landscape: Lessons from Kangchenjunga. Lalitpur: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M.F. 2004. Conservation and sustainable development in mountain areas. Gland: IUCN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rexhepi, B., B. Mustafa, A. Hajdari, J. Rushidi-Rexhepi, C.L. Quave, and A. Pieroni. 2013. Traditional medicinal plant knowledge among Albanians, Macedonians and Gorani in the Sharr Mountains (Republic of Macedonia). Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 60: 2055–2080. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-013-9974-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyes-García, V., M. Guèze, A.C. Luz, J. Paneque-Gálvez, M.J. Macía, M. Orta-Martínez, J. Pino, and X. Rubio-Campillo. 2013. Evidence of traditional knowledge loss among a contemporary indigenous society. Evolution and Human Behavior 34: 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Labajos, B., R. Binimelis, and I. Monterroso. 2009. Multi-level driving forces of biological invasions. Ecological Economics 69: 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.08.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Mallén, I., and E. Corbera. 2013. Community-based conservation and traditional ecological knowledge: Implications for social-ecological resilience. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05867-180412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santiago, C.M. 2017. Lifestyle migration and the nascent agroecological movement in the Andean Araucanía, Chile: Is It promoting sustainable local development? Mountain Research and Development 37: 406–414. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00036.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarmiento, F. O., and C. Cotacachi. 2019. Framing cultural ecosystem services in the Andes: Utawallu as sentinels of values for biocultural heritage conservation. In Satoyama Initiative Thematic Review: Understanding the multiple values associated with sustainable use in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes (SEPLS), ed. UNU-IAS and IGES. Vol. 5. Tokyo: United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability.

  • Schaaf, T. 2008. Global change in mountain regions—Strategies for biosphere reserves. In IMBC-Plenary Session I: Climate Change and its Implications for Mountains. Kathmandu: UNESCO.

  • Schirpke, U., M. Kohler, G. Leitinger, V. Fontana, E. Tasser, and U. Tappeiner. 2017. Future impacts of changing land-use and climate on ecosystem services of mountain grassland and their resilience. Ecosystem Services 26: 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., G. Wang, and E. Padoa-Schioppa. 2021. Editorial: Mountain landscapes: Protected areas, ecosystem services, and future challenges. Ecosystem Services 49: 101302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneiderbauer, S., P. Fontanella Pisa, J.L. Delves, L. Pedoth, S. Rufat, M. Erschbamer, T. Thaler, F. Carnelli, et al. 2021. Risk perception of climate change and natural hazards in global mountain regions: A critical review. Science of the Total Environment 784: 146957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146957.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, R., K. Albrich, K. Erb, H. Formayer, D. Leidinger, G. Leitinger, U. Tappeiner, E. Tasser, et al. 2019. What drives the future supply of regulating ecosystem services in a mountain forest landscape? Forest Ecology and Management 445: 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.03.047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahzad, L., A. Tahir, F. Sharif, W.U.D. Khan, M.A. Farooq, A. Abbas, and Z.A. Saqib. 2019. Vulnerability, well-being, and livelihood adaptation under changing environmental conditions: A case from mountainous region of Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26: 26748–26764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05880-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, E. 2016. Reconciling the mountain biodiversity conservation and human wellbeing: Drivers of biodiversity loss and new approaches in the Hindu- Kush Himalayas. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy. https://doi.org/10.16943/ptinsa/2016/v81i1/48378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, E., K. Tse-ring, N. Chettri, and A. Shrestha. 2008. Biodiversity in the Himalayas—Trends, perception and impacts of climate change. In IMBC-Plenary Session I: Climate Change and its Implications for Mountains. Kathmandu: UNESCO.

  • Slaymaker, O. 2010. Drivers of mountain landscape change during the twenty-first century. Journal of Soils and Sediments 10: 597–610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-010-0194-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeets, E., and R. Weterings. 1999. Environmental indicators: Typology and overview. Technical Report No 25. European Environment Agency.

  • Spehn, E.M., K. Rudmann-Maurer, C. Körner, and D. Maselli, eds. 2010. Mountain biodiversity and global change. Basel: GMBA-DIVERSITAS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian, S. M., E. Yiu, and B. Leimona. 2018. Enhancing effective area-based conservation through the sustainable use of biodiversity in socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes (SEPLS). In Satoyama Initiative Thematic Review: Sustainable Use of Biodiversity in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes and its Contribution to Effective Area-based Conservation, ed. UNU-IAS and UNU-IAS. Vol. 4. Tokyo: United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability.

