Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-7
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 7.5.6.1 Trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services (ES) ==== <div id="section-7-5-6-1-trade-offs-and-synergies-between-ecosystem-services-es-block-1"></div> Unplanned or unintentional trade-offs and synergies between policy driven response options related to ecosystem services (ES) can happen over space (e.g., upstream-downstream, integrated watershed management, Section 3.7.5.2) or intensify over time (reduced water in future dry-season due to growing tree plantations, Section 6.4.1). Trade-offs can occur between two or more ES (land for climate mitigation vs food; Sections 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, Cross-Chapter Box 8 in Chapter 6; Cross-Chapter Box 9 in Chapters 6 and 7), and between scales, such as forest biomass-based livelihoods versus global ES carbon storage (Chhatre and Agrawal 2009 <sup>[[#fn:r1171|1171]]</sup> ) ( ''medium evidence, medium agreement'' ). Trade-offs can be reversible or irreversible (Rodríguez et al. 2006 <sup>[[#fn:r1172|1172]]</sup> ; Elmqvist et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r1173|1173]]</sup> ) (for example, a soil carbon sink is reversible) (Section 6.4.1.1). Although there is ''robust evidence'' and ''high agreement'' that ES are important for human well-being, the relationship between poverty alleviation and ES can be surprisingly complex, understudied and dependent on the political economic context; current evidence is largely about provisioning services and often ignores multiple dimensions of poverty (Suich et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r1174|1174]]</sup> ; Vira et al. 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r1175|1175]]</sup> ). Spatially explicit mapping and quantification of stakeholder choices in relation to distribution of various ES can help enhance synergies and reduce trade-offs (Turkelboom et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1176|1176]]</sup> ; Locatelli et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r1177|1177]]</sup> ) (Section 7.5.5). <div id="section-7-5-6-2-sustainable-development-goals-sdgs-synergies-and-trade-offs"></div> <span id="sustainable-development-goals-sdgs-synergies-and-trade-offs"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-7
(section)
Add languages
Add topic