Resource and Environmental Management

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Adaptive Management ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Ecosystem Approach ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Course Of Action ◽  
Small Set

Change. Complexity. Uncertainty, Conflict, Ambiguity. Intractability. Wicked problems. Ethics, Integrity. All these terms capture much of what resource and environmental managers must address in determining the most appropriate course of action relative to social-ecological systems. Often, no obviously correct strategy or response is identifiable. Instead, options exist, each with strengths and weaknesses. Ultimately a decision must be taken, reflecting scientific and experiential understanding as well as values and priorities of societies and stakeholders. The intent in this book is to raise awareness about the need to recognize such attributes of resource and environmental management, and to provide concepts, approaches, and methods to help in developing solutions. At the outset, the importance of developing a vision is highlighted. In defining the scope of problems and opportunities, it is argued that a holistic or ecosystem approach should be interpreted as an integrated rather than a comprehensive approach, with the focus on a small set of variables and relationships having significant impact on the functioning of an ecosystem, and amenable to being managed. An adaptive management approach is also strongly encouraged, to learn from experience. Part of learning will arise through stakeholder engagement. Disputes may emerge, and need to be resolved. Finally, implementation of policies and plans can encounter many obstacles, emphasizing the need to become aware of and overcome them, and then monitor and assess outputs and outcomes, in order to adapt to changing circumstances.

Visions for the Future

2019 ◽  
pp. 31-62
Author(s):  
Bruce Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Strong Sustainability ◽  
The Future

In this chapter, the characteristics of a vision for a region, organization, or group are discussed, and then attention turns to examining the roles of forecasting and backcasting, and scenarios to anticipate the future. Subsequently, the characteristics of both sustainable development and resilience as possible visions to guide resource and environmental management are examined. In the context of sustainable development, the distinction between weak and strong sustainability is reviewed. Next, attention turns to the implications of the Anthropocene for achieving sustainable development and resilience. The concept of the rule of hand is explored, which suggests that normally not more than three to five variables are significant when trying to understand complex social-ecological systems, followed by consideration of how both adaptation and transformation can become strategies to address complexity and uncertainty. Kathryn Bellette provides a guest statement focused on implementing a strategy for sustainable development in metropolitan Adelaide, Australia.

scholarly journals A social-ecological systems approach for environmental management

2016 ◽  
Vol 178 ◽  
pp. 83-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arika Virapongse ◽  
Samantha Brooks ◽  
Elizabeth Covelli Metcalf ◽  
Morgan Zedalis ◽  
Jim Gosz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological

scholarly journals Intervene or wait? Modelling the timing of intervention in conservation conflicts adaptive management under uncertainty

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Bach ◽  
Jeroen Minderman ◽  
Nils Bunnefeld ◽  
Aileen Mill ◽  
Alexander B. Duthie
Keyword(s):  
Adaptive Management ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Animal Population ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Delayed Action ◽  
Waiting Strategy ◽  
Conservation Conflict ◽  
High Yields ◽  
Waiting Periods

AbstractThe timing of biodiversity managers’ interventions can be critical to the success of conservation, especially in situations of conflict between conservation objectives and human livelihood, i.e., conservation conflicts. Given the uncertainty associated with complex social-ecological systems and the potentially irreversible consequences of delayed action for biodiversity and livelihoods, managers tend to simply intervene as soon as possible by precaution. However, refraining from intervening when the situation allows it can be beneficial, notably by saving critical management resources. Here, we introduce a strategy for managers to decide, based on monitoring, whether intervention is required or if waiting is possible. This study evaluates the performance of this waiting strategy compared to a strategy of unconditional intervention at every opportunity. We built an individual-based model of conservation conflict between a manager aiming to conserve an animal population and farmers aiming to maximize yield by protecting their crop from wildlife damage. We then simulated a budget-constrained adaptive management over time applying each strategy, while accounting for uncertainty around population dynamics and around decision-making of managers and farmers. Our results showed that when the decision for the manager to intervene was based on a prediction of population size trajectory, the waiting strategy performed at least as well as unconditional intervention while also allowing managers to save resources by avoiding unnecessary interventions. Under difficult budgetary constraints on managers, this waiting strategy ensured as high yields as unconditional intervention while significantly improving conservation outcomes by compensating managers’ lack of resources with the benefits accrued over waiting periods. This suggests that waiting strategies are worth considering in conservation conflicts, as they can facilitate equitable management with a more efficient use of management resources, which are often limiting in biodiversity conservation.

Strategies for regenerative business

2020 ◽  
pp. 147612702097922
Author(s):  
Tobias Hahn ◽  
Maja Tampe
Keyword(s):  
Business Strategy ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Evolutionary Process ◽  
Business Case ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Business Strategies ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Business Sustainability ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological

Escalating ecological degeneration and mounting social challenges highlight the need to rethink the current way of doing business. Human and business activities rely on functioning social-ecological systems but tend to take these for granted. Extant research on business sustainability has acknowledged the relevance of sustainability concerns for business strategy and organizing. Yet, dominant conceptualizations of business sustainability remain focused on the organization and its business case, in the quest to find strategies that translate less harmful social and environmental practices into competitive advantages. Only few scholars have gone beyond such a commercial logic and adopted a systems approach to derive business strategies from the logic of social-ecological systems. In this article, we propose that taking a systems approach means to conceptualize business sustainability in terms of regenerative business, that is, businesses that enhance, and thrive through, the health of social-ecological systems in a co-evolutionary process. As our main contribution, we develop the restore-preserve-enhance scale for regenerative business strategies reflecting a continuum of strategies for regeneration. These strategies follow from two main principles and related criteria for a systems-based level of aspiration and an adaptive management approach to regeneration. By doing so, we fundamentally shift the focus away from a business logic to a systems logic. Importantly, we offer concrete strategies for organizations to contribute to life-supporting conditions in social-ecological systems.

scholarly journals Assessing the Complexity of Social-Ecological Systems: Taking Stock of the Cross-Scale Dependence

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (15) ◽  
pp. 6236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandra R. Gonçalves ◽  
Mayara Oliveira ◽  
Alexander Turra
Keyword(s):  
Coastal Zone ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Ecosystem Approach ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Fit For Purpose ◽  
The Cross ◽  
The Impact

Human demands and activities introduce cross-scale pressures in different systems and scales, affecting the provision of ecosystem services and causing an unbalanced effect on human well-being within the territory. The existing institutions are frequently considered panaceas since they do not take into account the different spatial and jurisdictional scales of the social-ecological systems (SES). This paper aims to broaden the existing DPSIR (Drivers–Pressures–State–Impact–Response) assessment frameworks to strengthen the ecosystem approach and promote an integrated cross-scale perspective. The concept of the Cross-scale Ecosystem-Based Assessment (DIET) was developed and applied to a case study on the demand of seafood provisions. The assessment has indicated that the activities related to the specified demand occur at different scales and generate cumulative impacts and pressures on other scales, especially in the coastal zone. The existing responses to address this issue are highly fragmented, both spatially and among sectors. DIET was applied here to the land–sea interface to illustrate how coastal zone governance and management can be improved and how the impact of certain drivers or activities in the SES can be reduced. DIET may help to reduce the governance morbidity and prevent panaceas by fostering the integration of institutions in pursuing flexible, adaptive and fit-for-purpose policies to address complex issues so as to secure social-ecological justice and well-being for all humans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document