| 1. |
- Biggs, Reinette, et al.
(författare)
-
Toward Principles for Enhancing the Resilience of Ecosystem Services
- 2012. - 37
-
Ingår i: Annual Review Environment and Resources. - : Annual Reviews. - 1543-5938 .- 1545-2050. ; 37, s. 421-448
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services (ES) that underpin human well-being is critical for meeting current and future societal needs, and requires specific governance and management policies. Using the literature, we identify seven generic policy-relevant principles for enhancing the resilience of desired ES in the face of disturbance and ongoing change in social-ecological systems (SES). These principles are (P1) maintain diversity and redundancy, (P2) manage connectivity, (P3) manage slow variables and feedbacks, (P4) foster an understanding of SES as complex adaptive systems (CAS), (P5) encourage learning and experimentation, (P6) broaden participation, and (P7) promote polycentric governance systems. We briefly define each principle, review how and when it enhances the resilience of ES, and conclude with major research gaps. In practice, the principles often co-occur and are highly interdependent. Key future needs are to better understand these interdependencies and to operationalize and apply the principles in different policy and management contexts.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bousquet, Francois, et al.
(författare)
-
Resilience and development : mobilizing for transformation
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 21:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2014, the Third International Conference on the resilience of social-ecological systems chose the theme resilience and development: mobilizing for transformation. The conference aimed specifically at fostering an encounter between the experiences and thinking focused on the issue of resilience through a social and ecological system perspective, and the experiences focused on the issue of resilience through a development perspective. In this perspectives piece, we reflect on the outcomes of the meeting and document the differences and similarities between the two perspectives as discussed during the conference, and identify bridging questions designed to guide future interactions. After the conference, we read the documents (abstracts, PowerPoints) that were prepared and left in the conference database by the participants (about 600 contributions), and searched the web for associated items, such as videos, blogs, and tweets from the conference participants. All of these documents were assessed through one lens: what do they say about resilience and development? Once the perspectives were established, we examined different themes that were significantly addressed during the conference. Our analysis paves the way for new collective developments on a set of issues: (1) Who declares/assign/cares for the resilience of what, of whom? (2) What are the models of transformations and how do they combine the respective role of agency and structure? (3) What are the combinations of measurement and assessment processes? (4) At what scale should resilience be studied? Social transformations and scientific approaches are coconstructed. For the last decades, development has been conceived as a modernization process supported by scientific rationality and technical expertise. The definition of a new perspective on development goes with a negotiation on a new scientific approach. Resilience is presently at the center of this negotiation on a new science for development.
|
|
| 3. |
- Enfors-Kautsky, Elin, et al.
(författare)
-
Wayfinder : a new generation of resilience practice
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 26:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Here, we introduce Wayfinder, a novel conceptual framework and a process design for resilience practice. Framed by the Anthropocene argument, and with an explicit social-ecological system focus, the purpose of Wayfinder is to help users navigate toward trajectories of sustainable development. We present the theoretical perspectives that underpin the Wayfinder framework, which draw together and synthesize multiple strands of contemporary resilience thinking. We also describe how we operationalize this framework through an action-oriented process that is designed to facilitate transformative change on the ground. Wayfinder's contribution to resilience theory and practice emerges from the combination of: (1) framing that enables users to address the complex sustainability challenges that we face today, (2) synthesis of recent key advances in resilience science into one comprehensive framework and process, (3) practical guidance that moves beyond an assessment of the current state of affairs and provides concrete advice for planning and action, and (4) emphasis on learning as a key mode of operation in the rapidly changing Anthropocene.
|
|
| 4. |
- Nilsson, Annika E, et al.
(författare)
-
Food security in the Arctic : Preliminary reflections from a resilience perspective
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Arctic Resilience: Interim Report 2013. - Stockholm : Arctic Council. - 9789186125431 - 9789186125424 ; , s. 113-117
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Chapter 10 discusses food security, which is emerging as a major cross-cutting issue in a changingArctic. The preliminary reflections presented in the chapter highlight that food security bringstogether concerns over a range of interacting environmental, social, economic, political andcultural changes. These include: food and water-borne diseases; increasing incidence of lifestylediseases; high costs of healthy foods; contamination; changing ecosystems that impede access tofood; high fuel costs; and loss of traditional knowledge. The chapter concludes that food security isintimately interlinked with social relations and cultural well-being.
|
|
| 5. |
- Oteros-Rozas, Elisa, et al.
