In this mode, there will be oral and poster presentations of studies and experiences. Work presented
in symposia and poster sessions will be selected by the scientific committee from those abstracts submitted following the
submission guidelines and organised according to the the following themes:
1. Ecosystem functions and services characterization and assessment
- Identification, modeling and mapping of ES
- Vulnerability and environmental risk assessment
Coordinators: Pedro Laterra (GEAP, CONICET), Juan Camilo Villegas (Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Antioquia, Colombia)
2. Economic and Social valuation of ecosystem services
- Processes and methods of ecosystem services economic and social valuation
- Processes and methods of benefits economic and social valuation
Coordinators: Berta Martin Lopez (UAM), Juan Carlos Manchado (INTA)
3. Incorporation of ecosystem services in decision-making
- Public policy instruments: land-use planning and environmental monitoring plans
- The role of economic instruments in public policy
- Instruments for incorporating ecosystem services in private initiatives
- Ecosystem services governance
Coordinators: José Paruelo (IFEVA - FAUBA), Alice Altesor (UDELAR, Uruguay)
4. Ecosystem services and society
- Environmental education and ecosystem services
- Participatory work in ecosystem services research. Transdisciplinary approaches.
- Experiences of social communication, outreach and rural extension.
Coordinators: Daniel Cáceres (Universidad de Córdoba, Argentina, CONICET), Cornelia Flora (Iowa State University)
5. Ecosystem management for the provision of ecosystem services
- Ecosystems conservation for ecosystem services provision
- Ecosystems restoration for ecosystem services provision
- Management and planning of agro-ecosystems for sustainable ecosystem services provision
Coordinators: María Elena Zaccagnini (INTA), José María Rey Benayas (Universidad de Alcalá)
6. Land-use change and ecosystem services
- Scenario analysis of land-use change and ecosystem service impacts
- Trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services
- Regional planning
Coordinators: Sandra Luque (University of St Andrews, UK), Gregorio Gavier (INTA)
Forums will provide a space for panel and plenary discussion about the following topics of relevance
at the interface among academia, decision-makers and other social actors. Forums will consist of panel presentations of
invited speakers and a debate open to all attendees. Three themes will be covered:
I. Environmental law and public policy
- Tools for ES management and decision making: Experiences in Land-Use Plans and Environmental Observatories.
- Gobernance, dependencies and relationships between stakeholders, states and markets and ESE. Sectoral
economic development, public and private funding, risk management.
- Environmental law: eficacy and eficiency in ES management. Aliances for the formulation of laws and policies.
Coordinators: Nicolás Lucas (TNC), Fernando Milano (UNICEN)
II. Bottom-up initiatives for the conservation of ecosystem services
- Experiences and lessons learned of ES framework incorporation in bottom-up innitiatives, including or not
mechanisms of payment for ES.
- Conflicts between development and conservation under the framework of ES.
Coordinators: Fernando Miñarro (FVSA), Roberto Vides-Almonacid (FCBC-CEM/UICN)
III. Regional experiences in ecosystem services
- Presentation of pre-congress regional workshops results (Pampas, Northwest Argentina, Cuyo and AMBA) to be
held during the first semester 2015 and organised by INTA in the frame of CISEN4).
Coordinators: Paula Natinzon (INTA), Natalia Murillo (INTA)
Sandra Díaz obtained her BS and PhD in Biology from the Universidad Nacional de Córdoba de Argentina
(UNC). She is a senior researcher at the National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) and professor
of the Biological Diversity and Ecology Department of the Exact, Physic and Natural Sciences Faculty (UNC). She works at the
Multidisciplinary Institute of Plant Biology (CONICET-UNC). Her research focuses on understanding the interactions between
plant functional types and ecosystem processes and services in the context of global change. She is recognized for her leading
role in the theoretic develpment and practical implementation of the concept of functional diversity, its effects on ecosystem
properties and its social relevance. Sandra was a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). In 2009 she was elected as one of the 18 foreign associates of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States (NAS) in the Environmental Sciences and Ecology section. Currently, she actively participates
in the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services (IPBES), and she is the General Scientific Coordinator
of DiverSus, an international network of researchers on Biodiversity, Ecosystems and Sustainability. Recently, she has been
awarded the Platinum Konex Prize (2013).
