Der vorliegende Stakeholder Panel Report stellt die Ergebnisse der Onlinebefragung »Gesundheit-Apps« vor, die vom 13. September 2016 bis 31. Dezember 2016 über das Internetangebot des Stakeholder Panel TA öffentlich zugänglich war. Er ergänzt den TAB-Arbeitsbericht Nr. 179 »Gesundheits-Apps«, in dem eine Zusammenfassung der Onlinebefragungsergebnisse enthalten ist, und dokumentiert u. a. die Auswertungen der Kommentare von Befragungsteilnehmenden. Der Report führt die Publikationsreihe zum Stakeholder Panel TA fort (TA steht für Technikfolgenabschätzung).

Ce mémoire se propose de réaliser une monographie des éléments récents du cadre réglementaire, national et international, qui déterminent la politique climatique post-2012 en Roumanie. L'existence ou la non-existence d‟un nouvel accord global se profile comme un des défis les plus importants pour la politique climatique post-2012 du pays. Comme point de départ, la synthèse bibliographique donne un aperçu du rôle de l'Etat dans la gouvernance mondiale du climat et suggère une typologie possible de la politique étrangère de l'environnement. Un bref passage en revue des principaux repères climatiques de la Roumanie comme la vulnérabilité et l'adaptation, les émissions de GES, les scénarios de changement climatique, décrit le cadre spécifique de la Roumanie dans ce domaine. Afin d'étudier la façon dont la politique climatique de la Roumanie est parvenue à son état actuel post 2012, le mémoire fait un parallèle entre l'évolution de la politique nationale et le déroulement des négociations de la CCNUCC, en passant par la ratification du Protocole de Kyoto pour finir avec la Conférence sur le Climat de Copenhague. Le régime post-Kyoto sur le changement climatique en Roumanie est décrit comme un processus complexe, influencé par la triple identité du pays: Etat Membre de l'Union Européenne, signataire du Protocole de Kyoto et un pays en transition vers une économie de marché. En tant qu‟Etat Membre de l'UE, la Roumanie est tenue d‟appliquer les dispositions du paquet climat-énergie portant sur le nouveau système européen d'échange de quotas d‟émissions, les émissions de GES, les énergies renouvelables, le captage et le stockage du carbone, l'efficacité énergétique jusqu'en 2020. En tant que signataire du Protocole de Kyoto, la Roumanie est touchée par les politiques récemment élaborées par les autres pays signataires liés à leur excédent de AAU. À l'avenir, la Roumanie peut faire l'objet de nouvelles décisions prises concernant le rapport des AAU et la poursuite de projets JI. Outre la volonté politique de prendre des engagements climatiques au niveau européen et international, le profil environnemental de la Roumanie est déterminé par ses besoins de croissance économique et la place occupée par les combustibles fossiles dans l'industrie nationale. Les principales difficultés économiques avec lesquelles la Roumanie est confrontée, liées à la crise générale et à son niveau de développement, influencent ses politiques intérieures et sa contribution financière à la lutte internationale contre le changement climatique. La "boîte à outils" utilisé par le Gouvernement Roumain pour lutter contre le changement climatique est dévoilée par une sélection des plus pertinentes mesures existantes et prévues à l‟avenir. Le système du certificat vert et son évolution législative turbulente ont été choisis comme exercice pour une analyse plus approfondie. Certaines recommandations récentes des politologues et sociologues imaginant le rôle idéal de l'Etat dans un futur accord global marquent la fin du mémoire dans une perspective altruiste.

Global governance is an idea that has enticed and has startled humankind since its dawn and iscurrently going through the 21st century’s turmoil of nowadays world. This paper looks at the UN climate negotiations as a possible step towards a world community aware of the need to have a legitimatebiosphere policy. Its aim is to highlight some elements for the analysis of the UN strategy for climatechange mitigation. After an introductory chapter, the second one looks into how the design of international climate politics has evolved during the last decades from a scientific forum forcooperation, the IPPC, to the adoption of a Framework Convention and the implementation of the KyotoProtocol. In the third chapter, the paper summarizes the historical milestones of the international climate negotiations and enlists the challenges and expectations of a post 2012 climate regime, with aparticular focus on the future role of UN institutions. The fourth chapter of this paper elaborates on the criticism of the Kyoto Protocol and the feasibility of the UNapproach of the climate change mitigation. Some recent recommendations of politologists and sociologists who are picturing an idealistic role of the state in a future global agreement are depicted in the fifth chapter

