马学成
, 巩杰, 柳冬青, 张金茜
兰州大学 资源环境学院 西部环境教育部重点实验室,甘肃 兰州 730000
Ma Xuecheng, Gong Jie, Liu Dongqing, Zhang Jinxi
中图分类号: P901;X171.1
文献标识码: A
文章编号: 1001-8166(2018)04-0435-10
通讯作者:
收稿日期: 2017-10-30
修回日期: 2018-02-9
网络出版日期: 2018-04-20
版权声明: 2018 地球科学进展 编辑部
基金资助:
作者简介:
First author:Ma Xuecheng (1993-), male, Haidong City, Qinghai Province, Master student. Research areas include social ecological system and ecosystem services.E-mail:maxch2016@lzu.edu.cn
作者简介:马学成(1993-),男,青海海东人,硕士研究生,主要从事社会生态系统和生态系统服务研究.E-mail:maxch2016@lzu.edu.cn
展开
摘要
社会生态系统是当前可持续性和全球变化研究的热点与核心议题。通过SCI-E和CNKI数据库,运用文献计量法对1980—2017年社会生态系统研究进展及热点进行分析。结果表明:①社会生态系统研究发展态势良好;发达国家的贡献较大,瑞典和美国占据领先地位,斯德哥尔摩大学是发文量最多的机构;国家(地区)与机构间的合作正在不断加强。②中国是最早开展社会生态系统研究的国家之一,但发展速度较慢,国际合作相对较弱,文献被引频次相对较低,国际影响力有待进一步提升。③重点研究主要表现在社会生态系统整体性与社会发展需求之间的协同性、社会生态系统复杂性与不确定性、社会系统与内外部环境的交互作用及演化机制等方面;此外,受人类活动和全球气候变化的胁迫,社会生态系统的响应与反馈机制及政策与决策研究尤为突出。
关键词：
Abstract
Social Ecological System (SES) is the core and highlight of the global change research and sustainability science. Based on Science Citation Index Expanded Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the situation of social ecological system research was analyzed via bibliometrics from 1980 to 2017. The results indicated that: ①The scientific outcomes of social ecological system research are increasing gradually. The developed countries have greatly contributed to it, such as, Sweden and the USA, the leading countries in this field, and Stockholm University is the dominant institution on publication of SES. Cooperation between countries (regions) and institutions is strengthening gradually. ② China is one of the frontier countries in the social ecological system research with a lower increasing speed, its international cooperation and the citation frequency of publications are relatively low, and its international influence should be strengthened in the future. ③ The research highlights are listed as follows: The synergy between social ecological system integrity and social development needs, the complexity and uncertainty of SES, the mechanism between social system and its environmental factors, etc. In addition, under the stress of human activity and global climate change, the research of response and feedback mechanism of SES and policy decision-making are one of the important topics of SES.
Keywords：
社会生态系统是人类社会存在和发展的基础,是指一个具有不可预期、自组织、非线性、多稳态、阈值效应、历史依赖等特征[1],由生物、地理、自然元素与相关的社会行为者、社会体制所组成的复杂交互系统[2]。社会生态系统的子系统有资源系统(如沿海渔业)、资源单位(如龙虾)、管理系统(如管理沿海渔业的政府组织和相关规则)和用户(如渔民),它们彼此之间交互且直接影响社会生态系统最终的互动结果,同时又受其反作用[3]。社会生态系统重在强调人类社会与自然环境之间的整体性和协调性,它不是把社会系统机械地嵌入到生态系统里,也不是把生态系统生硬地纳入到人类社会中,而是2种不同系统的耦合,尽管其社会与生态成分可单独识别,但不可轻易将其分开[4]。人类社会一直依赖于自然和环境,并与之相互影响相互作用,但其作为科学问题进行相关研究源于20世纪70年代,如马世骏1981年提出的社会—经济—自然复合生态系统、吴传钧1991年提出的人地关系地域系统、叶笃正2001年提出的有序人类适应等理念,都是基于人与自然环境协调发展的思想来探讨生态环境与社会发展问题。随后,国际上开展了一系列的社会生态系统科学研究和项目实践,并取得了显著成效,如瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学对社会生态系统领域开展了较为详尽的科学研究[57];成立于1999年的恢复力联盟(Resilience Alliance)致力于社会生态系统的动态演化分析,先后开展了恢复力概念、适应性与转换力评估、治理对策等研究[810]。2009年,Ostrom[3]的社会生态系统可持续性研究框架文献,将社会生态系统研究提上了新的高度,吸引了全球可持续性领域众多学者的广泛参与。当前,随着地球表层环境的快速变化,生物居住栖息地环境遭受极大的压力和破坏,自然资源严重受损[11],严重阻碍了区域生态环境健康与人类可持续发展进程。因此,在高强度人类活动和全球环境快速变化的双重驱动下,研究社会生态系统的动态变化,对加深理解全球环境变化、维持复杂世界各组成系统的稳定发展、实现自然生态和人类社会可持续发展与制定区域协调发展政策具有重要的理论和现实意义[12]。
