|
|
|
| Registros recuperados: 210 | |
|
|
| Wynberg, Rachel; Environmental Evaluation Unit, Department of Environmental and Geographical Science, University of Cape Town; rachel.wynberg@uct.ac.za; Hauck, Maria; Environmental Evaluation Unit, Department of Environmental and Geographical Science, University of Cape Town; MHauck4@gmail.com. |
| The concept of benefit sharing has seen growing adoption in recent years by a variety of sectors. However, its conceptual underpinnings, definitions, and framework remain poorly articulated and developed. We aim to help address this gap by presenting a new conceptual approach for enhancing understanding about benefit sharing and its implementation. We use the coast as a lens through which the analysis is framed because of the intricate governance challenges which coastal social–ecological systems present, the increasing development and exploitation pressures on these systems, and the growing need to improve understanding about the way in which greater equity and reduced inequalities could reduce conflicts, protect coastal ecosystems, and ensure... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Coastal communities; Governance; Inequality; Power. |
| Ano: 2014 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Almedom, Astier M; Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies; Lund University Division of Social Medicine and Global Health; Centre for Societal Resilience, Lund University.; astier.almedom@lucsus.lu.se; O'Byrne, David; Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies; David.O_Byrne@lucsus.lu.se; Jerneck, Anne; Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies; anne.jerneck@lucsus.lu.se. |
| We propose two fundamental principles of epistemological accountability with critical methodological implications for studies designed to measure, assess, and/or profile human psychosocial resilience. Firstly, researchers involved in human psychosocial resilience studies owe it to the individuals and communities that they engage to disclose their motives and possible misreadings of the situations they enter, albeit with good intentions. Secondly, researchers and those individuals researched need to share a language of colearning and coproduction, and utilization of knowledge that is mutually intelligible. Again, the onus is on researchers and their funders to respect the researched and their particular epistemological sovereignties. As the number of... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Community resilience; Epistemological accountability; Human resilience; Psychosocial well-being sustainability studies. |
| Ano: 2015 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Bunch, Martin J; Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University; Network for Ecosystem Sustainability and Health; bunchmj@yorku.ca; Morrison, Karen E; Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph; Network for Ecosystem Sustainability and Health; karenm@uoguelph.ca; Parkes, Margot W; Health Sciences Program, University of Northern British Columbia; Network for Ecosystem Sustainability and Health; mwparkes@interchange.ubc.ca; Venema, Henry D; International Institute for Sustainable Development; Network for Ecosystem Sustainability and Health; hvenema@iisd.ca. |
| In coupled social–ecological systems, the same driving forces can result in combined social and environmental health inequities, hazards, and impacts. Policies that decrease social inequities and improve social cohesion, however, also have the potential to improve health outcomes and to minimize and offset the drivers of ecosystem change. Actions that address both biophysical and social environments have the potential to create a "double dividend" that improves human health, while also promoting sustainable development. One promising approach to managing the complex, reciprocal interactions among ecosystems, society, and health is the integration of the ecohealth approach (which holds that human health and well-being are both dependent on... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Ecohealth; Ecosystem approach; Environment and health; Environmental determinants of health; Health promotion; Integrated water resources management; Resilience; Social determinants of health; Watershed governance; Watershed management. |
| Ano: 2011 |
|
| |
|
|
| DeCaro, Daniel A.; Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory & Policy Analysis, Indiana University; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville; Center for Land Use and Environmental Responsibility, University of Louisville; decaro.daniel@gmail.com; Stokes, Michael K.; Western Kentucky University; Micheal.Stokes@wku.edu. |
| Public participation plays a role in the development and long-term maintenance of environmental institutions that are well-matched to local social–ecological conditions. However, the means by which public participation impacts such institutional fit remains unclear. We argue that one major reason for this lack of clarity is that analysts have not clearly outlined how humankind’s sense of agency, or self-determination, influences institutional outcomes. Moreover, the concept of institutional fit is ambiguous as to what constitutes a good fit and how such fit could be diagnosed or improved. This is especially true for “social fit,” or how well institutions match human expectations and local behavioral patterns. We... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Autonomy-support; Environmental management; Institutional fit; Procedural justice; Psychology; Public participation; Self-determination; Social acceptability; Social– Ecological systems; Sustainable development. |
| Ano: 2013 |
|
| |
|
|
