scholarly journals Wicked Social-Ecological Problems Forcing Unprecedented Change on the Latitudinal Margins of Coral Reefs: the Case of Southwest Madagascar

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Henrich Bruggemann ◽  
Martine Rodier ◽  
Mireille M.M. Guillaume ◽  
Serge Andréfouët ◽  
Robert Arfi ◽  
...  
Complexity ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 73-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Forrester ◽  
Richard Greaves ◽  
Howard Noble ◽  
Richard Taylor

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
Avigdor Abelson

Abstract Following a series of mass-bleaching events that have seriously degraded coral reefs, notably the Great Barrier Reef of Australia, a common narrative is now dominating the discourse, according to which “the only sure way to save the world’s coral reefs is climate change mitigation”. However, climate change is not a sole stressor. Most coral reefs around the world are threatened by a myriad of local stressors, including overfishing, destructive fishing, untreated sewage, agriculture effluents (nutrients and pesticides), and siltation due to deforestation. Reefs will not survive the severe effects of this plethora of stressors while waiting until we mitigate climate change. In order to safeguard reefs, we need to adopt a new narrative—“there are diverse ways in which we can improve the chances of saving coral reefs”—by acting now to: (i) improve their local protection and marine protected area networks, (ii) alleviate their critical local stressors, (iii) restore degraded and damaged reefs, and (iv) promote reef resilience and adaptation (e.g. adaptation networks, assisted evolution) to the changing conditions, notably climate change effects. It is time for us to move on from the impractical goals of the climate change narrative (“interventions beyond our field of expertise”) to building up resilience and adaptation of social-ecological systems of coral reefs.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele L. Barnes ◽  
Örjan Bodin ◽  
Tim R. McClanahan ◽  
John N. Kittinger ◽  
Andrew S. Hoey ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Hirsch ◽  
Valerie A. Luzadis

We develop a twofold approach to the development and utilization of policy-relevant knowledge. First, we propose that moving beyond competition to focus on compatibility may promote more effective interdisciplinary collaborations in the context of complex social-ecological problems. Second, we propose that attention to the policy affordances of a set of compatible hypotheses may inform the development of a more holistic and robust set of policy options. This twofold approach is modeled in our methodological approach, in which we have sought to discover how the concepts each of us have been developing are compatible with each other, and what affordances they might offer for improving translation across the science-policy boundary. We illustrate and apply our approach to the complex milieu surrounding the issue of lead paint toxicity. In addition, we draw on findings from focus groups with researchers involved in collaborations at the science-policy boundary to develop recommendations for productive and policy-relevant interdisciplinary collaboration.


2018 ◽  
pp. 117-139
Author(s):  
Bue Rübner Hansen

Over the recent decades, the concept of resilience has spread from environmental science to a number of disciplines dealing with crisis and disaster management. From psychology, public health, and human resource management to development and security studies, resilience is replacing an earlier focus on resistance and adaptability within these fields. There exist several studies dealing with resilience discourse as a key to a diagnostic of the present. While some hail resilience as a new register of ecological resistance for social movements, other decries resilience as a discourse legitimating the neoliberal state’s abandonment of the poor to catastrophe. This article proposes a framework for reading together these highly diverging interpretations of resilience through a historicising of the concept of resilience, tracing its rise genealogically in relation to the concepts of resistance and adaptability. Through readings of authors such as Thomas Hobbes, Carl von Clausewitz, Herbert Spencer, and C.J. Holling, the article shows how these concepts were imported from scientific materialism into pragmatic and normative discourses of defence of life against shifting threats to individual and social life. The article shows how the shifting importance of the concepts of resistance, adaptability and resilience must be related to changing social-ecological problems and the forms of contestation and governance that respond to them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document