文献计量是一种基于数理统计的定量分析方法,它以科学文献的外部特征为研究对象,研究文献的分布结构、数量关系、变化规律和定量管理,进而探讨科学技术的某些结构、特征和规律[13],近年来已被众多国内外学者采用[14,15]。本文以社会生态系统为主题,利用文献计量归纳国内外社会生态系统研究的现状,分析该领域国际发展态势及研究热点,为社会生态系统后续研究提供借鉴参考。
以美国科学信息研究所的SCI-E (Science Citation Index Expanded) 数据库为数据源分析国际上社会生态系统领域研究进展,以SCI-E数据库中检索到的来自中国的英文文献和CNKI数据库中的中文文献分析国内社会生态系统领域研究态势。在SCI-E数据库中,检索主题为“Social ecological system”,文献类别为“Environmental sciences or Ecology or Environmental studies or Geography”,文献类型为“Article”,筛选得到国际论文共3 189篇;在CNKI数据库中,检索主题为 “社会生态系统or社会经济自然复合生态系统or复合生态系统or社会复合生态系统or生态社会复合系统”,筛选获得文献共366篇,数据采集时间为2017年4月30日。借助CiteSpace软件,在Excel软件中对论文数、总被引频次、篇均被引频次及关键词等指标进行归纳整理,分析该领域研究的发展态势及热点。
根据SCI-E和CNKI数据库,得到社会生态系统研究文献发表情况(图1)。从文献数量来看,国际上1990年发表了第一篇社会生态系统研究的英文文献,2002年之后文献量迅速增加,2016年发文量为431篇。国内1981年马世骏发表了第一篇社会生态系统相关的中文文献,到2002年期间共发文269篇,之后文献数量变化不大,2016年发文量为59篇。
图1 社会生态系统研究论文年度变化趋势(1980—2017年)
1980—1990年SCI-E数据库无社会生态系统研究文献收录,国内仅有35篇相关中文文献,故
Fig.1 Annual change trend of social ecological system research papers from 1980 to 2017
The start year of the figure is 1990 due to there are no papers on social ecological system included in the SCI-E database and there are only 35 Chinese literatures from 1980 to 1990
从论文增长率来看,1990—2017年,社会生态系统论文增长率处于波动状态,国内论文年均增长率为8.54%,国际论文年均增长率为21.05%。总体来看,2002年之前国际发文数量一直低于国内发文数量(除1997年和1999年外),2002年之后国际发文量进入快速增长阶段,说明国际社会对该领域研究越来越重视,而国内文献增长缓慢,整体发展势头不突出。
3.2.1 主要研究国家分析
开展社会生态系统研究的国家与地区由1981年的1个增加到2016年的86个,其中美国发文最多(发文量1 220篇,占总发文量的38.26%),中国的发文量为237篇(占总发文量的7.43%)。1980—2017年发文量前10位的国家及前7位国家的历年发文情况见表1和图2。从表1可以看出,篇均被引频次最高的是瑞典,除此之外,美国的各项指标均明显高于其他国家,说明美国对社会生态系统研究的关注较大。尽管瑞典发文量相对较少,但其被引频次及H指数排在美国和英国之后,这3个国家社会生态系统研究的综合影响力较高。中国除发文数排在第7位之外,其他指标均较低,影响力相对较弱。
表1 发文量前10位国家的论文量及其被引用情况(1980—2017年)
Table 1 Papers numbers and its citation of the top-10 countries from 1980 to 2017
| 国家 | 发文量 /篇 | 总被引频次 /次 | 篇均被引频 次/(次/篇) | H指数 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 美国 | 1 220 | 31 230 | 25.60 | 83 |
| 澳大利亚 | 427 | 11 293 | 26.45 | 47 |
| 英国 | 370 | 11 599 | 31.35 | 50 |
| 加拿大 | 306 | 8 132 | 26.58 | 42 |
| 德国 | 296 | 6 180 | 20.88 | 38 |
| 瑞典 | 280 | 11 460 | 40.93 | 47 |
| 中国 | 237 | 2 102 | 8.87 | 23 |
| 荷兰 | 199 | 5 328 | 26.77 | 36 |
| 西班牙 | 173 | 3 169 | 18.32 | 32 |
| 法国 | 144 | 2 536 | 17.61 | 24 |
图2 国际前7位主要国家历年发文情况(1980—2017年)
1980—1990年SCI-E数据库无社会生态系统研究文献收录,国内仅有35篇相关中文文献,故
Fig.2 Annual paper numbers of the top-7 countries from 1980 to 2017
The start year of the figure is 1990 due to there are no papers on social ecological system included in the SCI-E database and there are only 35 Chinese literatures from 1980 to 1990
社会生态系统研究中,自1990年起美国一直处于主导地位,除了中国在1981年发表了第一篇中文文献外,其他国家主要从1998年才加入到社会生态系统的研究中(图2)。中国于1992年由中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所的闻大中和美国康奈尔大学的David Pimentel联合发表了第一篇相关英文文献,2003年发文量开始缓慢增长。2010—2016年,各国发文数量增长幅度较大,这主要是由国际科学界认识到该领域研究的重要性及迫切性而导致的。
3.2.2 主要研究机构分析
开展社会生态系统相关研究的国际科研机构由1990年的3个增加到2016年的246个,国内研究机构由1981年的1个增加到2016年的33个。国际前10和国内前5的研究机构及其关注的10个研究主题见表2,这些高产机构多来自美国等发达国家,只有中国是发展中国家。发文量最多的机构是斯德哥尔摩大学(占前10机构总发文量的5.64%)。来自美国、瑞典和澳大利亚科研机构的发文量和篇均被引频次超过其他机构,有着强大的科研实力;中国科学院发文量居于第7位,篇均被引频次相对较低。中国科学院是国内社会生态系统研究的引领者之一,所属的生态环境研究中心与沈阳应用生态研究所的发文较多,其次是北京师范大学和北京大学等(表2)。各个研究机构所关注的主题不尽相同,概括有:全球变化背景下的社会生态系统动态机制、政策与决策管理、生态系统服务及生物多样性、可持续发展及影响因素、气候变化影响、景观格局—过程和生态整合等。
表2 国际前10和国内前5研究机构的发文情况及研究主题(1980—2017年)
Table 2 Paper number and research topics of the top-10 international institutions and top-5 domestic institutions from 1980 to 2017
