Advancing Empirical Approaches to the Concept of Resilience: A Critical Examination of Panarchy, Ecological Information, and Statistical Evidence

Abstract

Despite its ambiguities, the concept of resilience is of critical importance to researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers in dealing with dynamic socio-ecological systems. In this paper, we critically examine the three empirical approaches of (i) panarchy; (ii) ecological information-based network analysis; and (iii) statistical evidence of resilience to three criteria determined for achieving a comprehensive understanding and application of this concept. These criteria are the ability: (1) to reflect a system's adaptability to shocks; (2) to integrate social and environmental dimensions; and (3) to evaluate system-level trade-offs. Our findings show that none of the three currently applied approaches are strong in handling all three criteria. Panarchy is strong in the first two criteria but has difficulty with normative trade-offs. The ecological information-based approach is strongest in evaluating trade-offs but relies on common dimensions that lead to over-simplifications in integrating the social and environmental dimensions. Statistical evidence provides suggestions that are simplest and easiest to act upon but are generally weak in all three criteria. This analysis confirms the value of these approaches in specific instances but also the need for further research in advancing empirical approaches to the concept of resilience.

A dynamic management framework for socio-ecological system stewardship: A case study for the United States Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

“…Resilience is difficult to quantify (Kharrazi et al, 2016); however, it has been shown that some range of intermediate values is desirable in order to keep the state of a given SES in a region of high, and ideally maximum, sustainability (Goerner et al, 2015) while also considering the caveats noted by Benson and Craig (2014) on the evolution of the concept of sustainability over time. Therefore, resilience is a pre-condition for sustainability, although it is not itself a suitable foundation for a desired normative approach.…”

“…In a single-scale problem, the adaptive cycle was applied to study the historical development of a National Forest in Alaska (Beier et al, 2009). Recently, Kharrazi et al (2016) presented several advantages of the panarchy approach for addressing resilience issues when compared to the Ecological Information and Statistical Evidence approaches.…”

Operationalizing resilience for conservation objectives: the 4S's

“…Since both resource managers and stakeholders may only notice a state change when valued ecosystem traits or components are lost, a social–ecological approach to state identification may be inherently normative (i.e. values‐based) (Batavia & Nelson ; Davidson et al ; Kharrazi et al ), although resilience is considered rather to be descriptive by many authors (e.g. Derissen et al ) (e.g.…”

“…That is, success is value‐laden and these values must be acknowledged explicitly when assessing project outcomes (Batavia & Nelson ). Each manager must redefine resilience for each project (Kharrazi et al ). This means that managers may measure resilience as convenient to their existing projects and priorities.…”

Addressing Misconceptions to the Concept of Resilience in Environmental Education

“…However, despite its growing importance, the concept of resilience remains vague, on one hand hindering consistent meaningful application [9], while on the other hand, expanding its creative and trans-disciplinary scope [10]. The definition of the concept of resilience is influenced by one's disciplinary framework, socio-economic setting, and work experience [11]. While there are many definitions and measurements of resilience, a consensus among individual perspectives may be better achieved by understanding the common misconceptions of the concept.…”