Johanna Forster

@article{87372323d1fd467081d660a4de0b0691,

title = {Residual emissions in long-term national climate strategies show limited climate ambition},

author = {Harry B. Smith and Naomi E. Vaughan and Johanna Forster},

doi = {10.1016/j.oneear.2024.04.009},

issn = {2590-3322},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-05-17},

journal = {One Earth},

volume = {7},

number = {5},

pages = {867–884},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Net-zero targets imply a need to compensate for residual emissions through the deployment of carbon dioxide removal methods. Yet the extent of residual emissions within national climate plans, alongside their distribution, is largely unexplored. Here, we analyze 71 long-term national climate strategies to understand how national governments engage with residual emissions. Screening 139 scenarios, we determined that only 26 of the 71 strategies quantify residual emissions. Residual emissions are on average 21% of peak emissions for Annex I countries, ranging from 5% to 52% (excluding land use). For non-Annex I countries, residual emissions are on average 34%. By sector, agriculture represents the largest contributor to total residual emissions (on average, 36% for Annex I countries and 35% for non-Annex I countries). High-residual-emission scenarios show how some countries may retain or expand their fossil fuel production and use, using more carbon dioxide removal or international offsets to achieve net zero.},

note = {Funding information: This work was funded by Leverhulme Trust Doctoral Scholarship Programme DS-2020-028, the Critical Decade for Climate Change.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{bb1099560f4543079b1626594e014da2,

title = {Disaster risk in Caribbean fisheries: How vulnerability is shaped and how it can be reduced in Dominica and Antigua and Barbuda},

author = {Clare Shelton and Carole S. White and Johanna Forster and Susan Conlon and Georg H. Engelhard and John K. Pinnegar},

doi = {10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105951},

issn = {0308-597X},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-02-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

volume = {160},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Hurricanes and tropical storms have a substantial and sustained influence on fisheries globally. These threats present particularly significant challenges in Caribbean islands, where fisheries contribute towards economies, food security, and social and cultural identities. Yet, storm impacts on coastal communities and fisheries are a relatively neglected area of disaster risk reduction. In response, this paper reports on a novel application and adaptation of the Pressure and Release model (PAR) focused on Caribbean Island fisheries. The PAR is a wellestablished framework used to understand how vulnerability manifests and to identify appropriate policy and management options to reduce vulnerability and build resilience in the longer-term. This research highlights how this approach can expose underlying social, cultural, and economic factors that can either reduce or exacerbate vulnerability in the Caribbean island fisheries sector following extreme weather events using Dominica and Antigua and Barbuda as case studies. This study combines a literature review compiling data on underlying factors of vulnerability for Caribbean Island fisheries, with in-person interviews with fisheries managers from Dominica, and Antigua and Barbuda. It showcases the utility of the PAR in fisheries-focused recovery, and provides empirical evidence that fisheries play an important role in supporting immediate and medium-term coping and recovery after an extreme storm event. This approach has broader relevance for climate change adaptation as it highlights strategies for building resilience for fisheries-dependent societies.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{0ac901e098c34b3994874756520215a8,

title = {Exploring the relationship between plural values of nature, human well-being, and conservation and development intervention: Why it matters and how to do it?},

author = {Rachel Carmenta and Julie Zaehringer and Patricia Balvanera and Erin Betley and Neil Dawson and Natalia Estrada-Carmona and Johanna Forster and Jeff Hoelle and Bosco Lliso and Jorge Llopis and Ajit Menon and Moira Moeliono and Karen Mustin and Unai Pascual and Nitin D. Rai and Judith Schleicher and Clare Shelton and A Sigouin and Eleanor Sterling and Angela M. Steward and A Tauro and Carole White and Emily Woodhouse and Elizabeth L. Yuliani},

