Skip header and navigation

3 records – page 1 of 1.

Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social-ecological systems.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature50613
Source
Environ Manage. 2004 Jul;34(1):75-90
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jul-2004
Author
Per Olsson
Carl Folke
Fikret Berkes
Author Affiliation
Department of Systems Ecology and Centre for Transdisciplinary Environmental Research, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden. potto@system.ecology.su.se
Source
Environ Manage. 2004 Jul;34(1):75-90
Date
Jul-2004
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Canada
Community Networks
Conservation of Natural Resources
Ecology
Ecosystem
Humans
Information Services
Knowledge
Organizational Culture
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Social Conditions
Sweden
Abstract
Ecosystems are complex adaptive systems that require flexible governance with the ability to respond to environmental feedback. We present, through examples from Sweden and Canada, the development of adaptive comanagement systems, showing how local groups self-organize, learn, and actively adapt to and shape change with social networks that connect institutions and organizations across levels and scales and that facilitate information flows. The development took place through a sequence of responses to environmental events that widened the scope of local management from a particular issue or resource to a broad set of issues related to ecosystem processes across scales and from individual actors, to group of actors to multiple-actor processes. The results suggest that the institutional and organizational landscapes should be approached as carefully as the ecological in order to clarify features that contribute to the resilience of social-ecological systems. These include the following: vision, leadership, and trust; enabling legislation that creates social space for ecosystem management; funds for responding to environmental change and for remedial action; capacity for monitoring and responding to environmental feedback; information flow through social networks; the combination of various sources of information and knowledge; and sense-making and arenas of collaborative learning for ecosystem management. We propose that the self-organizing process of adaptive comanagement development, facilitated by rules and incentives of higher levels, has the potential to expand desirable stability domains of a region and make social-ecological systems more robust to change.
PubMed ID
15383875 View in PubMed
Less detail

Adaptive governance, ecosystem management, and natural capital.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature267187
Source
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jun 16;112(24):7369-74
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-16-2015
Author
Lisen Schultz
Carl Folke
Henrik Österblom
Per Olsson
Source
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jun 16;112(24):7369-74
Date
Jun-16-2015
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Animals
Birds
Conservation of Natural Resources - legislation & jurisprudence - methods
Decision Making
Ecosystem
Europe
Fisheries
Maine
Marine Biology - legislation & jurisprudence - methods
Nephropidae
Sweden
Abstract
To gain insights into the effects of adaptive governance on natural capital, we compare three well-studied initiatives; a landscape in Southern Sweden, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, and fisheries in the Southern Ocean. We assess changes in natural capital and ecosystem services related to these social-ecological governance approaches to ecosystem management and investigate their capacity to respond to change and new challenges. The adaptive governance initiatives are compared with other efforts aimed at conservation and sustainable use of natural capital: Natura 2000 in Europe, lobster fisheries in the Gulf of Maine, North America, and fisheries in Europe. In contrast to these efforts, we found that the adaptive governance cases developed capacity to perform ecosystem management, manage multiple ecosystem services, and monitor, communicate, and respond to ecosystem-wide changes at landscape and seascape levels with visible effects on natural capital. They enabled actors to collaborate across diverse interests, sectors, and institutional arrangements and detect opportunities and problems as they developed while nurturing adaptive capacity to deal with them. They all spanned local to international levels of decision making, thus representing multilevel governance systems for managing natural capital. As with any governance system, internal changes and external drivers of global impacts and demands will continue to challenge the long-term success of such initiatives.
Notes
Cites: Curr Biol. 2008 Jun 24;18(12):R514-518579091
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Jul 15;105(28):9489-9418621698
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Jul 15;105(28):9477-8218621700
Cites: Trends Ecol Evol. 2010 Apr;25(4):241-919923035
Cites: PLoS One. 2010;5(9):e1283220877460
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Oct 26;107(43):18278-8520176947
Cites: Science. 2015 Mar 20;347(6228):1317-925792318
Cites: Conserv Biol. 2011 Oct;25(5):904-1221797925
Cites: Ambio. 2011 Nov;40(7):719-3822338712
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 May 8;109(19):7565-7022529388
Cites: Curr Biol. 2012 Jun 5;22(11):1023-822633811
Cites: Conserv Biol. 2012 Aug;26(4):638-4822624623
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 30;109(44):17995-923027961
Cites: Trends Ecol Evol. 2011 Jun;26(6):261-221497409
PubMed ID
26082542 View in PubMed
Less detail

The dynamics of ecosystems, biodiversity management and social institutions at high northern latitudes.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature178250
Source
Ambio. 2004 Aug;33(6):350-5
Publication Type
Article
Date
Aug-2004
Author
Thomas Elmqvist
Fikret Berkes
Carl Folke
Per Angelstam
Anne-Sophie Crépin
Jari Niemelä
Author Affiliation
Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, Sweden. thomase@ecology.su.se
Source
Ambio. 2004 Aug;33(6):350-5
Date
Aug-2004
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Animals
Arctic Regions
Conservation of Natural Resources
Ecosystem
Environment
Humans
Interinstitutional Relations
Policy Making
Social Conditions
Abstract
Ecosystems at high latitudes are highly dynamic, influenced by a multitude of large-scale disturbances. Due to global change processes these systems may be expected to be particularly vulnerable, affecting the sustained production of renewable wood resources and abundance of plants and animals on which local cultures depend. In this paper, we assess the implications of new understandings of high northern latitude ecosystems and what must be done to manage systems for resilience. We suggest that the focus of land management should shift from recovery from local disturbance to sustaining ecosystem functions in the face of change and disruption. The role of biodiversity as insurance for allowing a system to reorganize and develop during the disturbance and reorganization phases needs to be addressed in management and policy. We emphasize that the current concepts of ecological reserves and protected areas need to be reconsidered to developp dynamic tools for sustainable management of ecosystems in face of change. Characteristics of what may be considered as customary reserves at high latitudes are often consistent with a more dynamic view of reserves. We suggest new directions for addressing biodiversity management in dynamic landscapes at high latitudes, and provide empirical examples of insights from unconventional perspectives that may help improve the potential for sustainable management of biodiversity and the generation of ecosystem services.
PubMed ID
15387073 View in PubMed
Less detail