| Shirk, Jennifer L.; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Department of Program Development and Evaluation; jls223@cornell.edu; Ballard, Heidi L.; University of California Davis, School of Education; hballard@ucdavis.edu; Wilderman, Candie C.; Environmental Studies Department, Dickinson College; wilderma@dickinson.edu; Phillips, Tina; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Department of Program Development and Evaluation; cbp6@cornell.edu; Wiggins, Andrea; DataONE, University of New Mexico; awiggins@syr.edu; Jordan, Rebecca; Rutgers University, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources; jordan@aesop.rutgers.edu; McCallie, Ellen; Carnegie Museum of Natural History; MccallieE@carnegiemnh.org; Minarchek, Matthew; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Department of Program Development and Evaluation; mjm564@cornell.edu; Lewenstein, Bruce V; Department of Communication, Cornell University; bvl1@cornell.edu; Krasny, Marianne E; Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University; mek2@cornell.edu; Bonney, Rick; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Department of Program Development and Evaluation; reb5@cornell.edu. |
| Members of the public participate in scientific research in many different contexts, stemming from traditions as varied as participatory action research and citizen science. Particularly in conservation and natural resource management contexts, where research often addresses complex social–ecological questions, the emphasis on and nature of this participation can significantly affect both the way that projects are designed and the outcomes that projects achieve. We review and integrate recent work in these and other fields, which has converged such that we propose the term public participation in scientific research (PPSR) to discuss initiatives from diverse fields and traditions. We describe three predominant models of PPSR and call upon case... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Citizen science; Community-based monitoring; Conservation; Outcomes; Participation; Public; Volunteer monitoring. |
| Ano: 2012 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Vogt, Jessica M.; The Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Furman University; jessica.vogt@furman.edu; Epstein, Graham B.; School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA), Indiana University Bloomington; The Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; gepstein@indiana.edu; Mincey, Sarah K.; Integrated Program in the Environment, Indiana University Bloomington; Indiana University Research and Teaching Preserve; Center for the Study of Institutions, Population and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University Bloomington; The Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA), Indiana University Bloomington; skmincey@indiana.edu; Fischer, Burnell C.; The Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA), Indiana University Bloomington; Center for the Study of Institutions, Population and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University Bloomington; bufische@indiana.edu; McCord, Paul; Center for the Study of Institutions, Population and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University Bloomington; Department of Geography, Indiana University Bloomington; The Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University Bloomington; pamccord@indiana.edu. |
| The Ostrom social-ecological system (SES) framework offers an interdisciplinary tool for studies of linked human-natural systems. However, its origin in the social sciences belies the effectiveness of its interdisciplinary ambitions and undermines its ability to cope with ecological complexity. To narrow the gap between inherently dynamic ecological systems and the SES framework, we need to explicitly recognize that SES outcomes are coproduced by social systems in which choices are made, as well as an ecological system with a diverse assortment of dynamic natural processes that mediate the effect of those choices. We illustrate the need for more explicit incorporation of ecological attributes into the SES framework by presenting a case study of a... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Ecological theory; Forest ecology; Interdisciplinary science; Linked human-natural systems; Social-ecological system framework. |
| Ano: 2015 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Brockhaus, Maria; Center for International Forestry Research; m.brockhaus@cgiar.org; Di Gregorio, Monica; University of Leeds, Sustainability Research Institute; m.digregorio@leeds.ac.uk; Carmenta, Rachel; Center for International Forestry Research; R.Carmenta@cgiar.org. |
| Policy making is often neither rational nor solution-oriented, but driven by negotiations of interests of multiple actors that increasingly tend to take place in policy networks. Such policy networks integrate societal actors beyond the state, which all aim, to different degrees, at influencing ongoing policy processes and outcomes. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) can be considered as such an emerging policy domain, in which actors cooperate and conflict in network structures, build coalitions and try to control information and finance flows relevant for REDD+ decision making. This special feature is the result of an extensive comparative research effort to investigate national level REDD+ policy processes and emerging... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Agency; Climate change; Comparative analysis; Discourse coalitions; Policy network analysis; Power; REDD+; SNA; Transformational change. |
| Ano: 2014 |
|
| |
|
|
| Walker, Brian H; CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems; brian.walker@csiro.au; Abel, Nick; CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems; nick.abel@csiro.au; Anderies, John M; School of Human Evolution and Social Change and School of Sustainability, Arizona State University; Marty.Anderies@asu.edu; Ryan, Paul; CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems; paul.ryan@grapevine.net.au. |