| 机构 | 发文量 /篇 | 篇均被引频次 /(次/篇) | 研究主题 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stockholm University | 180 | 54.76 | 社会生态系统, 恢复力,政策与决策,生态系统服务,生物多样性,可持续性,系统论,气候变化,生态系统,适应性 |
| Arizona State University | 114 | 57.5 | 社会生态系统,恢复力,政策与决策,概念框架,气候变化,生态系统服务,可持续性,脆弱性,适应性,系统论 |
| Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) | 110 | 46.47 | 社会生态系统,政策与决策,气候变化,恢复力,生态系统服务,可持续性,生物多样性,适应性,脆弱性,系统论 |
| University of California System | 108 | 26.56 | 恢复力,社会生态系统,政策,可持续性,气候变化,生态系统,生物多样性,生态系统服务,系统论,景观 |
| James Cook University | 89 | 25.37 | 恢复力,社会生态系统,政策,气候变化,生物多样性,生态系统服务,渔业,适应性,脆弱性,资源管理 |
| Wageningen University Research Center | 82 | 32.88 | 社会生态系统,政策与决策,恢复力,生态系统服务,可持续性,气候变化,生物多样性,适应性,景观,土地利用 |
| Chinese Academy of Sciences | 80 | 13.1 | 系统论,生态系统,政策,土地变化,生态系统服务,城市,脆弱性,社会生态系统,可持续性,自然生态 |
| United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) | 70 | 26.96 | 资源管理,社会生态系统,生态系统服务,系统论,恢复力,可持续性,生态系统,生态恢复,政策与决策,生物多样性 |
| State University System of Florida (SUSF) | 63 | 61.38 | 气候变化,社会生态系统,资源管理,生态系统服务,生态恢复,影响因素,可持续性,土地利用,生态系统,恢复力 |
| Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) | 59 | 18.73 | 生物多样性,可持续性,生态系统服务,系统论,资源管理,生态系统,土地利用,气候变化,影响因素,景观 |
| 中国科学院 | 189 | 23.48 | 土壤养分及水分,复合生态系统,生态系统服务,流域生态,脆弱性,可持续性,政策管理,土地利用,驱动因素,扩散模型 |
| 北京师范大学 | 32 | 25.81 | 指标体系,自然资源管理,恢复力,复杂性,稳定性,生物多样性,城市,生态整合,农林业复合系统,农村生态系统健康 |
| 北京大学 | 28 | 8.56 | 可持续性,生物多样性,适应性,生态系统服务,政策管理,景观生态风险,景观格局—过程,城市,生态风险评价,气候变化 |
| 北京林业大学 | 23 | 18.78 | 水土资源,生态系统,水土保持,复合生态系统,生态补偿,生态建设,生态位理论,指标体系,不确定性,林草复合生态工程 |
| 华东师范大学 | 17 | 20.29 | 影响因素,系统动力学,生态绿地系统规划,生态流,生态系统服务,生态安全,环境变化,温度,流域生态,水资源 |
3.2.3 国际合作分析
运用CiteSpace软件对SCI-E数据库中检索到的英文文献进行文献共被引分析,得到社会生态系统研究国际合作网络图谱(图3)。美国、瑞典、澳大利亚、英国、德国与其他国家之间的合作较为密切,澳大利亚节点的中心性最大(0.68),瑞典次之(0.57),绝大多数国家都与他们有着直接或间接的合作关系;中国为0.05,说明在社会生态系统领域与国际间的合作相对较弱。美国的合作国家主要有瑞典和加拿大,合作频次在10以上的有34个机构为此贡献力量。总体上,国际合作研究正在加强。
图3 社会生态系统研究国际合作情况
Fig.3 International cooperation in the field of social ecological system
关键词是文献研究内容的精炼与概括,分析关键词频次能够反映出某一研究领域的发展现状和关
键,而高频关键词一定程度上可以看作是该领域研究的热点[15]。基于SCI-E和CNKI数据库检索的历年文献数量变化情况、CiteSpace软件统计的历年文献关键词共现聚类状况并参考大量相关文献,将1980—2017年关于该领域研究的热点归纳为4类,再借助Excel软件对各个关键词(频次大于5的关键词)词频进行累加排序,选取高频关键词作为代表性关键词(表3),并对其作简要概述。
表3 社会生态系统领域研究热点
Table 3 Hottest keywords in the field of social ecological system
| 热点主题 | 代表性关键词 | 词频合计/次 |
|---|---|---|
| 政策与决策 | conservation, ecosystem management, biodiversity conservation, adaptive governance, comanagement, policy, decision making, perspective | 3 102 |
| 恢复力与脆弱性 | resilience, vulnerability, framework, model, dynamics, pattern, restoration, threshold, stability, climate change, environmental change | 2 024 |
| 复杂性与不确定性 | complexity, uncertainty, system, ecological system, social system, ecology, forest, mating system, agriculture, landscape ecology | 1 472 |
| 可持续性 | sustainability, sustainable development, indicator, ecological economics, evolution, biodiversity, population, community | 1 272 |
3.3.1 政策与决策分析
科学研究与政策间的互动至关重要,政策通过影响生产资料的分配、土地利用方式改变等直接或间接影响社会生态系统结构与功能演变,开展社会生态系统对政策的响应与反馈机制研究有益于提出更好的服务于人类福祉的决策方案和管理策略[16,17]。Kanyuuru等[18]评估了肯尼亚北部牧场社区应对日益增长的社会经济和环境因素的制度政策,指出联合管理才是应对当下急剧变化的关键。随着相关研究的深入,基于生态系统服务的社会生态系统决策研究成为热点,基于生态系统服务的社会生态系统决策成为一种新思路[19,20],然而,目前的“生态系统服务”偏于强调生态系统的自然属性,而对社会系统属性及其关联性关注不多,以至于会造成一些不当政策的干预。目前,严格意义上不受人类活动干扰的纯自然生态系统越来越少,因此,一些学者提出“社会生态系统服务”的研究理念,重点突出社会生态系统自身动态及对政策响应的复杂机制,特别强调人类社会与生态环境间的关系[21]。尽管已经开展了一系列关于自然资源—社会发展需求之间权衡研究,但由于社会生态系统是一个复杂交互系统,目前仍无法从整体上把握系统发展的规律,所以如何测度其决策的目标及评价标准等问题一直是该领域的难点[22,23]。
