Tiago Capela Lourenço

The increasing need to understand how socio-environmental risks affect ecosystem services has led to the development of multiple assessment approaches. However, evidence on risk–ecosystem service interactions remains fragmented across the scientific literature, limiting comparability and the systematic characterization of available knowledge. This study proposes an evidence-based framework for analysing interactions between socio-environmental risks and ecosystem services. The framework integrates a risk–ecosystem service matrix with the Ecosystem Service Risk Evidence Index (ESREI), which synthesizes the number of retained studies and the extent to which explicit impacts and socioeconomic information are documented in the scientific literature. The framework was applied to wildfire risk and four ecosystem services in Portugal using evidence identified through a systematic literature review. The ESREI was calculated for each risk–ecosystem service interaction using a reproducible workflow implemented in R. A sensitivity analysis was conducted by applying alternative weighting configurations to the three indicators. The results showed that changes in weighting coefficients affected the numerical ESREI values, while producing relatively limited changes in the corresponding evidence categories. The framework therefore does not estimate risk magnitude directly, but provides a standardized representation of the structure and characterization of available scientific evidence. By making differences in evidence availability and characterization explicit, the ESREI supports the identification of well-documented interactions and areas in which risk–ecosystem service relationships remain insufficiently characterized

The increasing need to understand how environmental risks affect ecosystem services has led to the development of multiple assessment approaches. However, information on risk–ecosystem service interactions remain fragmented across the scientific literature, limiting comparability and constraining the development of consistent analytical frameworks. This study proposes an evidence-based framework for analysing interactions between risks and ecosystem services. The approach integrates a matrix-based structure with a multi-criteria indicator, allowing the synthesis of different types of information documented in the literature. The framework is implemented through a reproducible workflow in R, enabling standardised application across different contexts. To evaluate model performance, a sensitivity analysis was conducted using alternative weighting configurations applied to the indicator. The results show that variations in weights affect numerical values but produce only limited changes in interaction categories, indicating that the model maintains consistent interpretation under different parameter settings. The proposed framework does not estimate risk magnitude directly but organizes the structure of available evidence. In doing so, it reveals asymmetries in how interactions are documented, indicating that ecosystem services supported by limited evidence may be underrepresented in conventional assessments. This approach reframes the analysis of risk–ecosystem service interactions by treating the structure of scientific evidence as an explicit analytical dimension, enabling the identification of knowledge asymmetries and a more robust interpretation of uncertainty.

Urban forests are not merely green amenities; they support critical ecosystem functioning and services vital for healthy, resilient cities. Recognising urban forests as core infrastructure is essential to reversing the loss of mature trees, preserving biodiversity, and maintaining liveability amid increasing climate and environmental pressures. Although the benefits of urban forests for climate resilience, biodiversity, and public health are broadly acknowledged, policies to protect and enhance these vital ecosystems are often limited, underfunded, and inadequately enforced. As mature canopy loss today takes decades to be replaced (if ever), immediate and sustained investment is crucial to safeguard urban forests. This urgency reveals four interconnected gaps in current urban forest management and stewardship. First, urban forests require recognition, investment, and maintenance as essential infrastructure contributing to urban resilience, including biodiversity support, and to maximise the delivery of key ecosystem services such as cooling and carbon sequestration. Second, equitable access to greenspaces across all communities must be ensured to redress long-standing social and environmental injustices. Third, integrating urban forests into broader climate and biodiversity governance frameworks is critical to mainstreaming their management and protection. Lastly, resilience must be strengthened through evidence-based management practices responsive to evolving environmental changes and social contexts. These priorities must be complemented with strong legal protections, rigorous enforcement of legislation against illegal tree removal, and robust community engagement supported by integrated urban planning and improved monitoring. Without these, the ecological, social, and economic benefits provided by urban forests will remain threatened. By reframing urban forests as essential living infrastructure embedded in legal, financial, and planning frameworks, cities can become cooler, healthier, more biodiverse, and socially just. This framework offers timely guidance for policymakers to prioritise urban forests within climate resilience and sustainability strategies, securing benefits for current and future generations.

