Social ecological complex adaptive systems: a framework for research on payments for ecosystem services

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayde C. Morse ◽  
William J. McLaughlin ◽  
J. D. Wulfhorst ◽  
Celia Harvey
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Yletyinen ◽  
G. L. W. Perry ◽  
P. Stahlmann-Brown ◽  
R. Pech ◽  
J. M. Tylianakis

AbstractUnderstanding the function of social networks can make a critical contribution to achieving desirable environmental outcomes. Social-ecological systems are complex, adaptive systems in which environmental decision makers adapt to a changing social and ecological context. However, it remains unclear how multiple social influences interact with environmental feedbacks to generate environmental outcomes. Based on national-scale survey data and a social-ecological agent-based model in the context of voluntary private land conservation, our results suggest that social influences can operate synergistically or antagonistically, thereby enabling behaviors to spread by two or more mechanisms that amplify each other’s effects. Furthermore, information through social networks may indirectly affect and respond to isolated individuals through environmental change. The interplay of social influences can, therefore, explain the success or failure of conservation outcomes emerging from collective behavior. To understand the capacity of social influence to generate environmental outcomes, social networks must not be seen as ‘closed systems’; rather, the outcomes of environmental interventions depend on feedbacks between the environment and different components of the social system.


Author(s):  
Dustin Eirdosh ◽  
Susan Hanisch

Evolutionary Studies (EvoS) examines the emergence and persistence of complex adaptive systems, including human social-ecological systems. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) aims to empower students with the skills to develop and sustain human social-ecological systems that reflect the shared values of our species. The aims of EvoS and ESD have clear overlaps, and yet these two fields remain as distant islands of thought with few academic bridges between them. This chapter explores the connections between EvoS and ESD from historical, theoretical, and applied perspectives and presents the value of an integrated approach. The authors argue the strengths of this approach include its cumulative evidence base from wide-ranging disciplines, its explanatory power, and its overall simplicity.


2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Levin ◽  
Tasos Xepapadeas ◽  
Anne-Sophie Crépin ◽  
Jon Norberg ◽  
Aart de Zeeuw ◽  
...  

AbstractSystems linking people and nature, known as social-ecological systems, are increasingly understood as complex adaptive systems. Essential features of these complex adaptive systems – such as nonlinear feedbacks, strategic interactions, individual and spatial heterogeneity, and varying time scales – pose substantial challenges for modeling. However, ignoring these characteristics can distort our picture of how these systems work, causing policies to be less effective or even counterproductive. In this paper we present recent developments in modeling social-ecological systems, illustrate some of these challenges with examples related to coral reefs and grasslands, and identify the implications for economic and policy analysis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 771-784
Author(s):  
Katrina Brown

This chapter examines the extent to which cross-disciplinary understandings of resilience support the development and application of multisystemic resilience approaches based on evidence in current literature. It focuses on how systems thinking—especially complex adaptive systems—has informed the evolution of social-ecological systems resilience analysis and the extent to which this provides an example of multisystemic resilience. It reviews some of the underlying concepts and principles in the field and the boundary-pushing areas of recent research. Finally, it identifies how systemic resilience analysis can make a difference in understanding key global challenges and suggests ways forward for development of a multisystemic resilience field.


2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Williams ◽  
Gail Whiteman ◽  
Steve Kennedy

In this article, we posit that a cross-scale perspective is valuable for studies of organizational resilience. Existing research in our field primarily focuses on the resilience of organizations, that is, the factors that enhance or detract from an organization’s viability in the face of threat. While this organization level focus makes important contributions to theory, organizational resilience is also intrinsically dependent upon the resilience of broader social-ecological systems in which the firm is embedded. Moreover, long-term organizational resilience cannot be well managed without an understanding of the feedback effects across nested systems. For instance, a narrow focus on optimizing organizational resilience from one firm’s perspective may come at the expense of social-ecological functioning and ultimately undermine managers’ efforts at long-term organizational survival. We suggest that insights from natural science may help organizational scholars to examine cross-scale resilience and conceptualize organizational actions within and across temporal and spatial dynamics. We develop propositions taking a complex adaptive systems perspective to identify issues related to focal scale, slow variables and feedback, and diversity and redundancy. We illustrate our theoretical argument using an example of Unilever and palm oil production in Borneo.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayde C. Morse

The environment and society are both the context for and product of human actions and interactions. Outdoor recreation is the primary interaction many people have with the environment and it is an interaction that greatly contributes to human well-being. To sustainably manage the social and ecological components of outdoor recreation, an integrative and dynamic systems perspective is needed. Analyses that link recreation management and recreational experiences to both social and ecological outcomes across multiple sales and over time are not developed. This article will outline how a number of fragmented recreation management frameworks such as the recreation experience model, beneficial outcomes, the recreation opportunity spectrum, limits of acceptable change, and constraints theory can be organized within a larger social-ecological framework. The outdoor recreation meta-framework presented here links structuration theory from the social sciences with theories of complex adaptive systems and hierarchical patch dynamics from ecology to understand the human and ecological drivers for and responses to outdoor recreation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 83-120
Author(s):  
Patrick Huntjens

AbstractIn this chapter I survey key theories and concepts that provide substance to the workings of Transformative Social-Ecological Innovation (TSEI). A number of relevant theories and concept have already been mentioned in the previous chapters, such as Social Contract theory (Sect. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec1), and in Sects. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec8 and 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec13, including resilience theory and social-ecological systems (Sect. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec8), quintuple helix innovation model (Sect. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec13), as well as institutional change and the structure-agency debate (Sect. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec13), and several economic theories (Sects. 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec2 and 10.1007/978-3-030-67130-3_3#Sec3). In this chapter I will start with providing a conceptual discussion and definition on Transformative Social-Ecological Innovation (Sect. 4.1), and devote more attention to various theories and approaches that are relevant for TSEI, such as transition studies (Sect. 4.2), institutional design principles for governing the commons (Sect. 4.3), design principles from nature (Sect. 4.4), complex adaptive systems (Sect. 4.5), adaptive, reflexive, and deliberative approaches to governance, management, and planning (Sect. 4.6), social learning, policy learning, and transformational learning (Sect. 4.7), shared value, multiple value creation, and mutual gains approach (Sect. 4.8), effective cooperation (Sect. 4.9), transdisciplinary cooperation, living labs, and citizen science (Sect. 4.10), and the art of co-creation: approaches, principles and pitfalls (Sect. 4.11).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document