doi = {10.1002/pan3.10562},

issn = {2575-8314},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-12-01},

journal = {People and Nature},

volume = {5},

number = {6},

pages = {1720–1738},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {1. Globally, land and seascapes across the bioculturally diverse tropics are in transition. Impacted by the demands of distant consumers, the processes of global environmental change and numerous interventions seeking climate, conservation and development goals, these transitions have the potential to impact the relationships and plurality of values held between people and place.2. This paper is a Synthesis of seven empirical studies within the Special Feature (SF): ‘What is lost in transition? Capturing the impacts of conservation and development interventions on relational values and human wellbeing in the tropics’. Through two Open Forum workshops, and critical review, contributing authors explored emergent properties across the papers of the SF. Six core themes were identified and are subsumed within broad categories of: (i) the problem of reconciling scale and complexity, (ii) key challenges to be overcome for more plural understanding of social dimensions of landscape change and (iii) ways forward: the potential of an environmental justice framework, and a practical overview of methods available to do so.3. The Synthesis interprets disparate fields and complex academic work on relational values, human well-being and de-colonial approaches in impact appraisal. It offers a practical and actionable catalogue of methods for plural valuation in the field, and reflects on their combinations, strengths and weaknesses.4. The research contribution is policy relevant because it builds the case for why a more plural approach in intervention design and evaluation is essential for achieving more just and sustainable futures, and highlights some of the key actions points deemed necessary to achieve such a transition to conventional practice.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{a78082a318ba4170bee3b9d1d70d44df,

title = {Long-term national climate strategies bet on forests and soils to reach net-zero},

author = {Harry B. Smith and Naomi E. Vaughan and Johanna Forster},

doi = {10.1038/s43247-022-00636-x},

issn = {2662-4435},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-12-07},

journal = {Communications Earth & Environment},

volume = {3},

publisher = {Nature Research},

abstract = {The deployment of carbon dioxide removal is essential to reach global and national net-zero emissions targets, but little attention has been paid to its practical deployment by countries. Here, we analyse how carbon dioxide removal methods are integrated into 41 of the 50 Long-term Low Emission Development Strategies submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), before 2022. We show that enhancing forest and soil carbon sinks are the most advocated strategies but are only explicitly quantified in 12. Residual emissions by 2050 are only quantified in 20 strategies and most of them use forests to achieve national net-zero targets. Strategies that quantify both residual emissions and carbon dioxide removal identify national constraints, such as wildfire risks to forests and limited geological CO2 storage capacity. These strategies also highlight the need for international cooperation. Taken together, we suggest that the UNFCCC should urgently strengthen its reporting requirements on long-term national climate strategies.},

note = {Funding information: This work was funded by a Leverhulme Trust Research Project Grant DS-2020-028. NEV acknowledges support from the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/P019951/1).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{d70b52213a764efaa36f0bed525abd45,

title = {Understanding perceived effectiveness of a novel coastal management project: The case of the Bacton-Walcott sandscaping scheme, UK},

author = {Isabel Cotton and Johanna Forster and Irene Lorenzoni and Trevor J. Tolhurst},

doi = {10.3389/fmars.2022.1028819},

issn = {2296-7745},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-10-26},

journal = {Frontiers in Marine Science},

volume = {9},

publisher = {Frontiers Media S.A.},

abstract = {Adaptation at actively receding coastal areas requires swift and long-term solutions that build resilience for both people and the environment. Nature-based solutions are increasingly being promoted over hard defences, but there is a lack of empirical research on the effectiveness of novel approaches, including those deployed at different scales. Sandscaping, a one-off large-scale deposition of sand (1.8 M m3) on a beach frontage, was implemented for the first time in the UK at a section of beach between Bacton and Walcott villages, in North Norfolk, in 2019. The purpose of sandscaping in this location was primarily to protect the nationally important gas terminal, and neighbouring villages from coastal erosion and flooding. This study investigates the perceived effectiveness and impacts of sandscaping on coastal residents, by eliciting views of residents in the two closest villages to the scheme, and comparing findings to geomorphological observations (using LiDAR data). A survey of Bacton and Walcott residents was distributed in January 2022, with n=77 responses. Results reveal wide differences in perceptions, and notable levels of doubt, on the ‘effectiveness’ of sandscaping at present and in the future, alongside different lived experiences of the scheme and prevailing distrust by some residents about coastal management. Keeping residents updated on changes to sandscaping with environmental data and communicating the advantages of nature-based solutions appear relevant in this context, but the diversity and contrast of resident perceptions illustrates deeper challenges for future coastal management planning. There is a need to think through how future coastal change can be planned for, drawing upon multiple social perspectives. This paper also illustrates that ‘effectiveness’ of sandscaping should be more widely examined in relation to the experiences and perspectives of those impacted by the scheme, and beyond evaluations of geomorphological change.},

