Collectively engaging complex socio-ecological systems: re-envisioning science, governance, and the California Delta

Norgaard, Richard B.; Kiparsky, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2008.10.004

Cited by 79 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The greater awareness of complexity and contingency in ecology led to suggestions that references and endpoints should be viewed as dynamic (Norgaard et al 2009, Hiers et al 2012 or even that ecosystems could be allowed to develop without being directed at a particular endpoint (Hughes et al 2012). Hence, there has been a growing call for future-focused goals that are dynamic, process-based and functional but that still account for historical knowledge, a socalled ''Restoration v2.0'' (Higgs et al 2014), goals that align with anticipative management (e.g., Rogers et al 2015).…”

Section: Restoration Motivations and Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Simultaneous environmental changes challenge biodiversity persistence and human wellbeing. The science and practice of restoration ecology, in collaboration with other disciplines, can contribute to overcoming these challenges. This endeavor requires a solid conceptual foundation based in empirical research which confronts, tests and influences theoretical developments. We review conceptual developments in restoration ecology over the last 30 years. We frame our review in the context of changing restoration goals which reflect increased societal awareness of the scale of environmental degradation and the recognition that inter-disciplinary approaches are needed to tackle environmental problems. Restoration ecology now encompasses facilitative interactions and network dynamics, trophic cascades, and above-and belowground linkages. It operates in a non-equilibrium, alternative states framework, at the landscape scale, and in response to changing environmental, economic and social conditions. Progress has been marked by conceptual advances in the fields of trait-environment relationships, community assembly, and understanding the links between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Conceptual and practical advances have been enhanced by applying evolving technologies, including treatments to increase seed germination and overcome recruitment bottlenecks, high throughput DNA sequencing to elucidate soil community structure and function, and advances in satellite technology and GPS tracking to monitor habitat use. The synthesis of these technologies with systematic reviews of context dependencies in restoration success, model based analyses and consideration of complex socioecological systems will allow generalizations to inform evidence based interventions. Ongoing challenges include setting realistic, socially acceptable goals for restoration under changing environmental conditions, and prioritizing actions in an increasingly space-competitive world. Ethical questions also surround the use of genetically modified material, translocations, taxon substitutions, and de-extinction, in restoration ecology. Addressing these issues, as the Ecological Society of America looks to its next century, will require current and future generations of researchers and practitioners, including economists, engineers, philosophers, landscape architects, social scientists and restoration ecologists, to work together with communities and governments to rise to the environmental challenges of the coming decades.

show abstract

Section: Restoration Motivations and Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ecosystem services sometimes negatively relate to each other and so marine management decisions about offshore aquaculture need to consider interactions and changing values for now and in the future regime based on strategic vision, participation, and consensus building, while Grafton and Kompas (2005) called for a governance system that uses socio-economic criteria in the development of management goals as well as the physical design of the conservation areas themselves. With regard to the complexities implicit in larger-scale, social-ecological systems (SESs), Norgaard et al (2009) reported on the lack of clarity from policy-makers and lawmakers concerning setting objectives and accountability. Further, these authors cautioned that because professionals often participate more as individuals than as representatives, the knowledge lines are very fuzzy among different groups thus broader representative views may not always be captured.…”

Section: Developing a Multi-level Governance Framework For Offshore Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance and Offshore Aquaculture in Multi-resource Use Settings

Krause

Stead

2017

Aquaculture Perspective of Multi-Use Sites in the Open Ocean

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The notion of the sea as a seemingly endless source of resources has long dominated marine governance. This is despite that different perceptions and valuation systems underlie the institutional structures that govern and manage marine systems. Socio-political considerations cover the whole range of stakeholders and their type of involvement in the establishment and operation of multi-use offshore systems. However, within the vast variety of regulations inside the EU, the EU Member States as well as in North America, their implementation for offshore multi-use settings is as yet incipient and examples of best practice in multi-use scenarios are needed. These need to combine different knowledge systems (e.g. authorities, decision-makers, local communities, science, etc.) to generate effective insights into the management of multiple uses of ocean space and to complement risk-justified decision-making. Pre-existing social networks can provide significant political leverage for governance transformations as required for the move offshore. That said, a range of organizational and social challenges related to the collective use of a defined ocean territory have to be taken into account. For instance, the creation and compliance with defined responsibilities and duties or the introduction of cross-sectoral management lines, such as an offshore co-management, that integrates the different demands and practices of the involved parties within an operational scheme that is practical on a day to day manner are in case in point. Indeed, how people perceive and value marine environments and the resources they provide determines individual and collective preferences, actions and strategies in the marine realm.

show abstract

“…The theoretical underpinnings of novel ecosystems stem from the ecosystem approach and sustainability science, and bridge differing disciplines such as ecological design and restoration combined with collaborative governance in the landscape (Biermann 2007;Curtin 2014;Folke et al 2005;Kallis et al 2009;Norgaard et al 2009;Olsson et al 2004;Sinclair et al 2008). …”

Section: Opportunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel ecosystems and social-ecological resilience

Collier

2015

Landscape Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collectively engaging complex socio-ecological systems: re-envisioning science, governance, and the California Delta

Cited by 79 publications

References 12 publications

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

Advances in restoration ecology: rising to the challenges of the coming decades

Governance and Offshore Aquaculture in Multi-resource Use Settings

Novel ecosystems and social-ecological resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About