Social-ecological Systems Research Research Articles

Looking back to shape the future: Trajectories and resilience of social-ecological systems in the Global South.

In complex Social-Ecological Systems (SES), the interplay between ecological and social components shapes trajectories that impact human well-being and ecosystem services. While SES dynamics have been studied in static conditions, there has been less attention to how said systems respond to shocks and stressors over time and space. This special issue presents a collection of articles that use diverse methodologies-ranging from system dynamics modeling to participatory approaches-to analyze past SES changes and discuss future scenarios. Case studies from regions including Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Honduras, Chile, Ethiopia and Mongolia illustrate key variables influencing social-ecological transitions and provide insights into potential policy strategies to support sustainable SES. The studies underscore the need for multi-scalar approaches to SES research that explicitly theorize and empirically assess trajectories across space and time.

Considering temporality for SES analysis with reflections from urban food forests and orchards

ABSTRACT Social ecological systems research has noted various understandings and experiences of time, however, these engagements tend to be underdeveloped. In this paper, we consider how SES analyses can make diverse experiences of time more apparent and better support SES research, management, and policy making. To consider how diverse temporal experiences might be better integrated in SES, we sketch how time and temporality have been addressed in SES research and in the social sciences and humanities. We argue that insights from social science and humanities, as well as other adjacent disciplines, have paved the way for thinking critically, relationally, and intentionally about time and temporality. To illustrate how temporality can be considered and the usefulness of such consideration, we discuss conceptual insights in relation to a series of vignettes from ongoing research in urban food forests and orchards. Bringing together these insights and key concerns of SES research, we propose a series of questions for explicitly engaging with temporality, oriented around the concepts of relational change, space and place and bodies and practice. We suggest that a more explicit and critical temporal focus is vital for SES scholars’ recent calls and efforts to more meaningfully engage with diverse ontologies, world views, and experiences.

Disentangling the complexity of human–nature interactions

Abstract Human–nature interactions have been identified as an important leverage point for achieving sustainability. Processes to recognize, protect, improve and reimagine human–nature interactions will be central to shift the world to more sustainable and equitable pathways and futures. In the context of the interconnected and rapidly changing Anthropocene, work on human–nature interactions must move beyond dominant linear assumptions of a relatively simple and easily and predictably manipulated world to acknowledge and engage with the complex, dynamic, asymmetrical and unequal nature of the interactions connecting people and nature. Based on three key features highlighted by the study of complex social–ecological systems (SES)—that these systems are relational, open and dynamic—we propose three new directions for the study and management of human–nature interactions that can help to acknowledge and disentangle the globally intertwined and dynamic nature of these interactions. These features suggest new directions and foci for sustainability science: the inseparable and relational qualities of the interactions between people and nature; the cross‐scale nature of these relationships; and the continuously evolving and changing form of these relationships. To bridge the gap between the theory of complex, inseparable and unequal human–nature interactions and the reductionist tendencies in research and practice, SES research raises opportunities to connect local action and global learning; to mobilize and develop new cross‐scale and relational capacities to encourage synergies and avoid trade‐offs; and to explore, experiment and learn our way forward onto more sustainable and equitable pathways. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Eliciting the plurality of causal reasoning in social-ecological systems research

Eliciting the plurality of causal reasoning in social-ecological systems research

The evolution of social-ecological systems (SES) research: a co-authorship and co-citation network analysis

The evolution of social-ecological systems (SES) research: a co-authorship and co-citation network analysis

Integrating evolutionary theory and social-ecological systems research to address the sustainability challenges of the Anthropocene.

The rapid, human-induced changes in the Earth system during the Anthropocene present humanity with critical sustainability challenges. Social-ecological systems (SES) research provides multiple approaches for understanding the complex interactions between humans, social systems, and environments and how we might direct them towards healthier and more resilient futures. However, general theories of SES change have yet to be fully developed. Formal evolutionary theory has been applied as a dynamic theory of change of complex phenomena in biology and the social sciences, but rarely in SES research. In this paper, we explore the connections between both fields, hoping to foster collaboration. After sketching out the distinct intellectual traditions of SES research and evolutionary theory, we map some of their terminological and theoretical connections. We then provide examples of how evolutionary theory might be incorporated into SES research through the use of systems mapping to identify evolutionary processes in SES, the application of concepts from evolutionary developmental biology to understand the connections between systems changes and evolutionary changes, and how evolutionary thinking may help design interventions for beneficial change. Integrating evolutionary theory and SES research can lead to a better understanding of SES changes and positive interventions for a more sustainable Anthropocene. This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolution and sustainability: gathering the strands for an Anthropocene synthesis'.