note = {Funding: This study is part of a publicly funded studentship, with joint funding from SeNSS-ARIES Doctoral Training Programmes (funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and the Natural Environment Research Council, respectively).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{fe4e7e2932ea458f935be4a979050499,

title = {Expanding narratives of governance constraints to improve coral reef conservation},

author = {Rachel A. Turner and Johanna Forster and Clare Fitzsimmons and Robin Mahon},

doi = {10.1111/cobi.13933},

issn = {0888-8892},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-10-01},

journal = {Conservation Biology},

volume = {36},

number = {5},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {To understand and address the failures of reef governance, it is critical to understand the perceptions of diverse policy makers and practitioners about the challenges they face in achieving their goals. Examining the discourse of policy makers and practitioners can reveal the extent to which these perceptions capture the full spectrum of potential governance challenges, including those related to management, institutional structures and processes, the values and principles underpinning governance, and the social and environmental context. We conducted semistructured interviews with 110 policy makers and practitioners across multiple sectors, scales, and contexts in Barbados, St Kitts and Nevis, Belize, and Honduras. We used thematic qualitative analysis informed by theories of interactive governance and governability to examine the challenges perceived by governance actors. Perceived governance challenges were broadly consistent across countries, but differed by sector (V = 0.819, F},

note = {Funding Information: This research was funded by the European Union 7th Framework program (FP7/2007‐2013) under grant agreement 244161.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{a3ac8f3e5e4c4204a71ed3c41f7d3126,

title = {Prioritising wellbeing and resilience to Build Back Better: insights from a Dominican small-scale fishing community},

author = {Johanna Forster and Clare Shelton and Carole S. White and Agathe Dupeyron and Alena Mizinova},

doi = {10.1111/disa.12541},

issn = {0361-3666},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-07-01},

journal = {Disasters},

volume = {46},

number = {S1},

pages = {S51–S77},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {Climate change is increasing the severity of extreme weather events, particularly hurricanes, presenting a significant challenge to Caribbean coastal communities. In the aftermath of a major disaster, government interventions typically prioritise infrastructure, assets, and the economy through rebuilding roads, reviving economic sectors, and providing financial compensation. This is driven by a focus on macro-level quantitative indicators rather than by local, multidimensional subjective and relational factors, closer to lived experiences and livelihoods. Using frameworks outlining social well-being and agency, this paper explores strategies used by a fisheries-dependent community in Dominica to recover from Hurricane Maria in 2017 and pursue well-being. The findings highlight the importance of multidimensional well-being, particularly relational and subjective dimensions, including existing social networks, and personal relationships critical for recovery after Maria. Furthermore, the paper demonstrates how recovery initiatives that concentrate solely on material well-being, such as employment, can undermine agency in the capacity of a community to recover and build resilience.},

note = {Supplement: ‘Building back better’? Lessons from disaster recovery in the Caribbean. Published in honour of Emeritus Professor David Barker Funding Information: The work was funded by a Global Challenges Research Fund (quality‐related) grant awarded by the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom (code: DEV31GFJF).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{81d1003b021e421e8f8e09663e631846,

title = {Bringing greenhouse gas removal down to earth: Stakeholder supply chain appraisals reveal complex challenges},

author = {Diarmaid Clery and Clair Gough and Naomi Vaughan and Johanna Forster and Irene Lorenzoni and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102369},

issn = {0959-3780},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-11-01},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

