Framing management of social-ecological systems in terms of the cost of failure: the Sierra Nevada, USA as a case study

Abstract

Managing complex social-ecological systems in an era of rapid climate change and changing human pressures represents a major challenge in sustainability science. The Sierra Nevada, USA is a large social-ecological system facing a tipping point that could result in major ecosystem changes. A century of fire suppression and climate change have set the stage for mega-disturbances that threaten biodiversity, human life and values, ecosystem services, and forest persistence. Stakeholders face multidimensional and often contentious trade-offs with costs and benefits that can be mismatched in space and time. If compromises cannot be reached, the status quo is likely to continue, resulting in the conversion of large portions of a 100 000 km2 predominately mixed-conifer forest ecosystem to a chaparral-dominated ecosystem. We describe the outcomes of a continuation of the ecological status quo on biodiversity, cultural history, fire management, recreational value, and climate control, including indirect effects on water and food security and recreation. The social-ecological ramifications of such a future are undesirable for most stakeholders. Therefore, we contend that forest management conflicts should be framed in terms of the cost of failure of negotiations among stakeholders. Specifically, negotiations may benefit from (1) stakeholders quantifying their definitions of success and failure, (2) quantification of trade-offs and recognition of their multidimensionality, and (3) allowing for solutions that are heterogeneous in space and time. This approach may help stakeholders navigate the wicked problem of managing Sierra Nevada forests and other complex social-ecological systems.