A learning journey into contemporary bioregionalism

Abstract Bioregioning is a new wave of bioregional discourse that appears to be attracting interest among sustainability researchers and practitioners. Through interviews with contemporary leaders and a reflexive research process, we explored bioregioning experiences across seven countries. Our paper outlines the motivations, practices and narratives that we encountered and positions these observations against prior expressions of bioregional thought and broader themes in sustainability research. We found that in bioregioning, the concept of a bioregion remains important and seems to attract people to the discourse in three ways: It inspires visions of the future that encompass more‐than‐human thriving, it creates a conceptual container that enables a strategic narrative for change that connects places to larger scales, and it justifies the importance of everyday people exercising their right to ‘do’ something. The combination of these motivators shows bioregioning's relationship with earlier expressions of bioregional thought: Like early bioregional thinkers, regional scales carry cognitive and strategic appeal, and like critical bioregionalism, power and justice are foregrounded to ensure the process of change is ethical. We suggest that in the shift to bioregioning, the bioregion serves as a boundary device, justifying (for some) a focus on regional scale action which has made bioregional discourse unique, and for others, rationalising participatory or emotional priorities. This lets bioregioning enact a dialogic approach to change and enables practitioners to consider questions of scale in open dialogue with emotive place‐based dynamics, bringing nature re‐connection and social–ecological systems research into consideration and overlap with the practice of bioregioning. We observed parallels between our research process and the central features in bioregioning; both respond to ambitions and calls within sustainability to enact relational values and surface contextualised knowledge while also valuing generalisations and abstraction. Our study, we suggest, provides one example of how research into human–nature relationships in Western sustainability might be pursued in line with these ambitions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Agent decision-making: The Elephant in the Room - Enabling the justification of decision model fit in social-ecological models

Agent-based models are particularly suitable to reflect the dynamics of humans, nature, and their interactions, making them a crucial approach for understanding social-ecological systems. The formalisations of human decision-making are central to resulting model behaviours. Despite awareness of the complexity of human behaviour in social-ecological systems research, scholars tend to represent human decision-makers as simplified, perfectly informed rational optimisers, without explicitly considering the fit with decision context. Key reasons are a lacking uptake of social theories and insights. To advance, we need a practice of reflecting, sharing, and inquiring on the justification of the decision model fit with its context. This paper stimulates this practice by 1) supporting the justification of decision model (DM) fit by describing the DM landscape and providing guiding questions; and 2) by supporting researchers in considering alternative DMs through a survey-based impression of modeller practices, and through highlighting DM frontiers as inspiration for future research.

An Evolving Understanding of Sense of Place in Social-Ecological Systems Research and the Barriers and Enablers to its Measurement.

Social-ecological systems (SES) are changing more in the Anthropocene than ever before. With this also comes a change in Sense of Place (SoP), that is, the emotional bond that a person (or group of people) has with a place. This impacts how individuals and groups interact with a place (i.e., their behaviours) and respond to disturbance or change (i.e., their adaptive capacity). To understand how SoP is changing across space and time and to be able to compare this across social-ecological contexts, we must first take stock of how SoP is conceptualised so as to understand how to capture and measure the phenomena in a meaningful way (e.g., to inform policy). Based on in-depth qualitative interviews with leading SoP researchers (n = 17 from 8 countries) this paper aims to identify: (1) the current breadth of theoretical conceptualisations for SoP; (2) the methodologies that have been used to measure SoP in different contexts and settings; and (3) the barriers and (4) enablers to the use of different methodologies. Results show that there has been a change in how SoP has been conceptualised over time, whereby it was traditionally considered as something singular and limited, towards something much more dynamic. Results also show that diverse methods (both quantitative and qualitative) have been used to measure SoP, but the choice of method is often a result of resource constraints that limit research design. These findings suggest that broader collaboration among stakeholders and increased interdisciplinarity would undoubtedly lead to improved outcomes in our understanding of SoP, specifically how it is changing in response to anthropogenic pressures, and how the results can be integrated into policy and practice to support environment conservation and management. It is hoped these findings can help establish a community of practice around how we conceptualise SoP, and hence understand it, to create space for methodological integration and shared learnings as a field.