volume = {71},

number = {November 2021},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) approaches are considered essential in several projections to meet the climate mitigation ambition of the Paris Agreement. Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and afforestation are included extensively in mitigation scenarios but there are concerns about the feasibility of these approaches. This was explored with stakeholders from industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and policy who were involved in interviews and a one-day participatory workshop. Multicriteria mapping (MCM) methodology was used to appraise the ‘real-world’ feasibility of four specific greenhouse gas removal supply chains at a granular level in the UK context. The MCM analysis shows that afforestation performs better in comparison to three BECCS supply chains, on criteria such as business model, social acceptability, and environmental sustainability. This innovative application of the MCM methodology enables the abstract representations of GGR in integrated assessment models to be explored at a more granular level through a supply chain analysis and thus gain a deeper understanding of the issues facing these approaches. The data gathered allows a wide range of technical, environmental, social and political criteria to be systematically applied in appraising the practical performance of different future implementation options for afforestation and BECCS. If these GGR supply chains are to become a reality on the scale required for 1.5 °C global warming, factors such as global cooperation, land availability, and the longevity of policies and incentives were found to be major challenges.},

note = {Funding Information: The authors acknowledge support from the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/P019951/1). Many thanks to each of the stakeholders for giving their time to be interviewed and participating in the workshop for this study. Also, thanks are given to the four notetakers during the workshop; Dr Tim Rayner, Dr Laurie Waller, Thomas Ball and Muir Freer. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{19cd31aee87a46acbfd3d03b4ef4f789,

title = {Bringing greenhouse gas removal down to earth: Stakeholder supply chain appraisals reveal complex challenges},

author = {Diarmaid S. Clery and Naomi E. Vaughan and Johanna Forster and Irene Lorenzoni and Clair A. Gough and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102369},

issn = {0959-3780},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-11-01},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

volume = {71},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) approaches are considered essential in several projections to meet the climate mitigation ambition of the Paris Agreement. Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and afforestation are included extensively in mitigation scenarios but there are concerns about the feasibility of these approaches. This was explored with stakeholders from industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and policy who were involved in interviews and a one-day participatory workshop. Multicriteria mapping (MCM) methodology was used to appraise the ‘real-world’ feasibility of four specific greenhouse gas removal supply chains at a granular level in the UK context. The MCM analysis shows that afforestation performs better in comparison to three BECCS supply chains, on criteria such as business model, social acceptability, and environmental sustainability. This innovative application of the MCM methodology enables the abstract representations of GGR in integrated assessment models to be explored at a more granular level through a supply chain analysis and thus gain a deeper understanding of the issues facing these approaches. The data gathered allows a wide range of technical, environmental, social and political criteria to be systematically applied in appraising the practical performance of different future implementation options for afforestation and BECCS. If these GGR supply chains are to become a reality on the scale required for 1.5 °C global warming, factors such as global cooperation, land availability, and the longevity of policies and incentives were found to be major challenges.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{8734feab16524f658e8d58ca8eeb3f27,

title = {Information brokerage in Caribbean coral reef governance networks},

author = {Rachel A. Turner and Johanna Forster and Angelie M. Peterson and Robin Mahon and Clare Fitzsimmons},

doi = {10.1017/S0376892920000351},

issn = {0376-8929},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-01},

journal = {Environmental Conservation},

volume = {47},

number = {4},

pages = {284–294},

publisher = {Cambridge University Press},

abstract = {Poor connectivity between diverse resource users and complex wider governance networks is a challenge in environmental governance. Organizations that ‘broker’ interactions among these relationships are expected to improve governance outcomes. Here, we used semi-structured interviews and social network analysis to identify actors in positions to broker coral reef-related information to and from resource users and to assess the performance of these brokers. Representatives (n = 262) of actor groups were interviewed, including local and national government, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community organizations and resource user groups from 12 communities across four Caribbean countries, to map information-sharing networks and to identify brokers. Broker performance was assessed through separate interviews with coral reef resource users (n = 545). The findings show that marine NGOs were the highest-functioning brokers. Where such local-level organizations were absent, government agencies in reef management roles acted as brokers, but their performance was lower. Actors in brokerage positions did not always effectively share information, with broker performance being positively correlated with network brokerage scores. The results further our understanding of the roles of brokers in different governance contexts. Identifying those in brokerage positions and supporting their roles in connecting local resource users to wider governance networks could encourage functional brokerage and enhance reef management outcomes.View full metadata},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{744fb7d5049f4b4793a8988da780cea3,

title = {Mapping feasibilities of Greenhouse Gas Removal: Key issues, gaps and opening up assessments},