Cultural ecosystem services constitute a growing field of research that is characterized by an increasing number of publications from various academic disciplines. We conducted a semiquantitative review of publications explicitly dealing with cultural ecosystem services. Our aims were: (1) to provide an overview of the current state of research, (2) to classify the diversity of research approaches by identifying clusters of publications that address cultural ecosystem services in similar ways, and (3) to highlight some important challenges for the future of cultural ecosystem services research. We reviewed 107 publications and extracted 20 attributes describing their type and content, including methods, scales, drivers of change, and trade-offs between services. Using a cluster analysis on a subset of attributes we identified five groups of publications: Group 1, conceptual focus, deals with theoretical issues; Group 2, descriptive reviews, consists mostly of desktop studies; Group 3, localized outcomes, deals with case studies coming from different disciplines; Group 4, social and participatory, deals mainly with assessing preferences and perceptions; and Group 5, economic assessments, provides economic valuations. Emerging themes in cultural ecosystem services research relate to improving methods for cultural ecosystem services valuation, studying cultural ecosystem services in the context of ecosystem service bundles, and more clearly articulating policy implications. Based on our findings, we conclude that: (1) cultural ecosystem services are well placed as a tool to bridge gaps between different academic disciplines and research communities, (2) capitalizing on the societal relevance of cultural ecosystem services could help address real-world problems, and (3) cultural ecosystem services have the potential to foster new conceptual links between alternative logics relating to a variety of social and ecological issues. Ecology and Society 18(3): 44 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss3/art44/ Fig. 6. Dendrogram showing the five groups of publications identified by the cluster analysis. Ecology and Society 18(3): 44

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com".

View related articles View Crossmark data 'value change debt.' We argue that the erosion of the old value system, together with the weakening of the landscape interface, threatens sustainability-whereas reconnecting social-ecological feedback and thus strengthening the landscape interface could foster sustainability. The new conceptual perspective proposed here could foster greater understanding of cultural landscapes, including the social dimension of human-environment interactions.

Although sustainability science and social-ecological systems research pursue very similar goals, i.e., generate problemand solution-oriented knowledge to foster sustainability transformation, they partly apply different research approaches and use different key concepts. Our aim is to identify archetypes of sustainability transformation research derived for sustainability science and social-ecological systems research that make knowledge from the two research pathways more accessible to each other in order to foster transformation. To reach this goal, we applied a mixed method approach toward an archetype analysis, based on semantic networks and clusters. Our findings point out that the fields of sustainability science and social-ecological systems research are rather coherent and not so distinct as may be expected, especially in terms of normative goals and addressed topics. Our analysis inductively reveals four archetypes of sustainability transformation research, with thematic structures clustered around (1) environmental change and ecosystem services; (2) resilience and vulnerability; (3) knowledge production for sustainability; and (4) governance for sustainability. We describe how these archetypes interact and facilitate dialogue between the fields. When considering the two transformation research pathways from the perspective of the research mode of transdisciplinary research, their discourses appear more disconnected. To fill this gap, we uncover key concepts that can strengthen the connection of the two fields to inform and foster sustainability transformations. These concepts involve engaging with nonacademic actors and seeking impact in policy.

Despite the normative nature of sustainability, values and their role in sustainability transformations are often discussed in vague terms, and when concrete conceptualizations exist, they widely differ across fields of application. To provide guidance for navigating the complexity arising from the various conceptualizations and operationalization of values, here, we differentiate four general perspectives of how and where values are important for transformation related sustainability science. The first perspective, surfacing implicit values, revolves around critical reflection on normative assumptions in scientific practices. Sustainability transformations concern fundamental ethical questions and are unavoidably influenced by assumptions sustainability scientists hold in their interactions with society. The second perspective, negotiating values, is related to the values held by different actors in group decision processes. Developing and implementing solution options to sustainability problems requires multiple values to be accounted for in order to increase civic participation and social legitimacy. The third perspective, eliciting values, focuses on the ascription of values to particular objects or choices related to specific sustainability challenges, for example, valuations of nature. The fourth perspective, transforming through values, highlights the dynamic nature and transformational potential of values. Value change is complex but possible, and may generate systemic shifts in patterns of human behaviours. Explicit recognition of these four interconnected values perspectives can help sustainability scientists to: (1) move beyond general discussions implying that values matter; (2) gain an awareness of the positionality of one's own values perspective when undertaking values related sustainability research; and (3) reflect on the operationalizations of values in different contexts.

This study identifies and analyses the underlying assumptions of experts involved in the first author meeting (FAM) of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)'s Values Assessment, and how they shape understandings of the multiple values of nature. We draw from survey data collected from 94 experts attending the FAM. Respondents self-report the tendencies and aims they bring to the assessment (i.e. motivation), the type and amount of evidence they require for knowledge to be valid (i.e. confirmation) and their epistemic worldviews (i.e. objectivity). Four clusters emerged that correspond to Pragmatist, Post-Positivist, Constructivist and Transformative epistemic worldviews. This result clarifies how different knowledge claims are represented in science-policy processes. Despite the proportionately higher number of social scientists in the Values Assessment, compared with previous IPBES assessments, we still found that fewer experts have Constructivist or Transformative worldviews than Pragmatist or Post-Positivist outlooks, an imbalance that may influence the types of values and valuation perspectives emphasised in the assessment. We also detected a tension regarding what constitutes valid knowledge between Post-Positivists, who emphasised high levels of agreement, and Pragmatists and Constructivists, who did not necessarily consider agreement crucial. Conversely, Post-Positivists did not align with relational values and were more diverse in their views regarding definitions of multiple values of nature compared to other clusters. Pragmatists emphasized relational values, while Constructivists tended to consider all value types (including relational values) as important. We discuss the implications of our findings for future design and delivery of IPBES processes and interdisciplinary research.

have been published in international peerreviewed journals. Copyright of the text and the illustrations is with the author or the authors of the respective chapter or appendix. The publishers own the exclusive right to publish or to use the text and illustrations for their purposes. Reprint of any part of this dissertation requires permission of the copyright holders.