Abstract
Audouin, M., R. Preiser, S. Nienaber, L. Downsborough, J. Lanz, and S. Mavengahama. 2013. Exploring the implications of critical complexity for the study of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 18(3): 12. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05434-180312
Highlights
The complex nature of social–ecological systems is frequently recognized (Berkes et al 2003, Norberg and Cumming 2008)
We end with a brief application of the questions proposed to the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA) project in South Africa, to illustrate their potential use in the context of resource management
In terms of the policy environment, NFEPA had its roots in the Cross-Sector Policy Objectives for Inland Water Conservation, for example (South African National Biodiversity Institute 2008), which were formulated through a collaborative process
Summary
The complex nature of social–ecological systems is frequently recognized (Berkes et al 2003, Norberg and Cumming 2008). We investigate the implications of complexity for the study of social–ecological systems from this unique perspective These implications are discussed in terms of two broad categories, namely, (1) those that relate to engaging with different knowledge systems and types; and (2) the normative context governing our research scope. Based on this discussion, we propose five key questions to guide the design of research processes in a way that recognizes critical complexity. A second implication of the need to draw boundaries in the study of social–ecological systems is that such boundary definition cannot be made entirely objectively, but involves choices that are essentially value-based (Heylighen et al 2007) Tacit-formal: Knowledge that is not documented, but held in people’s memories and developed according to a set of universally accepted rules; for example, knowledge of scientists that is not codified; and
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have