Abstract
Wilson, S., L. J. Pearson, Y. Kashima, D. Lusher, and C. Pearson. 2013. Separating adaptive maintenance (resilience) and transformative capacity of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 18(1): 22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05100-180122
Highlights
The sustainability literature is replete with references to socialecological system (SES) resilience and transformation
Results indicated that (1) it is practicable to carry out a holistic assessment of SES characteristics, and (2) purposeful, positive transformation is supported by vision, identification with place, unhappiness, high personal contribution to social capital, open social networks, and latent capital(s)
The results indicate that Smith exhibited functions of strong personal satisfaction with status quo and positive identification with the community, and it perceived itself as having high community resilience or adaptive maintenance
Summary
The sustainability literature is replete with references to socialecological system (SES) resilience and transformation. There is a growing call (O’Brien 2011, Pelling 2011, Pelling and Manuel-Navarrete 2011) for more studies to investigate the two types of system changes to understand their distinctions and similarities, and how to deliberately transform systems and society. The purpose of this paper was to contribute to our understanding of the distinction between SES resilience and transformation, grounded in empirical research into two rural Australian communities. Concern for SES resilience (originally from the discipline of ecology, e.g., Holling 1973) and adaptive capacity (from a social-ecological perspective, e.g., Berkes et al 2003) has focused on efforts to enhance resilience and avoid system “failure”, collapse, regime shifts, or transformation (e.g., Vogel et al 2007, Biggs et al 2009)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have