Author
Eduardo S. Brondizio
Other affiliations: University of Botswana, State University of Campinas
Bio: Eduardo S. Brondizio is an academic researcher from Indiana University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Land use & Amazon rainforest. The author has an hindex of 50, co-authored 166 publications receiving 11098 citations. Previous affiliations of Eduardo S. Brondizio include University of Botswana & State University of Campinas.
Topics: Land use, Amazon rainforest, Population, Deforestation, Sustainability
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
National University of Cordoba1, Addis Ababa University2, National Autonomous University of Mexico3, State University of Campinas4, United Nations Environment Programme5, UNESCO6, United States Department of Agriculture7, Indiana University8, University of British Columbia9, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation10, University of Paris-Sud11, Landcare Research12, University College London13, Autonomous University of Madrid14, University of Cambridge15, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research16, University of Southern Denmark17, United Nations University18, Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources and Environment19, The Nature Conservancy20, University of the South Pacific21, University of East Anglia22, Kyushu University23, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology24, University of Washington25, Budapest University of Technology and Economics26, Environmental Law Institute27, Ankara University28, University of Portsmouth29, Chinese Academy of Sciences30, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay31, Kyoto University32, Joseph Fourier University33, National Scientific and Technical Research Council34, University of Yaoundé35, Polish Academy of Sciences36, University of São Paulo37, École Normale Supérieure38, University of Otago39, Stanford University40, University of Queensland41, Azim Premji University42, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ43, University of Ghana44, Corvinus University of Budapest45, Stockholm University46, Lakehead University47, Indian Institute of Forest Management48, Seoul National University49, Sofia University50
TL;DR: The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework as discussed by the authors, which will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions.
1,585 citations
••
National University of Cordoba1, Leipzig University2, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ3, Indiana University4, United Nations5, University of the West Indies6, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology7, National Autonomous University of Mexico8, University of Minnesota9, University of Cambridge10, BirdLife International11, University of British Columbia12, National University of Río Negro13, National Institute for Environmental Studies14, Chiba University15, Michigan State University16, International Institute of Minnesota17, United Nations University18, Stellenbosch University19, Simón Bolívar University20, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation21, Hungarian Academy of Sciences22, University of Queensland23, Duke University24, Imperial College London25, Natural History Museum26, University of the West of England27, Stockholm University28, Clark University29, IFREMER30, University of Cape Town31, Radboud University Nijmegen32, George Mason University33, University of Oxford34, Royal Botanic Gardens35, University of the Philippines Diliman36
TL;DR: The first integrated global-scale intergovernmental assessment of the status, trends, and future of the links between people and nature provides an unprecedented picture of the extent of the authors' mutual dependence, the breadth and depth of the ongoing and impending crisis, and the interconnectedness among sectors and regions.
Abstract: The human impact on life on Earth has increased sharply since the 1970s, driven by the demands of a growing population with rising average per capita income. Nature is currently supplying more materials than ever before, but this has come at the high cost of unprecedented global declines in the extent and integrity of ecosystems, distinctness of local ecological communities, abundance and number of wild species, and the number of local domesticated varieties. Such changes reduce vital benefits that people receive from nature and threaten the quality of life of future generations. Both the benefits of an expanding economy and the costs of reducing nature's benefits are unequally distributed. The fabric of life on which we all depend-nature and its contributions to people-is unravelling rapidly. Despite the severity of the threats and lack of enough progress in tackling them to date, opportunities exist to change future trajectories through transformative action. Such action must begin immediately, however, and address the root economic, social, and technological causes of nature's deterioration.
913 citations
••
TL;DR: This work presents the multiple evidence base (MEB) as an approach that proposes parallels whereby indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems are viewed to generate different manifestations of knowledge, which can generate new insights and innovations through complementarities.
Abstract: Indigenous and local knowledge systems as well as practitioners’ knowledge can provide valid and useful knowledge to enhance our understanding of governance of biodiversity and ecosystems for human well-being. There is, therefore, a great need within emerging global assessment programs, such as the IPBES and other international efforts, to develop functioning mechanisms for legitimate, transparent, and constructive ways of creating synergies across knowledge systems. We present the multiple evidence base (MEB) as an approach that proposes parallels whereby indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems are viewed to generate different manifestations of knowledge, which can generate new insights and innovations through complementarities. MEB emphasizes that evaluation of knowledge occurs primarily within rather than across knowledge systems. MEB on a particular issue creates an enriched picture of understanding, for triangulation and joint assessment of knowledge, and a starting point for further knowledge generation.