author = {Johanna Forster and Nem Vaughan and Clair Gough and Irene Lorenzoni and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102073},

issn = {0959-3780},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-01},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

volume = {63},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal technologies and practices are essential to bring emissions to net zero and limit global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve this, the majority of integrated assessment models (IAMs), that generate future emissions scenarios and inform the international policy process, use large-scale afforestation and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). The feasibility of these technologies and practices has only so far been considered from a relatively narrow techno-economic or biophysical perspective. Here, we present one of the first studies to elicit perspectives through an expert mapping process to open up and broaden the discussion around feasibility of afforestation and BECCS. Our stakeholders included business and industry, non-governmental organisations and policy makers, spanning expertise in bioenergy, forestry, CCS and climate change. Perspectives were elicited on 1) issues relating to BECCS with large-scale afforestation, and 2) specific criteria for assessing feasibility. Participants identified 12 main themes with 61 sub-themes around issues, and 11 main themes with 33 sub-themes around feasibility criteria. Our findings show important societal and governance aspects of feasibility that are currently under-represented, specifically issues around real-world complexity, competing human needs, justice and ethics. Unique to the use of these technologies for greenhouse gas removal are issues around temporal and spatial scale, and greenhouse gas accounting. Using these expert insights, we highlight where IAMs currently poorly capture these concerns. These broader, often more qualitative perspectives, issues and uncertainties must be recognised and accounted for, in order to understand the real-world feasibility of large-scale afforestation and BECCS and the role they play in limiting climate change. These considerations enable widening the scope to broader and deeper discussions about possible and desirable futures, beyond a focus on achieving net-zero emissions, attentive to the effects such decisions may have. We outline approaches that can be used to attend to the complex social and political dimensions that IAMs do not render. By complementing IAMs in this way opportunities can be created to open up considerations of future options and alternatives beyond those framings proposed by IAMs, creating opportunities for inclusion of knowledges, reflexivity and responsibility.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{44d07a3027da44f8a9929dcdc2cc7ebd,

title = {Mapping feasibilities of Greenhouse Gas Removal: Key issues, gaps and opening up assessments},

author = {Johanna Forster and Naomi Vaughan and Clair Gough and Irene Lorenzoni and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102073},

issn = {0959-3780},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-03},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal technologies and practices are essential to bring emissions to net zero and limit global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve this, the majority of integrated assessment models (IAMs), that generate future emissions scenarios and inform the international policy process, use large-scale afforestation and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). The feasibility of these technologies and practices have only so far been considered from a relatively narrow techno-economic or biophysical perspective. Here, we present one of the first studies to elicit perspectives through an expert mapping process to open up and broaden the discussion around feasibility of afforestation and BECCS. Our stakeholders included business and industry, non-governmental organisations and policy makers, spanning expertise in bioenergy, forestry, CCS and climate change. Perspectives were elicited on 1) issues relating to BECCS with large-scale afforestation, and 2) specific criteria for assessing feasibility. Participants identified 12 main themes with 61 sub-themes around issues, and 11 main themes with 33 sub-themes around feasibility criteria. Our findings show important societal and governance aspects of feasibility that are currently under-represented, specifically issues around real-world complexity, competing human needs, justice and ethics. Unique to the use of these technologies for greenhouse gas removal are issues around temporal and spatial scale, and greenhouse gas accounting. Using these expert insights, we highlight where IAMs currently poorly capture these concerns. These broader, often more qualitative perspectives, issues and uncertainties must be recognised and accounted for, in order to understand the real-world feasibility of large-scale afforestation and BECCS and the role they play in limiting climate change. These considerations enable widening the scope to broader and deeper discussions about possible and desirable futures, beyond a focus on achieving net-zero emissions, attentive to the effects such decisions may have. We outline approaches that can be used to attend to the complex social and political dimensions that IAMs do not render. By complementing IAMs in this way opportunities can be created to open up considerations of future options and alternatives beyond those framings proposed by IAMs, creating opportunities for inclusion of knowledges, reflexivity and responsibility.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{94cc4486250143519f2bfdf1b340ae36,

