Institutes
Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- 2030 Agenda (1)
- Aichi targets (1)
- Biodiversity tools and pipelines (1)
- Biogeography (1)
- Data standard (1)
- Data standards (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Dissemination (1)
- Diversity (1)
- Marine biodiversity (1)
Institute
- Institut für Ökologie, Evolution und Diversität (4) (remove)
The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development stresses the fundamental role science should play in implementing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals endorsed by the global community. But how can and should researchers respond to this societal demand on science? We argue that answering this question requires systematic engagement with the fundamental normative dimensions of the 2030 Agenda and those of the scientific community—and with the implications these dimensions have for research and practice. We suggest that the production of knowledge relevant to sustainable development entails analytic engagement with norms and values through four tasks. First, to unravel and critically reflect on the ethical values involved in sustainability, values should increasingly become an empirical and theoretical object of sustainability research. Second, to ensure that research on social–ecological systems is related to sustainability values, researchers should reflect on and spell out what sustainability values guide their research, taking into account possible interdependencies, synergies, and trade-offs. Third, to find common ground on what sustainability means for specific situations, scientists should engage in deliberative learning processes with societal actors, with a view to jointly reflecting on existing development visions and creating new, contextualized ones. Fourth, this implies that researchers and scientific disciplines must clarify their own ethical and epistemic values, as this defines accountability and shapes identification of problems, research questions, and results. We believe that ignoring these tasks, whether one is in favor or critical of the 2030 Agenda, will undermine the credibility and relevance of scientific contributions for sustainable development.
In 2010, the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity agreedon the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 in Aichi Prefecture, Japan. As this planapproaches its end, we discussed whether marine biodiversity and prediction studieswere nearing the Aichi Targets during the 4th World Conference on Marine Biodiversityheld in Montreal, Canada in June 2018. This article summarises the outcome of a five-day group discussion on how global marine biodiversity studies should be focusedfurther to better understand the patterns of biodiversity. We discussed and reviewedseven fundamental biodiversity priorities related to nine Aichi Targets focusing onglobal biodiversity discovery and predictions to improve and enhance biodiversitydata standards (quantity and quality), tools and techniques, spatial and temporal scaleframing, and stewardship and dissemination. We discuss how identifying biodiversityknowledge gaps and promoting efforts have and will reduce such gaps, including via theuse of new databases, tools and technology, and how these resources could be improvedin the future. The group recognised significant progress toward Target 19 in relationto scientific knowledge, but negligible progress with regard to Targets 6 to 13 whichaimed to safeguard and reduce human impacts on biodiversity.
Soil degradation can have an impact on the soil microbiota, but its specific effects on soil fungal communities are poorly understood. In this work, we studied the impact of soil degradation on the richness and diversity of communities of soil fungi, including three different degrees of degradation in Germany and Panama. Soil fungi were isolated monthly using the soil-sprinkling method for 8 months in Germany and 3 months in Panama, and characterized by morphological and molecular data. Soil physico-chemical properties were measured and correlated with the observed values of fungal diversity. We isolated a total of 71 fungal species, 47 from Germany, and 32 from Panama. Soil properties were not associated with fungal richness, diversity, or composition in soils, with the exception of soil compaction in Germany. The geographic location was a strong determinant of the soil fungal species composition although in both countries there was dominance by members of the orders Eurotiales and Hypocreales. In conclusion, the results of this work do not show any evident influence of soil degradation on communities of soil fungi in Germany or Panama.