Towards Integrating Political Ecology into Resilience-Based Management

Abstract

Abstract:One of the biggest challenges faced today is how to sustainably manage social-ecological systems for both ecological conservation and human wellbeing. This paper explores two approaches to understanding such systems: resilience thinking and political ecology. Resilience thinking is a framework that emerged over the last 40 years as a management strategy for social-ecological systems, and a resilient social-ecological system is capable of absorbing disturbances and still retaining its basic function and structure. Political ecology is derived from cultural ecology and political economy and aims to critically examine how human-environment interactions are linked to environmental problems while exploring issues of power. Drawing from debates and theoretical issues both within and between these two theories, this paper proposes three main arguments for integrating political ecology into managing for resilience. First, political ecology could help fill in understanding gaps in resilience with its focus on society and politics, while resilience thinking's focus on ecology can ensure that political ecology engages with ecology. Second, the multiple lenses of political ecology may help define the system for resilience management. Third, political ecology's explanatory power may assist in identifying surrogates of resilience for indirectly measuring social-ecological resilience.

The strategy of shifting cultivators in West Kalimantan in adapting to the market economy: empirical evidence behind gaps in interdisciplinary communication

“…The political ecology perspective places greater attention on structural, multiscale issues including policy effects and politics, historical change, social networks and gender, injustices and vulnerability, economic-political pressures, and concerns over climate change issues (Elmhirst et al 2017;Friedmann 2015;Li 2015;Mathevet et al 2015;Ndamani and Watanabe 2015;Olsson and Jerneck 2010;Peluso 1992Peluso , 2005Ring 2020;Sima et al 2015;Thung 2018;Toumbourou and Dressler 2020;Willow and Wylie 2014;Zanotti et al 2020;Zimmerer and Bassett 2003). A synergy of the two perspectives is crucial in order to reestablish an integrated understanding on the correlation between economic political struggle for environmental resources, the cultural meanings attached to an environment, and the changing dynamics of ecology-environment (Benjaminsen and Svarstad 2019;Nygren and Rikoon 2008;Peterson 2000;Quandt 2016).…”

“…Extending the form of analysis in this article can provide the knowledge needed to strengthen their position, given the major changes occurring in land use and land management. I have stressed the three domains: balancing economicpolitical struggle for environmental resources, the cultural meanings attached to the environment, and the changing dynamics of ecology-environment (Benjaminsen and Svarstad 2019;Nygren and Rikoon 2008;Peterson 2000;Quandt 2016).…”

“…To strengthen their position, the political ecology of the forces affecting their region can inform them (Li 2015;Peluso 2005;Toumbourou and Dressler 2020). Research, but also the perspectives underlying these two approaches, can help to reestablish an integrated understanding of the links between economic-political struggle for natural resources, the cultural meanings attached to the environment, and the changing dynamics of ecology-environment (Benjaminsen and Svarstad 2019;Nygren and Rikoon 2008;Peterson 2000;Quandt 2016).…”

Analysing the capacity to respond to climate change: a framework for community-managed water services

“…The choice of what to include within the system boundaries and scales of inquiry involves a values judgement about what is most important to consider. Explicit consideration of different perspectives in defining the units of analysis (Fabinyi et al, 2014) and what factors can be realistically controlled in a given context (Quandt, 2016) are recommended for defining boundaries and scales.…”

The 2014 volcanic eruption in Fogo and the reterritorialization process: from risk to geographic resilience

“…The introduction of well-defined territorial facts, in the case of community resilience is within the socio-ecological scope, for this means the autochthon natural resources are being considered as an effective response to risk situations. Authors such as Armitage (2006) and Quandt (2016) emphasize this perspective, considering the concept of resilience as a boundary of power between natural and social systems, faced as being part of a whole, i.e., starting with holistic territories.…”