Who cares about biodiversity? Functional diversity and nature valuation in real ecosystems
Over the past 25 years, the concept of biodiversity has changed from purely biological to multidimensional.
This is partly because the maintenance, restoration and sustainable management of biodiversity goes far beyond the biological
into the social and political realms. The role of biodiversity as an active driver of change, affecting ecosystem processes
and services, has also received increasing attention. However, species number, the most common metric of biodiversity, is
often not a meaningful indicator of many ecosystem processes in real socio-ecosystems. Stating that biodiversity is important
is not enough. We need to understand what aspects of biodiversity matter for what ecosystem properties and societal benefits,
and for what social actors. We also need to understand how in turn specific social actors, in procuring ecosystem benefits,
manipulate the biota and its capacity to produce benefits for all stakeholders. The concept of functional diversity can provide
insight into all these relationships. It comprises at least three major components, whose role in determining ecosystem properties
and services is expected to vary according to the local context, and can be determined in real field situations by using a set
of recently developed interdisciplinary tools.
Laura Nahuelhual is an Agronomic Engineer and obtained a PhD on Agricultural and Resource Economy
from the Colorado State University (USA). Since 2001 she is an academic of the Agricultural Economy Institute where she has
collaborated in under and postgraduate courses at the faculties of Veterinary, Sciences, Forestry and Natural Resource Science
and Economy of the Universidad Austral de Chile. She has published 27 articles in peer reviewed journals and she is co-author
of seven books and book chapters. She has carried out projects on ecosystem service economic valuation and assessment promoting
transdisciplinary work in this field. To date, she manages solid collaboration networks both in the scientific and
decision-making areas. From 2009 to 2012 the Faculty of Agronomy has awarded her outstanding scientific productivity.
Currently, she is part of a research group at the Centro de Ciencia del Clima y Resiliencia (CR2), where she leads
investigations on vulnerability and ecosystem services.
Socioecological vulnerability: a bridge between ecosystem services and wellbeing
As ecosystem services (ES) are positioned on the agendas of conservation and development, there has been a variety
of indicators, mainly of ES supply and value. However, there has been little attention to measures like vulnerability, which truly reflect the complex
and interconnected nature of social-ecological systems (SES) and the consequences of changes in ES on human welbeing. In an interdisciplinary
and collaborative work, we have developed a conceptual framework linking the approaches of SES and ES, and where vulnerability (socio-ecological) is
expressed as the interaction between the sensitivity of the SES and its ability to adapt to stress factors (e.g. land-use change). Based on this
framework, we developed a methodology for vulnerability assessment with three objectives: (1) describe the spatial patterns of ES flow, social
benefits capture, and vulnerability, and spatial congruence between them using existing data; (2) integrate this information to relevant scales and in
a coordinated manner; and (3) generate a practical assessment tool (ECOSER 2.0) to serve as a tool for decision making. The methodology and tools
have been applied in case studies in Chile and Argentina. The results highlight the differences in vulnerability depending on the consideration or
not of different types of beneficiaries and the low spatial correlation between ES flow and vulnerability. Further, there is evidence that the
adaptive capacity may or may not reduce vulnerability, depending on the possibility of replacing the ES affected and the magnitude of the sensitivity
of the SES to the stress factor, which in turn is given by the strength of the connection between welbeing and the ES. It is hoped that this approach
and tools help increase the effectiveness of management interventions beyond the conventional indicators of ES, allowing to focus, for example, on
which areas of provision should be maintained or in which areas we should invest to build adaptive capacity and reduce vulnerability.
