Katana VentraIP

Socio-ecological system

A social-ecological system consists of 'a bio-geo-physical' unit and its associated social actors and institutions. Social-ecological systems are complex and adaptive and delimited by spatial or functional boundaries surrounding particular ecosystems and their context problems.[1]

Theoretical foundations[edit]

Social-ecological systems are based on the concept that humans are a part of—not separate from—nature.[8] This concept, which holds that the delineation between social systems and natural systems is arbitrary and artificial, was first put forth by Berkes and Folke,[9] and its theory was further developed by Berkes et al.[10] More recent research into social-ecological system theory has pointed to social-ecological keystones as critical to the structure and function of these systems, and to biocultural diversity as essential to the resilience of these systems.[11]

which arose from the need to develop a philosophy of relations between humans and their environment, because conventional ethics only applied to relations among people.[6]

Environmental ethics

which expands ecological concerns to respond to the inclusion of cultural and political activity within an analysis of ecosystems that are significantly but not always entirely socially constructed.[14]

Political ecology

which arose from the rich accumulation of material documenting relationships between societies and their environment.

Environmental history

which examines the link between ecology and economics by bridging the two disciplines to promote an integrated view of economics within the ecosystem.[15]

Ecological economics

which examines the linkages between resource management and social organisation, analysing how institutions and property rights systems deal with the dilemma of the "tragedy of the commons".[16][17]

Common property

which refers to ecological understanding built, not by experts, but by people who live and use the resources of a place.[18]

Traditional ecological knowledge

Katana VentraIP

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__subtitleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

Through to the final decades of the twentieth century, the point of contact between social sciences and natural sciences was very limited in dealing with social-ecological systems. Just as mainstream ecology had tried to exclude humans from the study of ecology, many social science disciplines had ignored the environment altogether and limited their scope to humans.[5] Although some scholars (e.g. Bateson 1979)[12] had tried to bridge the nature-culture divide, the majority of studies focused on investigating processes within the social domain only, treating the ecosystem largely as a "black box"[6] and assuming that if the social system performs adaptively or is well organised institutionally it will also manage the environmental resource base in a sustainable fashion.[13]


This changed through the 1970s and 1980s with the rise of several subfields associated with the social sciences but explicitly including the environment in the framing of the issues.[5] These subfields are:


Each of the six areas summarised is a bridge spanning different combinations of natural science and social science thinking.[5]

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

A framework that focuses on knowledge and understanding of ecosystem dynamics, how to navigate it through management practices, institutions, organisations and social networks and how they relate to drivers of change (Picture A).

[5]

Alternative conceptual model illustrates how it is meaningful to consider a wide range of socio-ecological system properties potentially influencing agricultural intensification, rather than singling out macro-drivers such as population pressure as the primary metric of agrarian change and intensification ().[24]

Picture B

A conceptual model in relation to the robustness of social-ecological systems. There resource could be water or a fishery and the resource users could be farmers irrigating or inshore fishermen. Public infrastructure providers involve, for example, local users associations and government bureaus and public infrastructure include institutional rules and engineering works. The number refer to links between the entities and are exemplified in the source of the figure (Picture C).

[27]

or Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Societal and Ecosystem Metabolism. This is a method of accounting used to analyse social-ecosystems and to simulate possible patterns of development.[28][29][30][31]

MuSIASEM

There are several conceptual frameworks developed in relation to the resilience approach.

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__heading--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__description--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

Adaptive governance[edit]

The resilience of social-ecological systems is related to the degree of the shock that the system can absorb and remain within a given state.[49] The concept of resilience is a promising tool for analysing adaptive change towards sustainability because it provides a way for analysing how to manipulate stability in the face of change.


In order to emphasise the key requirements of a social-ecological system for successful adaptive governance, Folke and colleagues[50] contrasted case studies from the Florida Everglades and the Grand Canyon. Both are complex social-ecological systems that have experiences unwanted degradation of their ecosystem services, but differ substantially in terms of their institutional make-up.


The governance structure in the Everglades is dominated by the interests of agriculture and environmentalists who have been in conflict over the need to conserve the habitat at the expense of agricultural productivity throughout history. Here, a few feedbacks between the ecological system and the social system exist, and the SES is unable to innovate and adapt (the α-phase of reorganisation and growth).


In contrast, different stakeholders have formed an adaptive management workgroup in the case of Grand Canyon, using planned management interventions and monitoring to learn about changes occurring in the ecosystem including the best ways to subsequently manage them. Such an arrangement in governance creates the opportunity for institutional learning to take place, allowing for a successful period of reorganisation and growth. Such an approach to institutional learning is becoming more common as NGOs, scientist and communities collaborate to manage ecosystems.[49]

Links to sustainable development[edit]

The concept of social-ecological systems has been developed in order to provide both a promising scientific gain as well as impact on problems of sustainable development. A close conceptual and methodological relation exists between the analysis of social-ecological systems, complexity research, and transdisciplinarity. These three research concepts are based on similar ideas and models of reasoning. Moreover, the research on social-ecological systems almost always uses transdisciplinary mode of operation in order to achieve an adequate problem orientation and to ensure integrative results.[51] Problems of sustainable development are intrinsically tied to the social-ecological system defined to tackle them. This means that scientists from the relevant scientific disciplines or field of research as well as the involved societal stakeholders have to be regarded as elements of the social-ecological system in question.[51]

Relational mobility

Aravindakshan, S., Krupnik, T.J., Groot, J.C., Speelman, E.N., Amjath-Babu, T.S. and Tittonell, P., 2020. Multi-level socioecological drivers of agrarian change: Longitudinal evidence from mixed rice-livestock-aquaculture farming systems of Bangladesh. Agricultural Systems, 177, p. 102695.()

Aravindakshan et al. 2020

Ecology Info Center, 2022. What is Panarchy? .

http://environment-ecology.com/general-systems-theory/535-panarchy.html

Gunderson, L. and Holling, C.S. (2002). Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.

Maclean K, Ross H, Cuthill M, Rist P. 2013. Healthy country, healthy people: An Australian Aboriginal organisation's adaptive governance to enhance its social-ecological system. Geoforum. 45:94–105.

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__quote--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__name--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__company_or_position--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__quote--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__name--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__company_or_position--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__quote--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__name--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__company_or_position--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--6DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$

$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--7DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$