3.3.2 恢复力和脆弱性分析
恢复力起初是指生态系统吸收变化并能继续维持的能力量度[24],Walker等[25]在研究外部干扰下社会生态系统未来演化轨迹的属性时,将其认为是系统能够承受且可以保持系统的结构、功能、特性以及对结构、功能的反馈在本质上不发生改变的干扰大小。恢复力反应了复杂适应系统进行自组织、学习并构建适应力的能力[26],其研究方法多样,如主成分分析、层次分析等统计学方法和空间恢复力模型、概念线性模型、综合指标模型等模型方法。如王群等[27]通过建立社会生态系统恢复力测度指标,利用集对分析法探讨了千岛湖旅游地社会生态系统恢复力影响因素的机理及曲线规律;Lacitignola等[28]基于社会生态系统模型,研究了大众游客和生态游客之间相互共存的动力机制以及系统达到均衡与稳定状态的参数条件,并讨论了改善其适应性能力的可能性;Marín等[29]建立了一个交互植被、灌木丛林地健康、胭脂虫收集、果实采收和饲养禽畜的数值模型,分析了秘鲁安第斯仙人掌属植物灌木丛的社会生态系统的动力学机制。
脆弱性被认为是与社会群体的敏感性、灾害暴露程度以及与社会经济文化背景相关的应对灾害事件能力的一种综合属性[30],Brikmann[31]通过对其扩展过程的研究,将其内涵从基于风险因子的内源性脆弱,拓展到结合自然、经济、社会、环境、组织和机构等特征的综合概念。相关研究成果也由侧重于单一视角(割裂了社会生态系统内在联系)开始注重不同系统间的耦合作用,研究内容集中于生态环境脆弱性领域以及局部案例实证研究,特别关注气候变化背景下的脆弱性产生机制、表征以及脆弱性评价等;主要评价方法有综合指数法、图层叠置法、脆弱性函数模型评价法、模糊物元评价法和危险度分析法等。如Johnson等[32]运用一种用于评估气候变化脆弱性的半定量方法,分析了太平洋岛国粮食安全与澳大利亚Carpentaria渔业对气候变化的脆弱性;Frazier等[33]基于SERV (Spatially Explicit Resilience-Vulnerability) 模型对美国Sarasota的人地系统脆弱性进行研究,并探讨了脆弱性和恢复力之间的关系,为其空间格局研究提供了范式模型;Liu等[34]基于自然资源、自然环境和社会经济的评价体系,指出受土地荒漠化和气候变化的影响,山区生态系统比平原区脆弱,社会生态系统脆弱性日趋恶化。
恢复力与脆弱性作为描述社会生态系统对外界干扰反应的术语,两者间的关系很难确定,如同硬币的两面:即脆弱性的反面就是恢复力[35];也有人认为恢复力和脆弱性如同一个双螺旋结构,在不同的社会层面和时空尺度中交叉,既相联系但不相关,简言之,两者之间的关系仍值得商榷[26]。社会生态系统是特定时间和空间尺度下社会生态经济相互作用的复合系统,恢复力、潜力和连通度被认为是描述社会生态系统适应性循环过程和系统状态的关键性指标,适应性循环理论可用于分析和揭示社会生态系统的动态机制[36,37]。解释社会系统是如何在其所处的生态、经济等环境发生变化时表现出适应这种变化的动态实践以及这些社会系统与其所处环境的交互作用和变化机制,已成为社会生态系统领域研究的科学基础与重点[38,39]。
3.3.3 复杂性与不确定性分析
社会生态系统是一种动态等级结构,类似于“动物体—器官—组织—细胞—蛋白质”层级结构[40],因此,必须要以多尺度的视角来分析,其尺度包括微观系统(影响个人身理、心理和社会角色的各种因素)、中观系统(对个人有影响的家庭、单位和其他社会群体)和宏观系统(比家庭等小群体更大的社会系统)[41]。复杂性在于社会系统和生态系统各层级之间的互动性,表现在2个或更多组成成分是连在一起且很难分离又相互影响,一般基于混沌理论、分形理论和耗散结构理论来开展研究,不确定性主要指系统结果的不可预测性[3]。如农业生产系统是由多维成分和驱动因素的交互组成的:Eakin等[42]分析了美国亚利桑那州中部城郊农业区农民对当前环境变化的响应,涉及了大宗商品和土地市场、水产方面的社会制度与环境,并提到认知和制度是影响农民应对环境变化能力的两大主导因素;Walters等[43]结合定性和定量数据基于系统动力学模型,探讨了各个驱动因素之间是如何系统、动态地相互作用并影响居民福祉的。
不同空间尺度下社会生态系统的布局和流动特征不同,同样,不同时间尺度下,人类社会经济发展阶段和生态系统演替进程的动态变化也影响着社会生态系统的变化[44]。如村落作为乡村的基本社区单位,是农户进行生产活动的基础环境。Urgenson等[45]在四川白乌河流域彝族村落开展了局域、流域和国家3个尺度上的适应性循环过程分析,探讨了3个循环内部及外部资源使用者、资源和制度之间的动态性和交互性;Finkbeiner[46]以小尺度渔业为研究对象,表明其对人类生计和粮食安全至关重要,多元化生产对风险消减和收入稳定起着重要作用。总之,社会生态系统分析的关键在于如何分析不同时空下多层次社会生态系统的复杂性[37,47]。
3.3.4 可持续性分析
协调环境、经济和社会之间的相互联系是可持续性研究的焦点和难点[48],而社会生态系统理论正是立足于人地和谐思想来探讨自然生态与社会发展问题,已成为可持续性研究的一个新议题[49]。可持续性评价体系的建立多基于压力—状态—响应(Pressure-State-Response, PSR)、驱动力—状态—响应(Driving force-State-Response, DSR)、驱动力—压力—状态—影响—响应(Driving force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response, DPSIR)、三维结构等框架,评价指标复杂多样。实现全球可持续发展是人类的最终目标,因此可持续性研究需要注重多尺度分析,Estoque等[50]基于可持续性的3个支柱(经济繁荣、社会公平和环境质量)构建社会生态系统指标,分析世界不同国家2010年的社会经济状况,提到社会生态系统指标主要在亚洲、美洲和非洲国家较低;Rasch等[51]以南非半干旱区为例,利用社会生态模拟模型评价了持续放牧和轮转放牧2种方式下的社会生态系统效益,指出保持基本不变放养率的持续放牧方式会带来更好的社会生态效益;Sharma等[52]以巴拿马Piriatí和Ipetí为对象,结合土地覆被数据、半结构访谈和调查的日常社会经济数据,运用ArcGIS和多变量统计,开展了社会生态系统可持续发展的空间变化研究。总之,目前社会生态系统可持续性评价内容侧重于生态环境或经济发展或社会发展等,如何对社会、生态、经济可持续协调评价并应用于实践及对可持续发展能力的评价将是以后研究的重点[48,53]。
3.3.5 研究热点之间的联系分析
地球表层生命系统及其环境有着很高的复杂性,很难用单一学科的理论和方法来分析这种复杂性[54]。可持续性终极目标是在系统具有不确定性的内部动态和外部干扰的状况下,满足当代人和后代人的物质和精神需求,其不确定性的出现为政策决策提供了很大选择空间[55];它以环境、经济和社会的相互关系为核心内容,其内容往往因时、因地、因人而异,所以说可持续性研究突出于人与环境之间的动态关系(特别是耦合系统的脆弱性、抗扰性、弹性和稳定性)的整合型[48]。人类需求会因社会经济状况、文化传统、生活方式等诸多因素而改变,以社会生态系统理论为框架,从复杂系统动力学的视角研究系统对外界干扰的恢复力与脆弱性既可以为可持续性研究寻求出路[49],其中适应性研究曾作为脆弱性研究的部分被提出,后自成体系[56],并逐渐提升到可持续发展能力建设的层面[57],如Chaudhury等[58]以尼泊尔、巴基斯坦和加纳开展适应气候变化政策的案例研究,分析了各个体系结构的特征,为全球相关国家理解适应、制定政策和实施提供借鉴依据;也可以为公共资源管理提供策略[56]。不合理的经济发展模式和生产方式会带来区域生态环境的破坏及恶化,又好又快的经济发展方式需要源源不断的自然资源和社会稳定来支持,而社会稳定和谐与经济健康快速发展可以改善和提高自然生态环境质量[59],因此全面、系统、客观地对一个区域的可持续状态进行评估,是为决策者提供合理的科学依据并推进区域可持续性进程的关键环节[54,60]。
