A network to enhance the contributions from the social sciences and humanities to IPBES

ABSTRACT IPBES requires enhanced contributions from the social sciences and humanities in order to meet its mandate and influence policy. However, achieving this has so far proved challenging, notably in the form of a shortage in nominations of experts from these fields. The Social Sciences and Humanities Network (the SSH Network) has been established in an effort to improve this situation. In this short communication, we present challenges identified by the network that hinders increased engagement from scholars from the social sciences and humanities, and strategies developed to overcome them. Among other initiatives, the SSH Network will function as a meeting place for scholars from the social sciences and humanities engaged in IPBES, interested in IPBES, or having IPBES as a study object.

• Publication year

  2022

• Venue

  Ecosystems and People

• Publication date

  2022-02-08

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1080/26395916.2022.2034971
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• From inclusion to epistemic belonging in international environmental expertise: learning from the institutionalisation of scenarios and models in IPBES

  2021cited by this paper
• The science-policy interface on ecosystems and people: challenges and opportunities

  2020cited by this paper
• Participation and inclusiveness in the Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

  2019cited by this paper
• The role, importance and challenges of social sciences and humanities in the work of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services (IPBES)

  2018cited by this paper
• Why are social sciences and humanities needed in the works of IPBES? A systematic review of the literature

  2018influential reference
• Engaging diverse experts in a global environmental assessment: participation in the first work programme of IPBES and opportunities for improvement

  2018cited by this paper
• Institutional entrepreneurship and techniques of inclusiveness in the creation of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

  2016cited by this paper
• A Rosetta Stone for Nature’s Benefits to People

  2015cited by this paper
• Towards a Reflexive Turn in the Governance of Global Environmental Expertise. The Cases of the IPCC and the IPBES.

  2014cited by this paper
• Conservation policy: Listen to the voices of experience

  2012cited by this paper

• A tale of two panels: learning and coordinating across IPCC, IPBES, and other science-policy interfaces

  2025cites this paper
• Advice for interdisciplinary biodiversity research

  2025cites this paper
• Expert Advice and Global Environmental Governance: Institutional and Epistemic Challenges for Assessment Bodies

  2025cites this paper
• Ten facts from critical and interpretive social sciences for environmental research

  2025cites this paper
• Geographic and epistemic pluralism in the sources of evidence informing international environmental science–policy platforms: lessons learnt from the IPBES values assessment

  2024cites this paper
• Pluralism, paralysis, practice: making environmental knowledge usable

  2023cites this paper
• Relational versus instrumental perspectives on values of nature and resource management decisions

  2023cites this paper
• Value Pluralism in Practice: Integrating IPBES to Refine Ecosystem Services Assessments in South Africa

  2023cites this paper
• Diorama—An Opening for Addressing the Global Challenges

  2023cites this paper
• A plea for more freshwater experts in IPBES

  2023cites this paper