  • Swiderska, K. 2020. Protecting indigenous cultures is crucial for saving the world’s biodiversity. International Institute for Environment and Development. February 18.

  • Tarolli, P., and E. Straffelini. 2020. Agriculture in Hilly and Mountainous Landscapes: Threats. Monitoring and Sustainable Management: Geography and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2020.03.003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • UN. 2002. Mountain ecosystems fundamental to life but extremely fragile, Secretary-General says in message to Global Mountain Summit. SG/SM/8464.

  • UN. 2015. A/RES/70/1—Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015.

  • UNDP. 2019. Ancestral Ingenuity by UNDP Ecosystems & Biodiversity on Exposure. Exposure.

  • UNEP. 1992. Agenda 21—Managing fragile ecosystems: Sustainable mountain development—United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

  • UNEP and GRID Arendal. 2020. Elevating mountains in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework 2.0. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

  • UNFCCC. 2011. Subsidiary body for scientific and technological advice. Thirty-fifth session Durban, 28 November to 3 December 2011. Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Ecosystem-based approaches to adaptation: compilation of information. United Nations.

  • UNFCCC. 2014. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice. Fortieth session. Bonn, 4–15 June 2014. Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Report on the meeting on available tools for the use of indigenous and traditional knowledge and practices for adaptation, needs of local and indigenous communities and the application of gender-sensitive approaches and tools for adaptation. United Nations.

  • UNU-IAS and IGES, ed. 2018. Satoyama initiative thematic review: Sustainable use of biodiversity in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes and its contribution to effective area-based conservation., vol. 4. Tokyo: United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies in Sustainability.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., N. Wu, C. Kunze, R. Long, and M. Perlik. 2019. Drivers of change to mountain sustainability in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. In The Hindu Kush Himalaya assessment: Mountains, climate change, sustainability and people, ed. P. Wester, A. Mishra, A. Mukherji, and A.B. Shrestha, 17–56. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_2.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wester, P., A. Mishra, A. Mukherji, and A.B. Shrestha. 2018. The Hindu Kush Himalaya assessment: Mountains, climate change, sustainability and people. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Western, D., M. Wright, and S.C. Strum. 1994. Natural connections: Perspectives in community-based conservation. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, B.T., C. O’Meara, L. Monti, and G.P. Nabhan. 2016. The importance of indigenous knowledge in curbing the loss of language and biodiversity. BioScience 66: 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xenarios, S., A. Gafurov, D. Schmidt-Vogt, J. Sehring, S. Manandhar, C. Hergarten, J. Shigaeva, and M. Foggin. 2019. Climate change and adaptation of mountain societies in Central Asia: Uncertainties, knowledge gaps, and data constraints. Regional Environmental Change 19: 1339–1352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1384-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., R. Badola, N. Chettri, R.P. Chaudhary, R. Zomer, B. Pokhrel, S.A. Hussain, S. Pradhan, et al. 2019. Sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. In The Hindu Kush Himalaya assessment, ed. P. Wester, A. Mishra, A. Mukherji, and A.B. Shrestha, 127–165. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_5.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yohannes, Z., M. Teshome, and M. Belay. 2020. Adaptive capacity of mountain community to climate change: Case study in the Semien Mountains of Ethiopia. Environment, Development and Sustainability 22: 3051–3077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00334-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurick, D.N. 1990. Traditional knowledge and conservation as a basis for development in a West Nepal Village. Mountain Research and Development 10: 23–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/3673536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Himangana Gupta is thankful to the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant No. JP 19F19795) for providing funding support in the form of fellowship. Alexandros Gasparatos acknowledges the support of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research B (Kakenhi B 19H04323). Thanks to Dr. Marcin Jarzebski for designing Figure 1 and to Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta and Dr. Rajib Shaw for critically going through the manuscript and suggesting appropriate changes.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Tokyo and United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, 5 Chome-53-70 Jingumae, Tokyo, 150-8925, Japan

    Himangana Gupta

  2. United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, 5 Chome-53-70 Jingumae, Tokyo, 150-8925, Japan

    Maiko Nishi

  3. Institute for Future Initiatives (IFI), The University of Tokyo, Administration Bureau Building 2, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8654, Japan

    Alexandros Gasparatos

Authors
  1. Himangana Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maiko Nishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexandros Gasparatos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Himangana Gupta.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Electronic supplementary file 1 (PDF 1075 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gupta, H., Nishi, M. & Gasparatos, A. Community-based responses for tackling environmental and socio-economic change and impacts in mountain social–ecological systems. Ambio 51, 1123–1142 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01651-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01651-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation