Helbing 2013, World Economic Forum, reproduced with permission

 Helbing 2013, World Economic Forum, reproduced with permission

Helbing 2013, World Economic Forum, reproduced with permission Introduction to Social-ecological Systems Topic 03 Learning outcomes Describe the main components and concepts within social-ecological systems Explain why a social-ecological systems approach is useful for more effective policies and planning

Demonstrate ability to reframe and analyse socialecological systems from multiple perspectives Defining social-ecological systems What is a social-ecological system? an integrated complex system that includes social (human) and ecological (nature) subsystems in a two-way feedback relationship (Berkes 2011)

Shift in our understanding of connections Economy Environment Society Shift in our understanding of connections

Economic systems Social systems Ecological systems Key concepts in understanding social-ecological systems Interactions and feedbacks: Challenges assumptions of linear tradeoffs in social ecological systems Multi-scale/level dynamics:

- Geographical scale - Temporal scale - Socio-political scale Diversity - Social diversity including groups, assets, goals - Multiple relationships from micro to macro levels Key concepts in understanding social-ecological systems Threshold: The point where small changes in a social or environmental driver produce large responses in the ecosystem

Tipping points: A threshold at which a relatively small change in conditions leads to a strong change in the state of a system (Brook et al. 2013) Resilience: Capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganise while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function and structure (Scheffer 2009) Persistence Adaptability Transformability Why do we need to think

in terms of SES? Case study of the Southern Cape, South Africa (van Wilgen et al. 2008) Reprinted from Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.89, Issue 4, B.W. van Wilgen, B. Reyers, D.C. Le Maitre, D.M. Richardson, L. Schonegevel, 'A biome-scale assessment of the impact of invasive alien plants on ecosystem services in South Africa', pp. 336-349. (c) 2008, with permission from Elsevier. Reprinted from Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.89, Issue 4, B.W. van Wilgen, B. Reyers, D.C. Le Maitre, D.M. Richardson, L. Schonegevel, 'A biome-scale assessment of the impact of invasive alien plants on ecosystem services in South Africa', pp. 336-349. (c) 2008, with permission from Elsevier.

Collins et al 2011; Frontiers in Ecology Reprinted from Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, Vol.9, Issue 6, Scott L. Collins, Stephen R. Carpenter, Scott M. Swinton, Daniel E. Orenstein, Daniel L. Childers, Ted L. Gragson, Nancy B. Grimm, J. Morgan Grove, Sharon L. Harlan, Jason P. Kaye, Alan K. Knapp, Gary P. Kofinas, John J. Magnuson, William H. McDowell, John M. Melack, Laura A. Ogden, G. Philip Robertson, Melinda D. Smith, Ali C. Whitmer, 'An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological research', pp.351-357. (c) 2010. Reprinted with permission from Wiley. Moving from local to global SES

Decreased Resilience = Increased Risk Millennium Ecosystem Assessment SES at the global scale Planetary boundaries: a safe operating space for humanity (Rockstrom et al. 2009, updated by

Steffen et al. 2015) Sees earth as a single system with 9 key and interacting processes These must stay within safe limits Reprinted from Global Environmental Change, Vol.28, John A. Dearing, Rong Wang, Ke Zhang, James G. Dyke, Helmut Haberl, Md. Sarwar Hossain, Peter G. Langdon, Timothy M. Lenton, Kate Raworth, Sally Brown, Jacob Carstensen, Megan J. Cole, Sarah E. Cornell, Terence P. Dawson, C. Patrick Doncaster, Felix Eigenbrod, Martina Florke, Elizabeth Jeffers, Anson W. Mackay, Bjorn Nykvist, Guy M. Poppy, 'Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems', pp.227-238. (c) 2014. Reprinted under Creative Commons license CC-BY 3.0

SES at the global scale the doughnut = safe and just space for humanity (Raworth 2012) We cannot overshoot the planets ecological ceiling But we must bring all people above a social foundation https://www.kateraworth.com/doughnut/

Reprinted from Global Environmental Change, Vol.28, John A. Dearing, Rong Wang, Ke Zhang, James G. Dyke, Helmut Haberl, Md. Sarwar Hossain, Peter G. Langdon, Timothy M. Lenton, Kate Raworth, Sally Brown, Jacob Carstensen, Megan J. Cole, Sarah E. Cornell, Terence P. Dawson, C. Patrick Doncaster, Felix Eigenbrod, Martina Florke, Elizabeth Jeffers, Anson W. Mackay, Bjorn Nykvist, Guy M. Poppy, 'Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems', pp.227-238. (c) 2014. Reprinted under Creative Commons license CC-BY 3.0 Other frameworks for analysing social-ecological systems

Why use a framework? A framework is...useful in providing a common set of potentially relevant variables and their subcomponents to use in the design of data collection instruments, the conduct of field work, and the analysis of findings (Ostrom 2009) Frameworks can help to define a common vocabulary for different people to discuss the same scenario. Class exercise: What criteria would you use to choose an appropriate framework in a specific situation?

