@article{SundeColletNowaketal.2021, author = {Sunde, Peter and Collet, Sebastian and Nowak, Carsten and Thomsen, Philip Francis and M{\o}ller Hansen, Michael and Schulz, Bj{\"o}rn and Matzen, Jens and Michler, Frank-Uwe and Vedel-Smith, Christina and Olsen, Kent}, title = {Where have all the young wolves gone? Traffic and cryptic mortality create a wolf population sink in Denmark and northernmost Germany}, series = {Conservation Letters}, volume = {14}, journal = {Conservation Letters}, number = {5}, publisher = {Wiley}, issn = {1755-263X}, doi = {10.1111/conl.12812}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-2565}, pages = {10}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Large carnivores are currently recolonizing Europe following legal protection, but increased mortality in landscapes highly impacted by humans may limit further population expansion. We analyzed mortality and disappearance rates of 35 wolves (of which three emigrated, nine died and 14 disappeared by 1 January 2020) by genetic monitoring in the heavily cultivated and densely populated Jutland peninsula (Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein, Germany). Annual traffic kill rate estimates ranged from 0.37 (95\% CI: 0.11-0.85) to 0.78 (0.51-0.96) in the German part, equivalent to 0.08 (0.02-0.29)-0.25 (0.13-0.46) for the entire region, in the absence of any registered Danish roadkills. In Denmark, annual mortality rate estimates ranged from 0.46 (0.29-0.67) to 0.52 (0.35-0.71), predominantly from cryptic mortality. Despite successful reproductions, we conclude the region is a wolf population sink, primarily driven by cryptic mortality, most likely illegal killing. We hypothesize that frequent encounters between wolves and wolf-averse persecutors in cultivated landscapes may cause unsustainably high mortality rates despite the majority of hunters respecting protection laws.}, language = {en} } @article{VoglhuberSlavinskyLemkeMacPhersonetal.2023, author = {Voglhuber-Slavinsky, Ariane and Lemke, Nahleen and MacPherson, Joseph and D{\"o}nitz, Ewa and Olbrisch, Mathias and Sch{\"o}bel, Philipp and Moller, Bj{\"o}rn and Bahrs, Enno and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Valorization for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Agri-Food Value Chain}, series = {Environmental Management}, volume = {72}, journal = {Environmental Management}, number = {6}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, doi = {10.1007/s00267-023-01860-7}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8104}, pages = {1163 -- 1188}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This article defines the term valorization of biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) measures, as distinguished from their valuation, and underpins it with an assessment of private valorization examples along the agri-food value chain. Valorization incentivizes measures for promoting BES, while valuation refers to its quantification. Valuation can be a step of valorization but is not indispensable. In scientific literature, the terms valorization and valuation are often used interchangeably. In addition, there is a lack of research on private options versus conventional, public policy options. Therefore, we searched for private valorization options primarily in public sources (gray literature and websites). This led to the identification of four clusters (markets for voluntary services, labeling, and certification, environmental management/CSR, and tradable permits and quotas). Based on these clusters the options were assessed from a legal and systems dynamics perspective. In addition, the viability of selected valorization options in different future scenarios was examined. The analysis revealed a wide range of private valorization options, which in contrast to public policy options that focus almost entirely on the production stage, are spread across the agri-food value chain. Their suitability differs under different future scenarios, legal and systems conditions.}, language = {en} }