| We present a resilience-based approach for assessing sustainability in a sub-catchment of the Murray-Darling Basin in southeast Australia. We define the regional system and identify the main issues, drivers, and potential shocks, then assess both specified and general resilience. The current state of the system is a consequence of changes in resource use. We identify ten known or possible biophysical, economic, and social thresholds operating at different scales, with possible knock-on effects between them. Crossing those thresholds may result in irreversible changes in goods and services generated by the region. Changes in resilience, in general, reflect a pattern of past losses with some signs of recent improvements. Interventions in the system for... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Integrated assessment of regional resilience; Interventions to support specific and general resilience; Threshold interactions and cascades. |
| Ano: 2009 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Kinzig, Ann P; Arizona State University; Ann.Kinzig@asu.edu; Ryan, Paul; CSIRO; paul.ryan@csiro.au; Etienne, Michel; INRA; etienne@avignon.inra.fr; Allison, Helen; Murdoch University; helenallison@ozemail.com.au; Elmqvist, Thomas; University of Stockholm; thomase@ecology.su.se; Walker, Brian H.; CSIRO; Brian.Walker@csiro.au. |
| Most accounts of thresholds between alternate regimes involve a single, dominant shift defined by one, often slowly changing variable in an ecosystem. This paper expands the focus to include similar dynamics in social and economic systems, in which multiple variables may act together in ways that produce interacting regime shifts in social-ecological systems. We use four different regions in the world, each of which contains multiple thresholds, to develop a proposed “general model” of threshold interactions in social-ecological systems. The model identifies patch-scale ecological thresholds, farm- or landscape-scale economic thresholds, and regional-scale sociocultural thresholds. “Cascading thresholds,” i.e., the... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Thresholds; Regime shifts; Social-ecological systems; System interactions; Cascading effects. |
| Ano: 2006 |
|
| |
|
|
| Miller, Fiona; Department of Resource Management and Geography, University of Melbourne; millerf@unimelb.edu.au; Osbahr, Henny; School of Agriculture, Policy and Development and the Walker Institute for Climate Systems Research, University of Reading; h.osbahr@reading.ac.uk; Boyd, Emily; Sustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds; Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; e.boyd@leeds.ac.uk; Bharwani, Sukaina; Stockholm Environment Institute (Oxford); sukaina.bharwani@sei.se; Ziervogel, Gina; Stockholm Environment Institute (Oxford); Climate Systems Analysis Group (CSAG), University of Cape Town; gina@egs.uct.ac.za; Walker, Brian; CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Australia; Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; Brian.Walker@csiro.au; van der Leeuw, Sander; School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University; vanderle@asu.edu; Hinkel, Jochen ; Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research; hinkel@pik-potsdam.de; Downing, Tom; Stockholm Environment Institute (Oxford); tomdowning.sei@gmail.com; Folke, Carl; Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; The Beijer Institute, Stockholm University; carl.folke@beijer.kva.se; Nelson, Donald; Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia; Department of Anthropology, University of Georgia; dnelson@uga.edu. |
| Resilience and vulnerability represent two related yet different approaches to understanding the response of systems and actors to change; to shocks and surprises, as well as slow creeping changes. Their respective origins in ecological and social theory largely explain the continuing differences in approach to social-ecological dimensions of change. However, there are many areas of strong convergence. This paper explores the emerging linkages and complementarities between the concepts of resilience and vulnerability to identify areas of synergy. We do this with regard to theory, methodology, and application. The paper seeks to go beyond just recognizing the complementarities between the two approaches to demonstrate how researchers are actively engaging... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Climate change; Hazards; Interdisciplinarity; Resilience; Social-ecological systems; Vulnerability. |
| Ano: 2010 |
|
| |
|
|
| Gotts, Nicholas M.; Macaulay Land Use Research Institute; n.gotts@macaulay.ac.uk. |
| The paper compares two ambitious conceptual structures. The first is the understanding of social-ecological systems developed around the term "resilience," and more recently the term "panarchy," in the work of Holling, Gunderson, and others. The second is Wallerstein's "world-systems" approach to analyzing hierarchical relationships between societies within global capitalism as developed and applied across a broader historical range by Chase-Dunn and others. The two structures have important common features, notably their multiscale explanatory framework, links with ideas concerning complex systems, and interest in cyclical phenomena. They also have important differences. It is argued that there are gaps in both sets of ideas that the other might remedy.... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Adaptive cycle; Cross-scale interaction; Panarchy; Population; Resilience; Technology; World-systems.. |
| Ano: 2007 |
|
| |
|
| |
| Registros recuperados: 210 | |
|
|
|