通过对社会生态系统研究文献进行数据挖掘与分析,认识如下。
(1)社会生态系统研究发展态势良好,发达国家对其贡献较大,且与其他国家(地区)之间的合作研究较为密切,瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学为主要贡献机构;中国是开展社会生态系统研究较早的国家之一,其发展速度平缓,文献被引频次相对较低,国际影响力相对较弱,但对整个社会生态系统与人类福祉关系研究具有十分重要、不可或缺的作用。
(2)社会生态系统重点研究主要表现在社会生态系统整体性与社会发展需求之间的协同性、社会生态系统复杂性与不确定性、社会系统与内外部环境的交互作用及演化机制等方面;此外,受人类活动和全球气候变化的胁迫,社会生态系统的响应与反馈机制研究备受关注,其中政策与决策研究尤为突出。一些存在的问题:尽管社会生态系统为可持续性研究提供了一个新议题,但其仍是一个拥有多稳态机制的复杂适应性系统,涉及大量非线性因素;社会生态系统研究还停留在理论辨析和案例评价层面,缺乏完善的统一体系和方法;受社会生态系统研究的复杂性和交叉性,加上文献计量分析本身存有一定的局限性,从文献计量分析的角度来梳理国内外社会生态系统研究态势,难以全面洞悉该领域发展的清晰脉络,有待日后进一步归纳总结,以全面反映其态势。总之,社会生态系统本身的复杂性和综合性,要求任何关于它的研究都需要有更多的学科参与共同献计献策。
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
| [1] |
. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science [J].
Abstract Global environmental change and sustainability science increasingly recognize the need to address the consequences of changes taking place in the structure and function of the biosphere. These changes raise questions such as: Who and what are vulnerable to the multiple environmental changes underway, and where? Research demonstrates that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards (perturbations and stresses) alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards. This recognition requires revisions and enlargements in the basic design of vulnerability assessments, including the capacity to treat coupled human-environment systems and those linkages within and without the systems that affect their vulnerability. A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human-environment systems is presented.
|
| [2] |
Assessing Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems: Workbook for Practitioners. Version 2.0 [EB/OL]. |
| [3] |
A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems [J]. |
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science [J].
Humanity has emerged as a major force in the operation of the biosphere. The focus is shifting from the environment as externality to the biosphere as precondition for social justice, economic development, and sustainability. In this article, we exemplify the intertwined nature of social-ecological systems and emphasize that they operate within, and as embedded parts of the biosphere and as such coevolve with and depend on it. We regard social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems and use a social-ecological resilience approach as a lens to address and understand their dynamics. We raise the challenge of stewardship of development in concert with the biosphere for people in diverse contexts and places as critical for long-term sustainability and dignity in human relations. Biosphere stewardship is essential, in the globalized world of interactions with the Earth system, to sustain and enhance our life-supporting environment for human well-being and future human development on Earth, hence, the need to reconnect development to the biosphere foundation and the need for a biosphere-based sustainability science.
|
| [6] |
Using sustainability science to analyse social-ecological restoration in NE Japan after the great earthquake and tsunami of 2011 [J].