title = {Historical trajectories of disaster risk in Dominica},

author = {Jennifer Barclay and Emily Wilkinson and Carole White and Clare Shelton and Johanna Forster and Roger Few and Irene Lorenzoni and George Woolhouse and Claire Jowitt and Harriette Stone and Lennox Honychurch},

doi = {10.1007/s13753-019-0215-z},

issn = {2095-0055},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-06-01},

journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Science},

volume = {10},

number = {2},

pages = {149–165},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {The calamitous consequences of 2017 Hurricane Maria for the Caribbean island of Dominica highlighted the acute and increasing susceptibility of the region to disasters. Despite increasing international attention to disaster risk reduction, recovery from hazard events can be especially lengthy and difficult for small island developing states. In this article, we build on existing understandings of disaster risk as a physical and social condition, showing that historical processes are fundamental to understanding how conditions of risk emerge and persist over time. We take an integrated approach to analyzing the drivers of risk accumulation, using the example of Dominica, where processes set in motion during the colonial period have shaped the location of people and assets, the degree to which they might be harmed, the societal repercussions of that harm and the prospects for recovery. We focus on the underlying economic vulnerabilities and physical exposure to hazards created by agricultural, economic, and social practices, and successive disaster responses that have constrained recovery. Uncovering these historical drivers and persistent issues, elucidates lessons for pursuing a more resilient development trajectory, including through the promotion of economic restructuring and diversification, and land reform.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{0bbff57b39a74f95b60c6ada0bd92ecd,

title = {Social fit of coral reef governance varies among individuals},

author = {Rachel Turner and Johanna Forster and Clare Fitzsimmons and David Gill and Robin Mahon and Angelie Peterson and Selina Stead},

doi = {10.1111/conl.12422},

issn = {1755-263X},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-05-01},

journal = {Conservation Letters},

volume = {11},

number = {3},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {Improved natural resource governance is critical for the effective conservation of ecosystems, and the well-being of societies that depend on them. Understanding the social fit of institutional arrangements in different contexts can help guide the design of effective environmental governance. This empirical study assessed individual-level variation in institutional acceptance of coral reef governance among 652 respondents in 12 fishing and tourism-oriented communities in the Wider Caribbean. High institutional acceptance was strongly associated with perceptions of community cohesiveness, underlining the potential contribution of civil society to effective governance processes. Institutional acceptance was also influenced by reef use, awareness of rules, perceived trends in reef fish populations, education, and contextual community-level factors. Understanding what influences diverse perceptions of coral reef governance among individuals can help to assess the likelihood of support for conservation measures. This study highlights how knowledge of institutional acceptance can inform the design of more targeted interventions that enhance the social fit of conservation governance to local contexts and diverse resource users.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{606cdc3023d64723bdff192563d7439b,

title = {Evidence of a common understanding of proximate and distal drivers of reef health},

author = {Johanna Forster and Rachel Turner and Clare Fitzsimmons and Angelie Peterson and Robin Mahon and Selina Stead},

doi = {10.1016/j.marpol.2017.07.017},

issn = {0308-597X},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-10-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

volume = {84},

pages = {263–272},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Marine management has typically prioritised natural science methodological traditions as an evidence base for decision-making; yet better integration of social science methods are increasingly shown to provide a more comprehensive picture to base management decisions. Specifically, perceptions-based assessments are gaining support, as they can provide efficient and holistic evaluation regarding management issues. This study focuses on coral reefs because they are particularly threatened ecosystems, due to their ecological complexity, socio-economic importance, and the range of environmental drivers that impact them. Research has largely concentrated on assessing proximate threats to coral reefs. Less attention has been given to distal drivers, such as socio-economic and governance factors. A common understanding of threats related to coral reef degradation is critical for integrated management that takes account of peoples’ concerns. This study compares perceptions of drivers of reef health among stakeholders (n = 110) across different sectors and governance levels, in four Caribbean countries. Interview data identified 37 proximate and 136 distal drivers, categorised into 27 themes. Five sub-groups of themes connecting proximate and distal drivers were identified. Perceptions of two of these narratives, relating to ‘fishing and socioeconomic issues’ and ‘reef management and coastal development’, differed among respondents from different countries and sectors respectively. However, the findings highlight a shared perception of many themes, with 18 of the 27 (67%) mentioned by > 25% of respondents. This paper highlights the application of perceptions data for marine management, demonstrating how knowledge of proximate and distal drivers can be applied to identify important issues at different context-specific scales.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1971,