(författare)
-
Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research : insights and experiences from 23 case studies
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 20:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Participatory scenario planning (PSP) is an increasingly popular tool in place-based environmental research for evaluating alternative futures of social-ecological systems. Although a range of guidelines on PSP methods are available in the scientific and grey literature, there is a need to reflect on existing practices and their appropriate application for different objectives and contexts at the local scale, as well as on their potential perceived outcomes. We contribute to theoretical and empirical frameworks by analyzing how and why researchers assess social-ecological systems using place-based PSP, hence facilitating the appropriate uptake of such scenario tools in the future. We analyzed 23 PSP case studies conducted by the authors in a wide range of social-ecological settings by exploring seven aspects: (1) the context; (2) the original motivations and objectives; (3) the methodological approach; (4) the process; (5) the content of the scenarios; (6) the outputs of the research; and (7) the monitoring and evaluation of the PSP process. This was complemented by a reflection on strengths and weaknesses of using PSP for the place-based social-ecological research. We conclude that the application of PSP, particularly when tailored to shared objectives between local people and researchers, has enriched environmental management and scientific research through building common understanding and fostering learning about future planning of social-ecological systems. However, PSP still requires greater systematic monitoring and evaluation to assess its impact on the promotion of collective action for transitions to sustainability and the adaptation to global environmental change and its challenges.
|
|
| 6. |
- Quinlan, Allyson E., et al.
(författare)
-
Measuring and assessing resilience : broadening understanding through multiple disciplinary perspectives
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Applied Ecology. - : Wiley. - 0021-8901 .- 1365-2664. ; 53, s. 677-687
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Increased interest in managing resilience has led to efforts to develop standardized tools for assessments and quantitative measures. Resilience, however, as a property of complex adaptive systems, does not lend itself easily to measurement. Whereas assessment approaches tend to focus on deepening understanding of system dynamics, resilience measurement aims to capture and quantify resilience in a rigorous and repeatable way.We discuss the strengths, limitations and trade-offs involved in both assessing and measuring resilience, as well as the relationship between the two. We use a range of disciplinary perspectives to draw lessons on distilling complex concepts into useful metrics.Measuring and monitoring a narrow set of indicators or reducing resilience to a single unit of measurement may block the deeper understanding of system dynamics needed to apply resilience thinking and inform management actions.Synthesis and applications. Resilience assessment and measurement can be complementary. In both cases it is important that: (i) the approach aligns with how resilience is being defined, (ii) the application suits the specific context and (iii) understanding of system dynamics is increased. Ongoing efforts to measure resilience would benefit from the integration of key principles that have been identified for building resilience.
|
|
| 7. |
- Sellberg, My M., et al.
(författare)
-
Engaging with complexity in resilience practice
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 26:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In a complex and turbulent world, there is heightened interest in managing for resilience. However, resilience guides, particularly those used in the development field, often lack a theoretical grounding in complex adaptive systems. There is a demand for guidance on how to operationalize complexity in applications of resilience, such as resilience assessment and planning. This study synthesizes lessons from how twelve cases of social-ecological resilience practice are engaging with complexity. We assessed how each case engaged with complexity, according to a framework of six features of complex adaptive systems. The cases are situated in a diversity of contexts, that include rural villages in Tajikistan, a Swedish municipality, Australian catchment management authorities, a Canadian coastal fishery, and the Arctic council. Our results revealed two main ways of engaging with complexity: capturing and making sense of the complexity of a social-ecological system (system complexity) and embodying complexity into the participatory process (process complexity). Our comparison demonstrates that resilience practice provides a useful approach to address system complexity by, for example, conceptualizing social-ecological interactions, identifying interactions across scales, and assessing system dynamics. Strategies related to understanding the adaptive and emergent features of complex systems were less developed and widespread. The study also revealed a set of strategies to address process complexity, such as facilitating dialogue, building networks, and designing a flexible and iterative process, showing how complexity can be embedded into the resilience assessment process. The more participatory and embedded cases of resilience practice were stronger in these process-oriented strategies. The complexity framework we used and the identified practical strategies provide a theoretically-grounded resource for managers, decision-makers, and researchers on how to engage with complexity when applying resilience in a variety of contexts, including development and landscape management.
|
|
| 8. |
- Sellberg, My M., 1987-, et al.
(författare)
-
How social-ecological resilience practice engages with complexity
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This study investigates how cases of social-ecological resilience practice are engaging with complexity across a diversity of contexts and approaches. Compared to some other resilience frameworks, social-ecological resilience thinking explicitly includes the perspective of complex adaptive systems. However, there is still a lack of knowledge of what this perspective means in practice when it comes to interventions aimed at assessing or building resilience, and there is a demand for practical guidance on how to address complexity. With a growing experience of resilience practice from different parts of the world there is now an opportunity to synthesize lessons across cases. In this study, we assessed twelve cases for how they engaged with complexity, according to a framework of six features of complex adaptive systems. The cases are situated in a diversity of contexts, such as rural villages in Tajikistan, a Swedish municipality, Australian catchment management authorities, a Canadian coastal fishery, and the Arctic council. We organized the cases of resilience practice into three types of approaches: 1) Assessment of theory-based resilience frameworks, 2) Participatory resilience assessment, and 3) Resilience-based planning and operations. Our results reveal alternative key strategies for engaging with complexity in each of these approaches, as well as different key tools and novel situated practices among the cases. The results can help practitioners to orientate their resilience practice, address multiple aspects of complexity, and prioritize strategies depending on their context, purpose, and type of approach. We also highlight two areas of advancing resilience practice methods and approaches: narratives for articulating and guiding desirable change, and an international and transdisciplinary community of practice.
|
|