In the wake of the catastrophic earthquake and tsunami that devastated part of northeastern Japan in March 2011, proposals for reconstruction and rehabilitation are still subjects of debate. The claim by many climate scientists that large-scale extreme events can be expected in the future, with similar catastrophic effects in coastal areas, suggests the need for long-term planning that aims at building resilience, the ability for socio-ecological systems to withstand and recover quickly from natural disasters, and continue to develop. We hypothesize that ecosystems and socio-economic resilience will provide affected communities with flexible barriers against future disasters and greater protection in the long run than will hard/engineering solutions such as high seawalls aimed at ensuring only physical security. Building social/ecological resilience in the Tohoku region will increase general security and is anticipated also to contribute to an enhanced quality of life now and for generations to come. This paper argues that building resilience in the affected area requires a transformation to sustainable agriculture, forestry and fisheries and we describe how the links between satoyama and satoumi , traditional rural territorial and coastal landscapes in Japan, can contribute to this revitalization and to strengthening the relationship between local residents and the landscape in the affected communities. Decision makers at local, regional and national levels need to take a holistic approach based on sustainability science to understand the inter-relationships between these landscapes and ecosystems to develop a robust rebuilding plan for the affected communities. Moreover, this paper suggests that building resilient communities in Japan that demonstrate the strategic benefits of satoyama and satoumi linkages can be a model for building resilient rural and urban communities throughout the world.
|
| [7] |
Disentangling intangible social-ecological systems [J].
Contemporary environmental challenges call for new research approaches that include the human dimension when studying the natural environment. In spite of the recent development of several conceptual frameworks integrating human society with nature, there has been less methodological and theoretical progress on how to quantitatively study such social–ecological interdependencies. We propose a novel theoretical framework for addressing this gap that partly builds on the rapidly growing interdisciplinary research on complex networks. The framework makes it possible to unpack, define and formalize ways in which societies and nature are interdependent, and to empirically link this to specific governance challenges and opportunities using a range of theories from both the social and natural sciences in an integrated way. At the core of the framework is a set of basic building blocks (motifs) that each represents a simplified but non-trivial social–ecological systems (SES) consisting of two social actors and two ecological resources. The set represents all possible patterns of interdependency in a SES. Each unique motif is characterized in terms of social and ecological connectivity, resource sharing, and resource substitutability. By aligning theoretical insights related to the management of common-pool resources, metapopulation dynamics, and the problem of fit in SES with the set of motifs, we demonstrate the multi-theoretical ability of the framework in a case study of a rural agricultural landscape in southern Madagascar. Several mechanisms explaining the inhabitants’ demonstrated ability to preserve their scattered forest patches in spite of strong pressures on land and forest resources are presented.
|
| [8] |
Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters [J]. |
| [9] |
Keskitalo E C H. Interlocking panarchies in mufti-use boreal forests in Sweden [J].
|
| [10] |
Understanding adaptive capacity and capacity to innovate in social-ecological systems: Applying a gender lens [J].
Development policy increasingly focuses on building capacities to respond to change (adaptation), and to drive change (innovation). Few studies, however, focus specifically on the social and gender differentiation of capacities to adapt and innovate. We address this gap using a qualitative study in three communities in Solomon Islands; a developing country, where rural livelihoods and well-being are tightly tied to agriculture and fisheries. We find the five dimensions of capacity to adapt and to innovate (i.e. assets, flexibility, learning, social organisation, agency) to be mutually dependant. For example, limits to education, physical mobility and agency meant that women and youth, particularly, felt it was difficult to establish relations with external agencies to access technical support or new information important for innovating or adapting. Willingness to bear risk and to challenge social norms hindered both women’s and men’s capacity to innovate, albeit to differing degrees. Our findings are of value to those aspiring for equitable improvements to well-being within dynamic and diverse social–ecological systems.
|
| [11] |
Ecology for a crowded planet [J].
Within the next 50 to 100 years, support and maintenance of an extended human family of 8 to 11 billion people will become difficult at best. Our consumption rates already exceed the supply of many resources crucial to human health, and few places on Earth do not bear the stamp of human impacts (1, 2). Fossil fuel combustion and fertilizer production have doubled the global rate of nitrogen fixation, which has exacerbated ongoing eutrophication while fertilizing remote portions of the planet (3). Increases in global commerce have led to the spread of pests and diseases that do great harm because they are divorced from their natural predators and pathogens (4). Studying the few and rapidly shrinking undisturbed ecosystems is important, but now is the time to focus on an ecology for the future. Because our planet will be overpopulated for the foreseeable future and natural resource consumption shows no signs of slowing, human modifications of the environment will only increase. Thus, a research perspective that incorporates human activities as integral components of Earth's ecosystems is needed, as is a focus on a future in
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review [J]. |
| [14] |
The place of agricultural sciences in the literature on ecosystem services [J].
61A deep analysis of the scientific literature on ecosystem services is proposed.61This ecological concept has little been appropriated by the agricultural sciences.61Few attention is paid to the issue of rival services and trade-offs.61Those issues are fundamental for agricultural sciences.61Agricultural sciences should broaden the issues they traditionally address.
|
| [15] |
Tendency analysis of socio-hydrology researches based on bibliometrics [J].基于文献计量的社会水文学发展态势分析 [J].