Global environmental challenges such as climate change, have accelerated the interest in sustainability transitions. Governments and industries are seeking to adopt and promote more sustainable production and consumption practices, in line with the targets set out by SDG12. The packaging industry, a major global contributor to material extraction and pollution, has been driven to replace single-use plastics with paper-based alternatives. Despite previous studies demonstrating the advantages of this transition (e.g. reducing fossil-based emissions), concerns have been raised about the potential negative impacts of the extended use of paper-based packaging (e.g. increased strain on forest ecosystems), and how it may affect climate resilience and carbon capture. The present study seeks to provide novel insights into how the transition from plastic to paper in the Portuguese packaging industry, may be framed under the wider global trend of sustainability transitions, with topics including perceptions towards plastic-to-paper transitions; identification of key policy and societal drivers; transition scenarios; and the potential effect on forest ecosystems. Using a case study approach, a set of 17 semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders from the Portuguese packaging sector (e.g. governmental officials, NGOs and industry professionals). All interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using a mixed-method software (MAXQDA). Results show that paper is a sustainable alternative to plastic in the packaging sector, but only in certain applications and that, ultimately, strategies to tackle the trade-offs between the benefits and downsides will need to be carefully developed. While paper does prove to have some benefits, such as reduced emissions, energy usage, biodegradability and higher recycling rate, unexpected negative implications arose, namely the use of plastic or chemical lining in paper packaging, which created unforeseen consequences in the packaging system, representing a maladaptive approach within this transition. The study concluded that European environmental policies are seen as both leverage points and obstacles, causing tensions within the Portuguese packaging sector. Additionally, when comparing obstacles to change and future transition scenarios to achieve whole-system transformation, the study concluded that designing interventions that bridge the product and the system levels may unlock the obstacles identified and lead to more effective transitions towards sustainability.

In Small Island Developing States (SIDS), coastal marine resources are particularly vulnerable to overexploitation, with small‐scale fisheries (SSF) providing an irreplaceable source of income and food. However, the decentralized and complex nature of SSF coupled with limited monitoring capacity hinders the design of effective measures to protect marine resources and local livelihoods. To address this knowledge gap, we implemented a participatory mobile device app‐based fisheries survey in 23 coastal communities of São Tomé and Príncipe (STP). Trained fishers and fish traders collected landing data from 12,403 unique fishing trips between 2019 and 2023 and recorded vessel activity on 620 sampling days. Catch and effort varied seasonally, with species composition varying across métiers (fishing types). While fishers demonstrated the ability to switch across métiers to target different species, catches were dominated by a few abundant species, notably blue runner and flying fish. Catch biomass and species richness, as well as biomass of demersal large‐bodied species, were lower on São Tomé Island compared to Príncipe Island, likely reflecting historical impacts of higher fishing effort. By combining community participation with digital tools, this approach generated high‐resolution data previously inaccessible to national authorities and provided actionable insights for fisheries governance in STP. Our findings highlight the value of participatory, mobile device‐based monitoring for filling knowledge gaps in SIDS, demonstrating how such approaches can guide conservation priorities while integrating resource users in fisheries management.

Informing and engaging all actors in the land sector, including land-owners and managers, researchers, policy-makers and citizens, on the most effective sustainable land-based solutions and behavioural changes is a key strategy for achieving climate change adaptation and mitigation targets at the global as well as at EU and local level. One requisite to support actors in the land sector is to provide them publicly available, reliable and ready-to-use information related to the implementation of Land-based Adaptation and Mitigation Solutions (LAMS). Here we introduce a LAMS catalogue, a collection of meaningful quantitative and qualitative information on 60 solutions characterised according to a set of specifications (e.g., mitigation and adaptation potential, cost of implementation, suitability factors, synergies and trade-offs, drivers and barriers to the implementation). The catalogue offers a reliable, science-based tool useful for different users’ needs, including valuable references for deriving context-specific quantitative inputs to simulate and evaluate the performance of solutions over time using modelling tools, such as Integrated Assessment Models at any scale.

Mediterranean water-stressed areas face significant challenges from higher temperatures and increasingly severe droughts. We assess the effect of climate change on rainfed barley production in the aridity-prone province of Almería, Spain, using the FAO AquaCrop model. We focus on rainfed barley growth by the mid-century (2041–2070) and end-century (2071–2100) time periods, using three Shared Socio-economic Pathway (SSP)-based scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, and SSP5-8.5. Using the paired t-test, Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficient, Root Mean Squared Error, and relative Root Mean Squared Error, we verified AquaCrop’s ability to capture local multi-year trends (9 or more years) using standard barley crop parameters, without local recalibration. Starting with a reference Initial Soil Water Content (ISWC), different soil water contents within barley rooting depth were modelled to account for decreases in soil water availability. We then evaluated the efficiency of different climate adaptation strategies: irrigation, mulching, and changing sowing dates. We show average yield changes of +14% to −44.8% (mid-century) and +12% to −55.1% (end-century), with ISWC being the main factor determining yields. Irrigation increases yields by 21.1%, utilizing just 3% of Almería’s superficial water resources. Mulches improve irrigated yield performances by 6.9% while reducing irrigation needs by 40%. Changing sowing dates does not consistently improve yields. We demonstrate that regardless of the scenario used, climate adaptation of field barley production in Almería should prioritize limiting soil water loss by combining irrigation with mulching. This would enable farmers in Almería’s northern communities to maintain their livelihoods, reducing the province’s reliance on horticulture while continuing to contribute to food security goals.