A Review of Social–Ecological System Research and Geographical Applications

This paper reviews the exploration and application of social–ecological systems research perspectives to sustainable development issues such as the areas of coupled human–earth relations, resource management, geographical landscape patterns, system dynamics, and the relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being, and summarizes practical approaches and applied techniques for solving social–ecological system problems in order to understand changes and relationships in complex systems better. The article summarizes the theoretical research on social–ecological systems by domestic and international scholars into six frameworks: system resilience, system cascade, nature’s contribution to humans based on ecosystem services, public resource system management, system behavior scenario analysis, and system regime shift. Innovative research and practice oriented to complexity, coupling, and nonlinearity have emerged. However, there are differences between scientific research and applied practice, including their theoretical and methodological orientations. We should be oriented to social–ecological system problems to achieve a transformation from components to relationships, from outcomes to processes, from single to open systems, from general interventions to context sensitivity, and from linear to complex causality to meet what is required from sustainability science and geography.

Approaches to Enhance Integration and Monitoring for Social-Ecological Systems

Integration and monitoring are pressing conceptual and methodological challenges in social-ecological systems (SES) research. This paper follows a social learning process, called participatory self-observation, piloted by a group of action-researchers to improve SES integration and monitoring, using the Tsitsa River Catchment in South Africa as a case study. The participatory self-observation process reflected on lessons to enhance integration and integrated monitoring of biophysical, social, and social-ecological data in SES projects; for adaptive planning and management. Three focal points emerged for improving the challenges of SES integration: the need for participatory people-based processes, the importance of applied praxis tasks to catalyze meaningful integration, and the need for transdisciplinary teams to value non-biophysical research. Five focal areas emerged as major challenges for SES monitoring: the integration of qualitative and quantitative data, data overload, the scale of SES monitoring, the need to center SES monitoring around learning, and good working relationships to enable data flow. Recommendations to further develop integrated monitoring and management of SESs include (i) using people-based approaches that focus on applied work which includes rigorous collection of quantitative, biophysical data, (ii) identifying essential data needs through an essential variable approach, and (iii) combining quantitative monitoring with participatory people-based processes.

Social-ecological change: insights from the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society

ABSTRACT Social-ecological systems (SES) research has emerged as an important area of sustainability science, informing and supporting pressing issues of transformation towards more sustainable, just and equitable futures. To date, much SES research has been done in or from the Global North, where the challenges and contexts for supporting sustainability transformations are substantially different from the Global South. This paper synthesises emerging insights on SES dynamics that can inform actions and advance research to support sustainability transformations specifically in the southern African context. The paper draws on work linked to members of the Southern African Program on Ecosystem Change and Society (SAPECS), a leading SES research network in the region, synthesizing key insights with respect to the five core themes of SAPECS: (i) transdisciplinary and engaged research, (ii) ecosystem services and human well-being, (iii) governance institutions and management practices, (iv) spatial relationships and cross-scale connections, and (v) regime shifts, traps and transformations. For each theme, we focus on insights that are particularly novel, interesting or important in the southern African context, and reflect on key research gaps and emerging frontiers for SES research in the region going forward. Such place-based insights are important for understanding the variation in SES dynamics around the world, and are crucial for informing a context-sensitive global agenda to foster sustainability transformations at local to global scales.

Integrated assessment across building and urban scales: A review and proposal for a more holistic, multi-scale, system-of-systems approach

Humanity is facing major societal challenges that are complex and systemic in the nature of their drivers, interactions, and impacts. Because buildings and cities play a substantial role in these societal challenges, we need reliable approaches that can be used to assess their resilience and sustainability. Given that building and urban systems are usually tightly coupled, we critically review nine building-scale assessment frameworks and seven urban-scale assessment frameworks, ranking them from high to low in terms of the causality among component systems. We identify four major knowledge gaps that, to varying degrees, span the entire range of assessment frameworks: (1) causality among component systems and their subsystems is limited; (2) sustainability and resilience are too narrowly defined; (3) social systems are inadequately addressed; and (4) building- and urban-scale assessments are poorly connected. To address these limitations, we briefly introduce several closely-related fields of research including integrated assessment and modeling, social-ecological systems research, land systems science, socio-environmental systems modeling, modeling of human behavior, multi-scale modeling, and multi-fidelity modeling. Building on these rapidly emerging research domains, we conclude by proposing a more holistic, multi-scale, system-of-systems approach that connects across building and urban scales using several common systems.

