Land-Change Science and Political Ecology: Similarities, Differences, and Implications for Sustainability Science

Abstract

Land-change science (LCS) and political ecology (PE) have emerged as two complementary but parallel approaches of addressing humanenvironment dynamics for sustainability. They share common intellectual legacies, are highly interdisciplinary, and provide understanding about changes in the coupled human-environment system. Distinctions in their problem framings and explanatory perspectives, however, have accentuated their differences and masked the symmetry in much of their findings relevant for sustainability themes. Focusing on their shared interests in the human-environment interactions of land use illuminates the differences and similarities relevant to these themes. Divergence is found primarily in regard to their different foci of interests about causes and consequences of land change. Convergence is revealed in the identification of the complexity of the interactions and the importance of context in land-change outcomes and in the general consensus found in such synthesis issues as forest transitions, vulnerability, and coproduction of science and application.

Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development

“…The emerging academic field focused on sustainability 1 aims to address complex anthropogenic challenges with a variety of research and teaching approaches that are problem driven and solution oriented (Kates et al 2001;Clark and Dickson 2003;Swart et al 2004; Komiyama and Takeuchi 2006;Grunwald 2007;Robinson 2008;Turner and Robbins 2008;Sarewitz and Kriebel 2010). The field's development is a response to existing and anticipated complex problems including climate change, desertification, poverty, pandemics, war-all featuring high degrees of complexity, damage potential, and urgency, and all having no obvious optimal solution.…”

Spatial patterns and driving forces of land use change in China during the early 21st century

“…In 1993, the two major international organizations of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) and the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP) put forward the scientific research program of LUCC as the core content of global change study (Lambin et al, 1995;Turner et al, 1995;Ojima et al, 2005). And then a new scientific plan of Global Land Project (GLP) as the succession of LUCC began in 2005, which emphasized the integration and simulation of the coupled human-environment system, based on which land use and land cover change has gradually become the major concern (IGBP Secretariat, 2005; and a "hot spot" in the new field of land change science (LCS) (Gutman et al, 2004;McMahon et al, 2005;Turner and Robbins, 2008).…”

Coupled social and ecological outcomes of agricultural intensification in Costa Rica and the future of biodiversity conservation in tropical agricultural regions

“…From this PE perspective natural resource access, use, and control cannot be understood without critically examining how land, labor, and financial resources are distributed among actors (Blaikie and Brookfield, 1987;Turner and Robbins, 2008;Peet et al, 2011). We draw from PE by utilizing stakeholder testimony to develop a qualitative chain of explanation to link sociopolitical drivers of change to local environmental and social outcomes and to assess the tradeoffs and consequences of agricultural intensification among different actors (Robbins, 2004;Turner and Robbins, 2008).…”