The DPSIR Framework Kristensen 2004 Kristensen, P. (2004) 'The DPSIR Framework', https://wwz.ifremer.fr/dce/content/download/69291/913220/.../DPSIR.pdf The DPSIR Framework Strengths Weaknesses

Simple to understand and use Too simple & static to capture complex social-ecological system dynamics & trends (i.e. oversimplifies the problems) Can be applied to a wide range of environmental issues, and in a standard way

Understood and used by large number of organisations Can be used as a tool to organise & communicate complex (social-ecological) information to policy makers & other stakeholders Discrepancies in understanding & applying DPSIR information categories (i.e. differing definitions &

interpretations of Drivers, Pressures, Responses, etc.) Produces potentially biased analysis & results (based on subjectivity of the individual(s) applying the framework see Svarstad et al. 2008) The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework DFID 1999: SLA Guidance Sheet 1, p.1

SLF: Strengths and weaknesses Strengths Genuinely transdisciplinary as produced, disseminated and applied in the borderland between research, policy, and practice. (Knutsson 2006) Responds to peoples own multi-dimensional view of livelihoods Very widely used in development initiatives Weaknesses (Scoones 2009) Lack of engagement with economic globalisation processes Lack of attention to power and politics Lack of rigorous attempts to deal with long-term change in environmental

conditions Failure to grapple with debates about long-term shifts in rural economies and questions of agrarian change Social-Ecological Systems Framework (McGinnis and Ostrom 2014) McGinnis and Ostrom 2014 Reprinted from Ecology and Society, Vol.19, No.2, Michael D. McGinnis and Elinor Ostrom, 'Social-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges', (c) 2014.

Reprinted under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC 4.0. Strengths and weaknesses of Ostroms SES framework Strengths Structures the analysis of complex processes Linkages (to related ecosystems or external drivers) and dynamics are inbuilt Gives equal weight to social and ecological components of the system Requires interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration leading to better understanding and decision-making Weaknesses

Works well for the analysis of territorial and well defined case studies, but less so for broader (national) scales or for spatially scattered actions and initiatives References Key readings

McGinnis, M.D. and Ostrom, E. (2014) Social-ecological system framework: Initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society 19(2): 30. Raworth, K. (2012) A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut? Oxfam Policy and Practice: Climate Change and Resilience 8: 1-26. Rockstrm, J. et al. (2009) Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14(2): 32. Scoones, I. (2009) Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant Studies 36:171-196. van Wilgen, B.W. et al. (2008). A biome-scale assessment of the impact of invasive alien plants on ecosystem services in South Africa. Journal of Environmental Management 89(4): 336-349.

Other readings Berkes, F. (2011) Restoring unity: the concept of social-ecological systems. World Fisheries: A Social- Ecological Analysis (eds R.E. Ommer, R.I. Perry, K. Cochrane & P. Cury), pp. 9-28. Wiley Blackwell, Oxford.

Brook, B.W. et al. (2013) Does the terrestrial biosphere have planetary tipping points? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 28: 396-401. Knutsson, P. (2006) The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach: A framework for knowledge integration assessment. Human Ecology Review 13(1): 90-99. Ostrom, E. et al. (2009) A general framework for analysing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325: 419-422. Scheffer, M. et al. (2009) Early-warning signals for critical transitions. Nature 461: 53-59. Steffen, W. et al. (2015) Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347(6223): 1259855. Svarstad, H. et al. (2008) Discursive biases of the environmental research framework DPSIR. Land Use Policy 25: 116-125.

Guided reading Please read: Galafassi, D. et al. (2017) Learning about social-ecological trade-offs. Ecology and Society 22(1): 2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08920-220102 Questions for discussion: Think of a social-ecological system with which you are familiar. Drawing on the methods outlined in the paper, design a process to engage all stakeholders to:

1. Identify possible trade-offs between different ecosystem services, between wellbeing of different groups of people and/or between different values; and 2. Negotiate options to mitigate these trade-offs.

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Medical

    Medical

    Risk Management Assessment. As with any business planning assessment process, the risk management process is a key tool used in successful businesses and is an ongoing process of identifying and managing risk.
  • Profile Fitting for Analysis of XRPD Data using HighScore Plus v3

    Profile Fitting for Analysis of XRPD Data using HighScore Plus v3

    Edit the profile fit parameters. Go to the menu Treatment > Profile Fit > Edit Automatic Profile Fit Steps. For normal profile fitting, select the Default parameter set. The only item to modify is the More Background term. You can...
  • eating.open.ac.uk

    eating.open.ac.uk

    Can a computer-marked exam improve retention? Jon Rosewell Communication & Systems, MCT EATING, 21st June 2012 A tale of several short modules Based on Relevant Knowledge, 10 poin
  • 11.2 - Partial Refraction and Total Internal Reflection

    11.2 - Partial Refraction and Total Internal Reflection

    partial reflection and refraction. Refraction. Both reflection and refraction occur, but not equally. The amount of each depends on the angle. In this case, more light is refracted than reflected, as shown by the thickness of the rays.
  • Water Polo Planning Workshop - Scottish Swimming

    Water Polo Planning Workshop - Scottish Swimming

    Finance Report - Alan Anderson & Katie Elder. Thanks to Katie for putting our financial situation back in order. There is additional spend in the Development budget. Similar £15k contribution from SS in 2017. Scottish Cup Finals day made net...
  • Velkommen til gudstjeneste

    Velkommen til gudstjeneste

    Tror du trængsler forestår? Jesus er den bedste tilflugt, når til ham i bøn du går. Kan en bedre ven du finde end Guds egen kære søn? - Han er jo din frelser bleven, o, bring alt til ham i...
  • minnera.weebly.com

    minnera.weebly.com

    Reading Apprenticeship: Using Evidence/Interpretation Logs to Enhance Reading Comprehension. MinneTESOL. November 15, 2014. Kiara Gilman Buchanan. Carlynn Miller-Gore
  • Chapter 2

    Chapter 2

    The common law trial system - judge and jury - evolved to make decisions about relatively simple facts and complex human motivations such as mens rea. It is based on adversary advocacy and unbiased/uninformed decisionmakers. It absolves lawyers of moral...