Updated census in the Laurentian Great Lakes Watershed: A framework for determining the relationship between the population and this aquatic resource

The Laurentian Great Lakes Watershed (LGLW) is a complex socio-ecological system that spans the United States and Canada and includes Anishinaabe Nations, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, and Métis Nations. However, this system contains overlapping political and ecological boundaries that do not conform, obscuring a true geographic definition of the LGLW and complicating the inclusion of population data in policy and social-ecological systems research. In this Short Communication, we provide a spatial framework for assessing the LGLW population using the watershed footprint under the Great Lakes Commission’s jurisdiction with international consistency to support regional science and policy, and discuss challenges in accurately assessing Indigenous areas. Using the best available sources, we estimate a population of 38,327,681 people (2015–2019) within the watershed and 133,737 residents within government-delineated Indigenous, First Nation, and Métis census areas of 2021.

Social-ecological feedbacks drive tipping points in farming system diversification

The emergence and impact of tipping points have garnered significant interest in both the social and natural sciences. Despite widespread recognition of the importance of feedbacks between human and natural systems, it is often assumed that the observed nonlinear dynamics in these coupled systems rests within either underlying human or natural processes, rather than the rates at which they interact. Using adoption of agricultural diversification practices as a case study, we show how two stable management paradigms (one dominated by conventional, homogeneous practices, the other by diversified practices) can emerge purely from temporal feedbacks between human decisions and ecological responses. We explore how this temporal mechanism of tipping points provides insight into designing more effective interventions that promote farmers transitions towards sustainable agriculture. Moreover, our flexible modeling framework could be applied to other cases to provide insight into numerous questions in social-ecological systems research and environmental policy.

NSF supported socio-environmental research: how do crosscutting programs affect research funding, publication, and citation patterns?

Recognizing the continued human domination of landscapes across the globe, social-ecological systems (SES) research has proliferated, necessitating interdisciplinary collaborations. Although interdisciplinary research started gaining traction in academic settings close to 50 years ago, formal frameworks for SES research did not develop until the late 1990s. The first National Science Foundation (NSF) funding mechanism specifically for interdisciplinary SES research began in 2001 and the SES-specific Coupled Natural Human (CNH) Systems program began in 2007. We used data on funded NSF projects from 2000 to 2015 to examine how SES research was funded, where the research is published, and the scholarly impact of SES research. Despite specific programs for funding SES research within the NSF, this type of research also received funding from non-SES mission programs (e.g., Ecosystem Science constituted 19% of grants in our study, and Hydrology constituted 16% of grants). Although NSF funding for SES research originates from across programs, the majority of products are published in journals with a focus on ecological sciences. Grants funded through the Coupled Natural Human Systems programs were more likely to publish at least one paper that was highly interdisciplinary (Biological Sciences [BE-CNH] constituted 70% of grants in program, and Geosciences [GEO-CNH] constituted 48% of grants) than the traditional disciplinary programs (Ecology [ES], 35% and Hydrology, 27%). This result highlights the utility of these cross-cutting programs in producing and widely disseminating SES research. We found that the number of citations was higher in BE-CNH and ES than other programs, pointing to greater scholarly impact of SES research in these NSF programs. Through our research, we identified the need for institutions to recognize research products and deliverables beyond the “standard” peer-reviewed manuscripts, as SES and interdisciplinary research and unconventional research products (e.g., popular press articles, online StoryMaps, workshops, white papers) continue to grow and are important to the broader societal impact of these types of research programs. This project demonstrates that the outcomes and products of grants awarded through the NSF CNH programs are important to furthering SES research and the programs should be valued and expanded in the future.

Fourteen propositions for resilience, fourteen years later

In 2006, Walker et al. published an article titled, “A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-ecological Systems.” The article was incorporated into the <em>Ecology and Society</em> special feature, Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. Walker et al. identified five heuristics and posed 14 propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. At the time, the authors hoped the paper would promote experimentation, critique, and application of these ideas in resilience and social-ecological systems research. To determine the extent to which these propositions have achieved the authors’ hopes, we reviewed the scientific literature on social-ecological systems since the article was published. Using Scopus, we identified 627 articles that cited the Walker et al. article. We then identified and assessed the articles relative to each proposition. In addition, we conducted a more general Scopus review for articles that did not cite the Walker et al. article specifically but incorporated a proposition’s concepts. Overall, articles often cite Walker et al. as a reference for a definition of a heuristic or ecological resilience generally and not to reference a specific proposition. Nonetheless, every proposition was at least mentioned in the literature and used to advance resilience scholarship on social-ecological systems. Eleven propositions were tested by multiple articles through application of case studies or other research, and 7 of the 11 propositions were substantially discussed and advanced. Finally, three propositions were heavily critiqued either as concepts in resilience literature or in their application.