title = {Evidence of a common understanding of proximate and distal drivers of reef health},

author = {J Forster and R Turner and C Fitzsimmons and A Peterson},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

pages = {263-272},

chapter = {263},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1979,

title = {Social fit of coral reef governance varies among individuals},

author = {R A Turner and J Forster and C Fitzsimmons and D Gill and R Mahon and A Peterson and S Stead},

doi = {10.1111/conl.12422},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Wiley Conservation Letters},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{071261552761432aabf0af78ead4cd03,

title = {Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects},

author = {Andrew J. Jordan and Dave Huitema and Mikael Hildén and Harro Asselt and Tim J. Rayner and Jonas J. Schoenefeld and Jale Tosun and Johanna Forster and Elin L. Boasson},

doi = {10.1038/nclimate2725},

issn = {1758-678X},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-11-01},

journal = {Nature Climate Change},

volume = {5},

pages = {977–982},

publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},

abstract = {Governance responses from the international climate regime have been widely critiqued. But fresh research is revealing that ‘new’ and more dynamic forms of governing are appearing in alternative domains, producing a more polycentric pattern. Some analysts believe that these ‘new’ forms will fill gaps in the regime, but this optimism is based on untested assumptions about their diffusion and performance. We conclude that the advent of more polycentric governance does offer new opportunities to govern climate change, but based on existing empirical research it is far too early to judge whether hopes about the performance of the ‘new’ forms are well founded. More time and vastly more coordinated research efforts are needed to comprehend their full potential; time that is in very short supply in governing climate change.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1309,

title = {Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects},

author = {J Tosun and E Boasson and J Forster and A Jordan and D Huitema and M Hildén and H van Asselt and T Rayner and J Schoenefeld},

url = {http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2725.html},

doi = {10.1038/nclimate2725},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-01-01},

journal = {Nature Climate Change},

abstract = {<p>The international climate regime represented by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been widely critiqued. However, textquoterightnewtextquoteright dynamic forms of climate governing are appearing in alternative domains, producing a more polycentric pattern. Some analysts believe that the new forms will fill gaps in the existing regime, but this optimism is based on untested assumptions about their diffusion and performance. The advent of polycentric governance offers new opportunities for climate action, but it is too early to judge whether hopes about the effectiveness of emerging forms of climate governance are well founded.</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{194b8bb32fef41ea9ad08d29f8d73548,

title = {Measuring good governance for complex ecosystems: Perceptions of coral reef-dependent communities in the Caribbean},

author = {R. A. Turner and C. Fitzsimmons and Johanna Forster and R. Mahon and A. Peterson and S. M. Stead},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.08.004},

issn = {0959-3780},

year  = {2014},

date = {2014-11-01},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

volume = {29},

pages = {105–117},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Good governance is widely seen as a prerequisite for effective natural resources management in the context of environmental decline and increasing anthropogenic pressures. Few studies quantitatively examine governance principles, or explore links between perceptions of community members and the governance that shapes their behaviour. Comparative work, spanning multiple sites and contexts, is rare. This paper measures community members' perceptions of governance in twelve coral reef-dependent communities across four countries in the Wider Caribbean Region. In relation to established principles of 'good governance', multiple correspondence analysis indicates that perceptions can be reliably described using two themes, institutional acceptance and engagement. These explain over 50% of variation in individual perceptions. These measurable themes provide an indication of the social fit of governance arrangements, and have implications for expected outcomes, including support for management and compliance with regulations. Cluster analysis provides unique empirical evidence linking structural characteristics of governance to community perceptions; four of five good governance indicators were present in communities with positive perceptions. Results suggest a combination of supportive structures and processes are necessary to achieve governance systems positively perceived by community members. Findings are relevant to those seeking to design management systems and governance structures that are appropriate to local circumstances and will engender stakeholder support. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{93a8dd8b1a7e447cb519dc68e9641031,

title = {The influence of hurricane risk on tourist destination choice in the Caribbean},