Simone has a degree in Environmental Science (Ecology and Conservation Biology); a Diploma in Community Natural
Resource Management; and a PhD focused on methodologies (process, information and tools) for integrated ecosystem services assessments across
multiple scales. As Director of her own consulting company and a Scholar at the Australian National University she facilitates social consensus
to develop and implement ecosystem services frameworks. In 2011 Simone was invited to address the Prime Minister on "ecosystem services approach
for a sustainable Australia". She is a Lead Author for the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Asia
Pacific Regional Assessment and Liaison Expert for the Thematic Assessment on the Sustainable Use of Biodiversity. Simone is also the Community
of Practice Moderator for UNEP’s Global Environment Outlook. She has taught ecosystem services concepts at universities, delivered on numerous
government and private sector consultancies and published in books and journals. She is on the Executive Committee of the Ecosystem Services
Partnership (as well, Coordinator of the Regional Chapters and National Networks); on the Editorial Board of the journal Ecosystem Services; and
has contributed to the UN’s System of Environmental-Economic Accounts (UN SEEA) and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). She has
received many scholarships and awards, including a Planning Institute of Australia Award for the South East Queensland (SEQ) Ecosystem Services Project
that she previously managed.
How appropriate is your framework for conducting ecosystem services assessments?!
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) states one of its intents is to be used ‘as a framework and source of tools for
assessment, planning and management’. Since its release, however, there has been exponential growth in ecosystem services framework development by
stakeholders from different sectors, with different disciplines, from different cultures, to address specific issues, for application at different scales
and by different end-users. Without analysing these initiatives, particularly the ‘drivers’ underpinning the choice of different ‘processes’ to develop
the frameworks (e.g. collaborative, in-house, expertise involved, resources invested) and the different ‘information’ (e.g. on biodiversity’s role in
service provision, ecosystem process and service definitions, valuation methods) and ‘tools’ (e.g. conceptual frameworks, maps, models, reporting mediums)
supporting them, researchers are adopting and adapting these frameworks presupposing they are right to suit their purpose. This presentation presents the
results of analysing methodologies developed in different contexts so to determine a) what an appropriate methodology (process, information and tools) is
for assessing ecosystem services?; and b) the implications of applying different frameworks in ecosystem services assessments. It provides examples of
Guiding Principles that have been developed to assist researchers in making more informed decisions on an appropriate framework for use in single or
multi-scale ecosystem services assessments; or from which researchers can assess their currently applied framework to determine its appropriateness.
The Principles were developed by analysing frameworks developed since the MA’s release in 2005. Documents and literature were reviewed to assess a wide
range of frameworks and their components, including the MA, TEEB, UN SEEA and CICES to name a few. Applied research was conducted to develop an actual
framework at the regional scale in South-East Queensland, Australia, capturing and creating an understanding of the constraints and opportunities that
might arise in everyday practice when developing a framework. Multiple case study analysis was applied to analyse in depth two frameworks developed, one
at the national scale (the US EPA’s Ecosystem Services Research Program) the other at the multi-national scale (the UK National Ecosystem Assessment).
Thirty-three interviews were conducted with program Leads. Constraints and opportunities provided by drivers underpinning the programs were identified
and how these influenced the processes applied and the information and tools developed.
Pablo Tittonell is since March 2012 chair Professor of the group Farming Systems Ecology of Wageningen
University, in The Netherlands, and holds external Professorships at the Ecole Doctorale Sibaghe of the University of Montpellier,
France and at the National University of Lomas de Zamora, Argentina. He is an agronomist by training and holds a PhD in
Production Ecology and Resource Conservation and his areas of expertise include soil fertility, agroecology and farming
systems analysis. He participated in a diversity of research and development projects around the world, on design,
resilience and adaptation of farming systems. His career in the international research arena (CGIAR) started at the Tropical
Soil Biology and Fertility (TSBF) Institute of CIAT in Nairobi, Kenya, and at the University of Zimbabwe, where he run
research and educational programmes on soil fertility, conservation agriculture and agroecosystems modelling. He worked at
CIRAD (Centre de coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement) where he led a research team on
Systems Design and Evaluation with activities in America, Asia and Africa. He is a board member of the African Conservation
Tillage network, coordinator of the community of practice on Farming Systems Design within the European Society for Agronomy,
and the European focal point of the Latin American Society for Agroecology (SOCLA). Since January 2015 he is the coordinator
of the National Program on Natural Resources, Environmental Management and Ecoregions of the National Institute of Agronomic
Research (INTA) of Argentina.
