2016, Václavík, Tomáš, Langerwisch, Fanny, Cotter, Marc, Fick, Johanna, Häuser, Inga, Hotes, Stefan, Kamp, Johannes, Settele, Josef, Spangenberg, Joachim H., Seppelt, Ralf

Much of our knowledge about land use and ecosystem services in interrelated social-ecological systems is derived from place-based research. While local and regional case studies provide valuable insights, it is often unclear how relevant this research is beyond the study areas. Drawing generalized conclusions about practical solutions to land management from local observations and formulating hypotheses applicable to other places in the world requires that we identify patterns of land systems that are similar to those represented by the case study. Here, we utilize the previously developed concept of land system archetypes to investigate potential transferability of research from twelve regional projects implemented in a large joint research framework that focus on issues of sustainable land management across four continents. For each project, we characterize its project archetype, i.e. the unique land system based on a synthesis of more than 30 datasets of land-use intensity, environmental conditions and socioeconomic indicators. We estimate the transferability potential of project research by calculating the statistical similarity of locations across the world to the project archetype, assuming higher transferability potentials in locations with similar land system characteristics. Results show that areas with high transferability potentials are typically clustered around project sites but for some case studies can be found in regions that are geographically distant, especially when values of considered variables are close to the global mean or where the project archetype is driven by large-scale environmental or socioeconomic conditions. Using specific examples from the local case studies, we highlight the merit of our approach and discuss the differences between local realities and information captured in global datasets. The proposed method provides a blueprint for large research programs to assess potential transferability of place-based studies to other geographical areas and to indicate possible gaps in research efforts.

2012, Eppink, Florian V., Werntze, Andreas, Mäs, Stephan, Popp, Alexander, Seppelt, Ralf

Land management, the organisation of the use and development of land, is an important instrument for addressing problems of rising greenhouse gas emissions and loss of natural resources. Yet, natural-social systems in which land management policies are implemented are poorly understood, thus decreasing the effectiveness of these policies. Local studies provide valuable insights, though only for the local conditions prevalent during the investigated period. Synthesising local studies in order to generalise results is impaired by the variety of local conditions. Collaborative research programmes may prevent some of these problems. They support the share of insights across temporal, ecological and spatial-economic contexts. On the basis of existing literature, we identify the challenges which face synthesis and demonstrate how a German research programme attempts to address some of them.

2019, Hagedorn, Gregor, Loew, Thomas, Seneviratne, Sonia I., Lucht, Wolfgang, Beck, Marie-Luise, Hesse, Janina, Knutti, Reto, Quaschning, Volker, Schleimer, Jan-Hendrik, Mattauch, Linus, Breyer, Christian, Hübener, Heike, Kirchengast, Gottfried, Chodura, Alice, Clausen, Jens, Creutzig, Felix, Darbi, Marianne, Daub, Claus-Heinrich, Ekardt, Felix, Göpel, Maja, Hardt, Judith N., Hertin, Julia, Hickler, Thomas, Köhncke, Arnulf, Köster, Stephan, Krohmer, Julia, Kromp-Kolb, Helga, Leinfelder, Reinhold, Mederake, Linda, Neuhaus, Michael, Rahmstorf, Stefan, Schmidt, Christine, Schneider, Christoph, Schneider, Gerhard, Seppelt, Ralf, Spindler, Uli, Springmann, Marco, Staab, Katharina, Stocker, Thomas F., Steininger, Karl, Hirschhausen, Eckart von, Winter, Susanne, Wittau, Martin, Zens, Josef

In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead. © 2019 G. Hagedorn et al.; licensee oekom verlag.This Open Access article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CCBY4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).