Synthesis: Vulnerability, Traps, and Transformations—Long-term Perspectives from Archaeology

Abstract

ABSTRACT. In this synthesis, we hope to accomplish two things: 1) reflect on how the analysis of the new archaeological cases presented in this special feature adds to previous case studies by revisiting a set of propositions reported in a 2006 special feature, and 2) reflect on four main ideas that are more specific to the archaeological cases: i) societal choices are influenced by robustness-vulnerability trade-offs, ii) there is interplay between robustness-vulnerability trade-offs and robustness-performance trade-offs, iii) societies often get locked in to particular strategies, and iv) multiple positive feedbacks escalate the perceived cost of societal change. We then discuss whether these lock-in traps can be prevented or whether the risks associated with them can be mitigated. We conclude by highlighting how these long-term historical studies can help us to understand current society, societal practices, and the nexus between ecology and society.

Should Sustainability and Resilience Be Combined or Remain Distinct Pursuits?

“…Both have built the passage of time into their theoretical frameworks as well as the importance of history in creating context, but neither has effectively incorporated historical knowledge or, more generally, a long-term perspective (e.g., Redman et al 2004, Diamond 2005, Fisher et al 2009, Schoon et al 2011, Cooper and Sheets 2012. Just as resilience and sustainability practitioners have made poor use of history, those who do focus on the past and other cultures, such as historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists, have poorly framed their knowledge as useful to addressing today's challenges.…”

Enhancing the Resilience of Human–Environment Systems: a Social Ecological Perspective

“…The example of the U.S. debt ceiling debates, which raged in Washington in the latter part of 2011, exemplify what Schoon et al (2011) refer to as robustness-vulnerability tradeoffs and potentially devastating lock-in traps that often arise within non-resilient systems. It seems plausible to suggest that the disadvantageous tradeoffs favoring greater vulnerability (over robustness) and heightened potential for creating inescapable lock-in traps are occurring within the U.S. economic systems, and more broadly within the global economy, not because the U.S. government lacks the financial capital to invest in infrastructure development (environmental capital) or novel green energy technologies (technological and ecological capital), but rather because its politicians lack sufficient consensus and fortitude to take collective action (e.g., strategic investments of economic capital as an adjunct to cost-cutting measures) that would promote job growth, lower the national debt over the long run, while also reducing income inequality and strengthening social capital.…”

Adaptive pathways and coupled infrastructure: seven centuries of adaptation to water risk and the production of vulnerability in Mexico City

“…The concept of robustness-vulnerability trade-offs has been applied in several archaeological cases and rural CIS (Hegmon et al 2008, Cifdaloz et al 2010, Nelson et al 2010. The lessons learned from these cases underscore the costs of resilience and the impossibility of eliminating vulnerability (Schoon et al 2011). Eliminating vulnerability becomes even more untenable in an urban context.…”

“…In urban CISs, the decision pathways that tend to increase soft and hard infrastructure, staffed by people who could lose their jobs, becomes self-reinforcing. Positive feedbacks, path dependency, and system inertia, i.e., fundamental features of any socialecological system, put CISs at risk of lock-in or a rigidity trap (Schoon et al 2011, Wise et al 2014). …”