社会水文学是一门研究人水耦合系统动态变化规律、服务水资源管理的交叉学科,通过对Web of Science数据库检索到的论文进行文献计量分析,系统综述社会水文学的国际研究发展态势和趋势。分析结果显示,广义的社会水文学研究涉及水资源、环境科学、土木工程、地球科学、环境工程、农学、环境研究、生态学、气象与大气科学、地理学等。国际上长期关注水资源管理、水质、农业灌溉和水政策等问题,不同时期研究的问题热点根据时代发展的水资源管理需求有所变化,不同国家根据国内水资源情势,其关注点也有所不同。狭义的社会水文学研究主要涉及城市化和农村发展的水需求和水安全等问题,强调通过有效的水文模型预测来支持科学管理决策。该学科的发展将会促进人类对水资源的可持续管理和利用,更好地解决人类社会面临的水问题。
|
| [16] |
et al. Ecosystem services management: An integrated approach [J].
Attracting professionals from diverse disciplines, the ecosystem services conceptual framework with integrative character strives to provide a solution to the drastic decline of the natural resources of our planet. Nonetheless, losses of ecosystem services accelerate more rapidly than ever. As humans interact with nature, increasing their global presence in both scale and intensity, the need for a new macroeconomic world emerges. This world should be based on an integration of nature and society (nature-societal) or society and ecosystems (socio-ecosystem), which will facilitate the transition toward sustainable ecosystem services management. Achieving this new macroeconomic economic paradigm would require redesigning a new thought process that embraces ecosystem services as precious goods, rather than unlimited and free, unappreciated resources. Market and government are not sufficient for this new macro-economics, in which ecosystem services are its main content. We suggest an integrated set of market, government, and human values to manage ecosystem services, as traditional, narrow, economic, political and scientific solutions alone do not adequately address the sustainable use of natural ecosystems. Culture, created from human values which, to a certain extent, can be influenced or directed, has the capacity to influence the interactions between nature, social and economic systems. The ancient Chinese philosophy of 'unity of man with nature' provides principles which can guide and develop human values into a new, positive force with the potential to harmoniously manage sustainable ecosystem services.
|
| [17] |
Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union [J].
78 Mainstreaming of ecosystem services into EU policy is dependent spatial information. 78 We summarize current methods of mapping ecosystem services. 78 We identify knowledge gaps in mapping ecosystem services. 78 We propose a stepwise framework for mapping ecosystem services. 78 We demonstrate the use of the framework for mapping using water purification.
|
| [18] |
Adaptation of institutional arrangements to management of Northern Rangelands of Kenya [J].
Abstract Northern Rangelands of Kenya have continued to grapple with management challenges largely due to a lack of understanding of the dynamics thereof. Eroding customary institutions and new institutional arrangements characterize the system suggesting that adaptation is taking place to cope with the change. It is imperative that these socio-ecosystems adjust to the disturbance without disintegrating into a different state that is controlled by a different set of processes to ensure sustainable rangeland management. To understand the nature of change, the study sought to evaluate institutional arrangements engaged in tackling growing socio-economic and ecological factors challenging development within the last decade. Three study sites namely Kinna, Makurian and Westgate, representing three types of institutional arrangements (elders only, group ranch committee and community conservancy board), were investigated. Key informants, focused group discussions and household survey methods were used to gather data. Data were managed and analysed using Ms Access, Ms Excel, social network analysis and SPSS. Findings indicate that more actors (internal and external) are engaging in management of social economic and ecological factors challenging development within the last decade. The co-management approach allows increased capacity to tackle these challenges and further presents more opportunities for a diversified livelihood, two key features of ecosystem resilience. Findings are useful as the Kenya government implements the National Land Policy that recognizes the need to restructure community land and its management.
|
| [19] |
. From explanation to application: Introducing a Practice-oriented Ecosystem Services Evaluation (PRESET) model adapted to the context of landscape planning and management [J].
The development and use of the conceptual framework of ecosystem services (ES) has been very successful in supporting the broad diffusion and application of ES within science and policy communities. However, most of the currently proposed interpretations of the framework neither correlate to environmental planning nor to decision-making contexts at the local and regional scale, which is a potential reason for the slow adoption and practice of the ES conceptual framework. This paper proposes a practice-oriented ES evaluation (PRESET) model specifically adapted to the requirements of local and regional planning and decision-making contexts, and discusses its potential benefits and implications for practice. Through the usage of PRESET we suggest making a distinction between ‘offered ES’, ‘utilized ES’, ‘human input’, and ‘ES benefits’ as relevant information for decision-making. Furthermore, we consider it important to link these decision-support categories to different value dimensions relevant in planning and management practice. PRESET provides guidance to inject the ES concept into planning, but needs to be implemented together with concrete assessment methods, indicators and data. The planning strategic benefits of using PRESET include its reference to existing legislative objectives, avoiding the risk that monetized ES values might dominate decision-making, clarification of human contributions, and easier identification of land use conflicts and synergies. Examples are given for offered and utilized ES, as well as for respective evaluation approaches and instruments of implementation.
|
| [20] |
Integrated ecosystem management of river basins and the coastal zone in Brazil [J].
International society has begun to consider river basins and the coastal zone as one management unit that requires an ecosystem approach. Various countries have undertaken initiatives since the 1970s and have improved the approach to integrated coastal zone management. Brazil has not been one of them. Its sector-based approach to most environmental issues started in the 1980s with the National Environmental Policy Act (Law 6,938/1981). The National Coastal Zone Management Plan (NCZMP) was then approved by Law 7,661 in 1988. Shortly thereafter, the 1988 Brazilian Constitution was enacted, which established the environment as a common good to be used by the entire society but in such a way as to prevent environmental degradation and conserve its quality for present and future generations. The National Water Resources Policy (NWRP) was not enacted until 1997 (Law 9,433/1997). This law established that water resource management in Brazil must take into account estuarine ecosystems and the coastal zone, using an integrated approach. Only in 2006 did the National Water Resources Council (NWRC) create a technical chamber dedicated to developing regulatory measures for integrated management in Brazil. There has been substantial discussion and various proposals to implement it, as outlined in this article. This paper concludes with suggestions for implementing integrated river basin and coastal zone management in Brazil.
|
| [21] |
Research progress and debate on the theory of payment for ecosystem services [J].生态补偿理论研究进展及争论 [J]. |
| [22] |
The ecosystem services agenda: Bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy [J].