Operationalizing agency in livelihoods research: smallholder farming livelihoods in southwest Ethiopia

Livelihoods are activities and practices in which social and environmental factors interlink, and they play a key role in achieving human well-being and environmental conservation. Livelihood analyses are therefore important to social-ecological systems research. With a few exceptions, however, the concept of agency has been largely missing in research applying the social-ecological systems approach. This is an important gap to address, because humans are not passive victims of broader sociopolitical trends and environmental changes, but rather play causative roles that shape history. This paper presents a conceptual framework that enables the explicit integration of agency into livelihood analyses, and is useful for examining the extent to which livelihoods enable people to be agents of their own well-being, and stewards of their environment. The framework has four pillars of agency: preconditions (referring to capital assets and resources, or CARs); processes (feedbacks and dynamics); power (the social and political fabrics, and relations in which livelihoods are embedded); and possibilities (the extent to which a present livelihood expands into future options, and builds the ability to act on options). The framework is then applied to a case study analyzing smallholder farming livelihoods and food security in southwest Ethiopia. The case study is based on empirical work involving quantitative survey, in-depth interviews, and focus-group discussions. This paper demonstrates the applicability of the framework to identifying agency constraints in smallholder farming, and helps determine areas where agency can be further strengthened. Beyond the case study, the framework may also be applied in other contexts and to other livelihood types. Its application can strengthen the contribution of livelihood analysis to social-ecological systems research by providing a way to operationalize and foreground agency.

A regional PECS node built from place-based social-ecological sustainability research in Latin America and the Caribbean

ABSTRACT Sustainability requires a combination of meaningful co-production of locally relevant solutions, synthesis of insights gained across regions, and increased cooperation between science, policy and practice. The Programme for Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS) has been coordinating Place-Based Social-Ecological Sustainability Research (PBSESR) across the globe and emphasizes the need for regional scientific nodes from diverse biocultural regions to inform sustainability science and action. In this paper, we assess the strengths of the PBSESR communities in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We provide an overview of PBSESR literature associated with this region and highlight the achievements of two prominent regional networks: The Social-Ecological Systems and Sustainability Research Network from Mexico (SocioEcoS) and the South American Institute for Resilience and Sustainability Studies from Uruguay (SARAS Institute). Finally, we identify the potential in these nodes to constitute a regional PECS node in Latin America and discuss the capacity needed to ensure such function. The results of the literature review show that while still loosely interconnected across the region, networks play key roles in connecting otherwise cloistered teams and we illustrate how the SocioEcoS network (focusing on transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge towards sustainability) and the SARAS Institute (focusing on innovative approaches for looking at complex social-ecological problems, rooted in slow science and arts) operate as key connectors in the region. We conclude that these organizations combined can embody a Latin American node for PECS, and would thereby not only contribute to regional but also global capacities to advance the sustainability agenda.

Drivers of collective action and role of conflict in Kenyan fisheries co-management

Fisheries in Kenya are experiencing social-ecological changes, impacting how they are governed via co-management. At the local level, these changes influence collective action, by influencing ecosystems, livelihoods and social cohesion. A critical research gap is to understand how fisheries conflict influences outcomes of collective action and the broader development of fisheries. In this article, we present a novel inquiry that contributes to this gap by examining the interplay between conflict and collective action within the frame of social-ecological systems research. We apply qualitative research methods, integrating Bennett’s conflict typology into Ostrom’s social-ecological systems framework, to present new evidence linking within and between group conflicts, to outcomes of collective action. We find leadership, gear technology, market dynamics, trust, cultural dependencies and past experiences influential in explaining dissimilar fisheries co-management outcomes in three cases. A closer look at fisheries co-management reveals that a sequence of early events, including conflict, has undermined collective action and sustainable resource use within fisheries, by altering social licence to operate and increasing transaction costs for decision making and cooperation. We use this empirical evidence to consider potential actions (e.g., recognising issue interdependencies and history) that can improve fisheries co-management in Kenya and thereby contribute to broader societal transformation.