Ecological intensification: from generation to use of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes
Often agriculture -in the broadest sense- is seen as a polluting activity, leading to the degradation
of natural resources and biodiversity loss, and in many cases as socially exclusive. On the other hand, where cattle and agro-forestry
activities share the space with the human and many other species habitat, agricultural landscapes have been proposed as key areas for
the generation of ecosystem services of global and regional importance. Examples of such services include the collection and availability
of drinking water, reception and adaptation of wastewater for further treatment, the control of slopes and watersheds, the sequestration of
atmospheric carbon dioxide, the preservation of habitats and biological corridors, etc. For this reason it is often spoken of multifunctional
landscapes. However, beyond the role that agriculture can meet in the provision of ecosystem services, there is huge potential for the use
of locally generated ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. Such services of regulation and support of key ecological processes for
agricultural activities are underutilized by the current dominant production models based on large energy inputs and an approach that aims to ´control´
-rather than manage- the processes of the agroecosystem. The efficient use of these services for the production requires a rational design
of the agricultural landscape, with scientific basis, and the involvement of the various actors in the territory. It is intended to fully
capitalize the ecological processes to replace and/or reduce the need for external inputs, increase regulation capacity and recovery of the
system to disturbances and adapt to changes caused by exogenous drivers. Is this what I call ecological intensification of agriculture. Examples
illustrating specific cases of ecological intensification and their potential will be presented and discussed during this session of the Congress.
Presentation of Environmental Situation Argentina 2015.
SAYDS Session: The challenges of the Native Forests Law and the conservation of ES
The National Law No. 26.331 "Protection of Native Forests" positions Argentina as the first country in
Latin America to grant funding to the provinces to be strengthened institutionally and compensate those who conserve and sustainably
manage the goods and services provided by native forests. Following this line of sustainable management policy with social
inclusion, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development of the Nation (SAyDS), together with the National Agricultural
Technology Institute (INTA) and partner provinces, implement the project "Incentives for Conservation of Ecosystem Services
of Global Significance", whose main objective is to design and test different types of payments for ecosystem services, which
recovery in production, economic, ecological and social terms, within the framework of the Forest Act, is one of the challenges
to be discussed in this event.
Dr. Sergio Lorusso - Secretario de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable de la Nación (SAyDS)
Dra. Silvia Révora - Subsecretaria de Planificación y Política Ambiental de la SAyDS
Lic. Inés Gómez - Directora de Bosques de la SAyDS
Dr. José Alberto Gobbi - Coordinador General del Proyecto Incentivos para la Conservación de Servicios Ecosistémicos de Importancia Global / INTA
Screening of documentary "Gran Chaco"
SYNOPSIS: “Gran Chaco” is a documentary that exposes the socio environmental conflict that affects
the largest forested region after Amazonia. It is an ethnographic view that shows the relation between native people with
nature and the problems caused by deforestation due to agricultural frontier advance. The testimony of diferent social actors
shows us the cultural richness, the beauty, biodiversity and the conflict of a until now relegated region; composed by Argentina,
Bolivia, Paraguay and Brasil.
After the screening there will be a debate with the film director and some of the researchers that
participated with their testimony in the documentary. This activity is open and free to all the society.
VENUE: Espacio Cultural Unzué (Río Negro 3500 y La Costa)