754 citations
••
Charles Darwin University1, World Conservation Monitoring Centre2, American Museum of Natural History3, Center for International Forestry Research4, Manchester Metropolitan University5, University of Helsinki6, Hungarian Academy of Sciences7, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation8, University of Queensland9, Wildlife Conservation Society10, Indiana University11, University of Maryland, Baltimore12, Stockholm University13
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used publicly available geospatial resources to show that Indigenous Peoples manage or have tenure rights over at least 38 million km2 in 87 countries or politically distinct areas on all inhabited continents.
Abstract: Understanding the scale, location and nature conservation values of the lands over which Indigenous Peoples exercise traditional rights is central to implementation of several global conservation and climate agreements. However, spatial information on Indigenous lands has never been aggregated globally. Here, using publicly available geospatial resources, we show that Indigenous Peoples manage or have tenure rights over at least ~38 million km2 in 87 countries or politically distinct areas on all inhabited continents. This represents over a quarter of the world’s land surface, and intersects about 40% of all terrestrial protected areas and ecologically intact landscapes (for example, boreal and tropical primary forests, savannas and marshes). Our results add to growing evidence that recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ rights to land, benefit sharing and institutions is essential to meeting local and global conservation goals. The geospatial analysis presented here indicates that collaborative partnerships involving conservation practitioners, Indigenous Peoples and governments would yield significant benefits for conservation of ecologically valuable landscapes, ecosystems and genes for future generations.
584 citations
06 May 2019
TL;DR: Diaz et al. as discussed by the authors presented a study on bio-medical vegetables in the context of the University of Nacional de Cordoba and the Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biologia Vegetal.
Abstract: Fil: Diaz, Sandra Universidad Nacional de Cordoba Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biologia Vegetal; Argentina
583 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
Harvard University1, Stockholm Resilience Centre2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research3, University of Oxford4, City University London5, Chatham House6, World Wide Fund for Nature7, Environmental Change Institute8, University of Minnesota9, University of California, Santa Barbara10, CGIAR11, Johns Hopkins University12, American University of Beirut13, Wageningen University and Research Centre14, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation15, ETH Zurich16, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur17, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation18, University of Indonesia19, World Health Organization20, Food and Agriculture Organization21, International Food Policy Research Institute22, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences23, University of Auckland24, Public Health Foundation of India25, Centre for Science and Environment26
TL;DR: Food in the Anthropocene : the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems focuses on meat, fish, vegetables and fruit as sources of protein.
4,710 citations
••
Catholic University of Leuven1, Clark University2, University of Ibadan3, University of Wisconsin-Madison4, McGill University5, National Autonomous University of Mexico6, International Institute of Minnesota7, Stockholm University8, Centre for Development Studies9, University College London10, Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement11, Chinese Academy of Sciences12, Indiana University13, Jawaharlal Nehru University14, Duke University15, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences16, University of Washington17, University of the Witwatersrand18
TL;DR: In this article, the authors track some of the major myths on driving forces of land cover change and propose alternative pathways of change that are better supported by case study evidence, concluding that neither population nor poverty alone constitute the sole and major underlying causes of land-cover change worldwide.
Abstract: Common understanding of the causes of land-use and land-cover change is dominated by simplifications which, in turn, underlie many environment-development policies. This article tracks some of the major myths on driving forces of land-cover change and proposes alternative pathways of change that are better supported by case study evidence. Cases reviewed support the conclusion that neither population nor poverty alone constitute the sole and major underlying causes of land-cover change worldwide. Rather, peoples’ responses to economic opportunities, as mediated by institutional factors, drive land-cover changes. Opportunities and
3,330 citations
••
TL;DR: Synthesis of six case studies from around the world shows that couplings between human and natural systems vary across space, time, and organizational units and have legacy effects on present conditions and future possibilities.
Abstract: Integrated studies of coupled human and natural systems reveal new and complex patterns and processes not evident when studied by social or natural scientists separately. Synthesis of six case studies from around the world shows that couplings between human and natural systems vary across space, time, and organizational units. They also exhibit nonlinear dynamics with thresholds, reciprocal feedback loops, time lags, resilience, heterogeneity, and surprises. Furthermore, past couplings have legacy effects on present conditions and future possibilities.
2,890 citations