author = {Johanna Forster and Peter W. Schuhmann and Iain Lake and Andrew Watkinson and Jenny Gill},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-012-0433-5},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2012},

date = {2012-01-01},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {114},

number = {3-4},

pages = {745–768},

publisher = {Springer},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{44d07a3027da44f8a9929dcdc2cc7ebdb,

title = {Mapping feasibilities of Greenhouse Gas Removal: Key issues, gaps and opening up assessments},

author = {Johanna Forster and Naomi Vaughan and Clair Gough and Irene Lorenzoni and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102073},

issn = {0959-3780},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal technologies and practices are essential to bring emissions to net zero and limit global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve this, the majority of integrated assessment models (IAMs), that generate future emissions scenarios and inform the international policy process, use large-scale afforestation and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). The feasibility of these technologies and practices have only so far been considered from a relatively narrow techno-economic or biophysical perspective. Here, we present one of the first studies to elicit perspectives through an expert mapping process to open up and broaden the discussion around feasibility of afforestation and BECCS. Our stakeholders included business and industry, non-governmental organisations and policy makers, spanning expertise in bioenergy, forestry, CCS and climate change. Perspectives were elicited on 1) issues relating to BECCS with large-scale afforestation, and 2) specific criteria for assessing feasibility. Participants identified 12 main themes with 61 sub-themes around issues, and 11 main themes with 33 sub-themes around feasibility criteria. Our findings show important societal and governance aspects of feasibility that are currently under-represented, specifically issues around real-world complexity, competing human needs, justice and ethics. Unique to the use of these technologies for greenhouse gas removal are issues around temporal and spatial scale, and greenhouse gas accounting. Using these expert insights, we highlight where IAMs currently poorly capture these concerns. These broader, often more qualitative perspectives, issues and uncertainties must be recognised and accounted for, in order to understand the real-world feasibility of large-scale afforestation and BECCS and the role they play in limiting climate change. These considerations enable widening the scope to broader and deeper discussions about possible and desirable futures, beyond a focus on achieving net-zero emissions, attentive to the effects such decisions may have. We outline approaches that can be used to attend to the complex social and political dimensions that IAMs do not render. By complementing IAMs in this way opportunities can be created to open up considerations of future options and alternatives beyond those framings proposed by IAMs, creating opportunities for inclusion of knowledges, reflexivity and responsibility.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{81d1003b021e421e8f8e09663e631846b,

title = {Bringing greenhouse gas removal down to earth: Stakeholder supply chain appraisals reveal complex challenges},

author = {Diarmaid Clery and Clair Gough and Naomi Vaughan and Johanna Forster and Irene Lorenzoni and Jason Chilvers},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102369},

issn = {0959-3780},

journal = {Global Environmental Change},

volume = {71},

number = {November 2021},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) approaches are considered essential in several projections to meet the climate mitigation ambition of the Paris Agreement. Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and afforestation are included extensively in mitigation scenarios but there are concerns about the feasibility of these approaches. This was explored with stakeholders from industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and policy who were involved in interviews and a one-day participatory workshop. Multicriteria mapping (MCM) methodology was used to appraise the ‘real-world’ feasibility of four specific greenhouse gas removal supply chains at a granular level in the UK context. The MCM analysis shows that afforestation performs better in comparison to three BECCS supply chains, on criteria such as business model, social acceptability, and environmental sustainability. This innovative application of the MCM methodology enables the abstract representations of GGR in integrated assessment models to be explored at a more granular level through a supply chain analysis and thus gain a deeper understanding of the issues facing these approaches. The data gathered allows a wide range of technical, environmental, social and political criteria to be systematically applied in appraising the practical performance of different future implementation options for afforestation and BECCS. If these GGR supply chains are to become a reality on the scale required for 1.5 °C global warming, factors such as global cooperation, land availability, and the longevity of policies and incentives were found to be major challenges.},

note = {Funding Information: The authors acknowledge support from the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/P019951/1). Many thanks to each of the stakeholders for giving their time to be interviewed and participating in the workshop for this study. Also, thanks are given to the four notetakers during the workshop; Dr Tim Rayner, Dr Laurie Waller, Thomas Ball and Muir Freer. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}