Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 18
  • Print publication year: 2012
  • Online publication date: November 2012

16 - Promises and pitfalls of adaptive management in resilience thinking: the lens of political ecology

Summary

Introduction

Resilience thinking analyses the structure and function of a social–ecological system to inform adaptive management on how to avoid a regime shift into a new and potentially undesirable state (Walker et al., 2002). The focus of resilience approaches on how much shock a coupled social–ecological system can absorb and still remain within a desirable or undesirable state begs many questions about what that state is, why it is so desirable, and for whom. A social–ecological system is considered to be in a desirable state based on its ability to provide ecosystem services for societal well-being and development. Resilience studies to date have not adequately considered whose needs are being met from these goods and services and the politics of their distribution and management. These questions are relevant for understanding why the potential for adaptive management is often not realised. We use a combined social–ecological resilience and political ecology approach to make these connections. Our engagement with the analytical approach of social–ecological resilience provides a more nuanced understanding of the ecological structure and function of social–ecological systems. Political ecological insights contribute to an understanding of the political economy of natural resource use and management. Our goal in this chapter is to illuminate how combined social–ecological relations structure social–ecological systems can produce unequal outcomes that are often highly contested from the perspectives of competing resource users whose vision of a desirable state differs from one another.

Similar to Widgren (Chapter 6), we seek to invigorate political ecology by engaging with the ecological insights provided by resilience thinking. This is a major challenge in the field of political ecology, as ecology often takes a back stage to social–political dynamics (Turner, 2009). Political ecology is an interdisciplinary social scientific approach to the study of human–environmental relationships. Political ecologists examine how social and ecological processes interact and change over time with respect to natural resource management and environmental quality issues. The aim of integrating political ecological insights into resilience thinking is to address what we argue are the seemingly apolitical perspectives of resilience thinking (Kirchhoff et al., Chapter 3). We also problematise the current lack of attention paid to power relations and asymmetries in conceptualisations and prescriptions of adaptive management solutions in resilience thinking.

References
Adger, N.Brown, K.Tompkins, E. 2005 The political economy of cross-scale networks in resource co-managementEcology and Society 10 9http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art9/
Armitage, D.Johnson, D. 2006 Can resilience be reconciled with globalization and the increasingly complex conditions of resource degradation in Asian coastal regions?Ecology and Society 11 2http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art2/
Bennett, E. M.Peterson, G. D.Gordon, L. J. 2009 Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem servicesEcology Letters 12 1
Blaikie, P.Brookfield, H. 1987 Land Degradation and SocietyLondon, UKMethuen
Boyd, E.Osbahr, H.Ericksen, P. 2008 Resilience and ‘climatizing’ development: examples and policy implicationsDevelopment 51 390
Carpenter, S. R.Walker, B.Anderies, J. M.Abel, N. 2001 From metaphor to measurement: resilience of what to what?Ecosystems 4 765
Carpenter, S. R.Bennett, E. M.Peterson, G. D. 2006 Scenarios for ecosystem services: an overviewEcology and Society 11 29http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art29/
Carpenter, S. R.Mooney, H. A.Agard, J. 2009 Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the Millennium Ecosystem AssessmentProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106 1305
Chapin, F. S.Carpenter, S. R.Kofinas, G. 2010 Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planetTrends in Ecology and Evolution 25 241
FAO 1997 Code of Conduct for Responsible FisheriesRomeFAO
Folke, C.Carpenter, S.Walker, B. 2004 Regime shifts, resilience, and biodiversity in ecosystem managementAnnual Review of Ecology and Evolution Systems 35 557
Folke, C.Hahn, T.Olsson, P.Norberg, J. 2005 Adaptive governance of social–ecological systemsAnnual Review of Environment and Resources 30 441
Folke, C.Carpenter, S. R.Walker, B. 2010 Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformabilityEcology and Society 15 20http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/
Gunderson, L. H.Holling, C. S. 2002 Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural SystemsWashington, DCIsland Press
Harvey, D. 1974 Population, resources, and the ideology of scienceEconomic Geography 50 256
Harvey, D. 1981 The spatial-fix: Hegel, von Thunen, and MarxAntipode 13 1
Holling, C. S. 2001 Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systemsEcosystems 4 390
Jessop, R. 2006 Spatial fixes, temporal fixes and spatio-temporal fixesDavid Harvey: a Critical ReaderCastree, N.Gregory, D.Oxford, UKBlackwell Publishing142
Kautsky, N.Rönnbäck, P.Tendengren, M.Troell, M. 2000 Ecosystem perspectives on management of disease in shrimp pond farmingAquaculture 191 145
Lebel, L.Hoang Tri, N.Saengnoree, A. 2002 Industrial transformation and shrimp aquaculture in Thailand and Vietnam: pathways to ecological, social, and economic sustainability?Ambio 31 311
Lebel, L.Anderies, J.Campbell, B. 2006 Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social–ecological systemsEcology and Society 11 19http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art19/
Lebel, L.Mungkung, R.Gheewala, S.Lebel, P. 2010 Innovation cycles, niches and sustainability in the shrimp aquaculture industry in ThailandEnvironmental Science and Policy 13 291
MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) 2005 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis ReportWashington, DCIsland Press
Naylor, R. L.Goldburg, R. J.Primavera, J. 2000 Effect of aquaculture on world fish suppliesNature 405 1017
Norgaard, R. 2010 Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinderEcological Economics 69 1219
Raudsepp-Hearne, C.Peterson, G.Tengö, M. 2010 Untangling the environmentalist’s paradox: why is human well-being increasing as ecosystem services degrade?BioScience 60 576
Scheffer, M.Carpenter, S. R.Foley, J. A.Folke, C.Walker, B. H. 2001 Catastrophic shifts in ecosystemsNature 413 591
Smith, N. 1984 Uneven Development: Nature, Capital, and the Production of SpaceAthensUniversity of Georgia Press
TCMP (Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership) 2001 Tanzania Mariculture Guidelines Source Book. TCMP Working Document noDar es SalaamUnited Republic of Tanzania
Turner, B. L. 2008 A skeptic’s comments on resilience and alternative approaches to coupled human–environment systemsRe-framing Resilience: a Symposium ReportLeach, M. E.Brighton, UKSTEPS Centre, Institute for Development Studies1
Turner, M. 2009 Ecology: natural and politicalA Companion to Environmental GeographyCastree, N.Demeritt, D.Liverman, D.Rhoads, B.Hoboken, NJWiley-Blackwell181
Walker, B. H.Carpenter, S.Anderies, J. 2002 Resilience management in social–ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approachEcology and Society 6 14http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol6/iss1/art14/
Walker, B. H.Holling, C. S.Carpenter, S.Kinzig, A. P. 2004 Resilience, adaptability, and transformabilityEcology and Society 9 5http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/
Walker, B. H.Gunderson, L. H.Kinzig, A. P. 2006 A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social–ecological systemsEcology and Society 11 13http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/