The Ecosystem Services Journal starts in 2012 with a formidable basis in the reports and books from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and TEEB projects. Following a half-century history of growing awareness and associated scientific based policy development a bridging concept with natural and social science notions was developed and coined “ecosystem services”. The agenda for the journal Ecosystem Services, presented in this introductory paper to the Journal Ecosystem Services is aimed at scientists and policy analysts who consider contributing to better knowledge and better use of that knowledge about ecosystem services. This should include knowledge of the ecological systems that provide the services, the economic systems that benefit from them, and the institutions that need to develop effective codes for a sustainable use. The agenda is derived from the experience of the authors in science and policy analysis and extended with some of the recommendations from the TEEB book for national and international policy making emphasising the science—policy—practice linkage, which is the philosophy of the Journal.
|
| [23] |
Identifying potential consequences of natural perturbations and management decisions on a coastal fishery social-ecological system using qualitative loop analysis [J].
Managing for sustainable development and resource extraction requires an understanding of the feedbacks between ecosystems and humans. These feedbacks are part of complex social-ecological systems (SES), in which resources, actors, and governance systems interact to produce outcomes across these component parts. Qualitative modeling approaches offer ways to assess complex SES dynamics. Loop analysis in particular is useful for examining and identifying potential outcomes from external perturbations and management interventions in data poor systems when very little is known about functional relationships and parameter values. Using a case study of multispecies, multifleet coastal small-scale fisheries, we demonstrate the application of loop analysis to provide predictions regarding SES responses to perturbations and management actions. Specifically, we examine the potential ecological and socioeconomic consequences to coastal fisheries of different governance interventions (e.g., territorial user rights, fisheries closures, market-based incentives, ecotourism subsidies) and environmental changes. Our results indicate that complex feedbacks among biophysical and socioeconomic components can result in counterintuitive and unexpected outcomes. For example, creating new jobs through ecotourism or subsidies might have mixed effects on members of fishing cooperatives vs. nonmembers, highlighting equity issues. Market-based interventions, such as ecolabels, are expected to have overall positive economic effects, assuming a direct effect of ecolabels on market-prices, and a lack of negative biological impacts under most model structures. Our results highlight that integrating ecological and social variables in a unique unit of management can reveal important potential trade-offs between desirable ecological and social outcomes, highlight which user groups might be more vulnerable to external shocks, and identify which interventions should be further tested to identify potential win-win outcomes across the triple-bottom line of the sustainable development paradigm.
|
| [24] |
Resilience andstability of ecological systems [J].
ABSTRACT THIS REVIEW EXPLORES BOTH ECOLOGICAL THEORY AND THE BEHAVIOR OF NATURAL SYSTEMS TO SEE IF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF THEIR BEHAVIOR CAN YIELD DIFFERENT INSIGHTS THAT ARE USEFUL FOR BOTH THEORY AND PRACTICE. THE RESILIENCE AND STABILITY VIEWPOINTS OF THE BEHAVIOR OF ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS CAN YIELD VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES. THE STABILITY VIEW EMPHASIZES THE EQUILIBRIUM, THE MAINTENANCE OF A PREDICTABLE WORLD, AND THE HARVESTING OF NATURE'S EXCESS PRODUCTION WITH AS LITTLE FLUCTUATION AS POSSIBLE. THE RESILIENCE VIEW EMPHASIZES DOMAINS OF ATTRACTION AND THE NEED FOR PERSISTENCE. BUT EXTINCTION IS NOT PURELY A RANDOM EVENT: IT RESULTS FROM THE INTERACTION OF RANDOM EVENTS WITH THOSE DETERMINISTIC FORCES THAT DEFINE THE SHAPE, SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DOMAIN OF ATTRACTION. THE VERY APPROACH, THEREFORE, THAT ASSURES A STABLE MAXIMUM SUSTAINED YIELD OF A RENEWABLE RESOURCE, MIGHT SO CHANGE THESE CONDITIONS THAT THE RESILIENCE IS LOST OR IS REDUCED SO THAT A CHANCE AND RARE EVENT THAT PREVIOUSLY COULD BE ABSORBED CAN TRIGGER A SUDDEN DRAMATIC CHANGE AND LOSS OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM. A MANAGEMENT APPROACH BASED ON RESILIENCE, ON THE OTHER HAND, WOULD EMPHASIZE THE NEED TO KEEP OPTIONS OPEN, THE NEED TO VIEW EVENTS IN A REGIONAL RATHER THAN A LOCAL CONTEXT, AND THE NEED TO EMPHASIZE HETEROGENEITY. THE RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRECISE CAPACITY TO PREDICT THE FUTURE BUT ONLY A QUALITATIVE CAPACITY TO DEVISE SYSTEMS THAT CAN ABSORB AND ACCOMMODATE FUTURE EVENTS IN WHATEVER UNEXPECTED FORM THEY MAY TAKE.
|
| [25] |
Resilience, adaptability and transform ability in social-ecological systems [J].
The concept of resilience has evolved considerably since Holling#8217;s (1973) seminal paper. Different interpretations of what is meant by resilience, however, cause confusion. Resilience of a system needs to be considered in terms of the attributes that govern the system#8217;s dynamics. Three related attributes of social#8211;ecological systems (SESs) determine their future trajectories: resilience, adaptability, and transformability. Resilience (the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks) has four components#8212;latitude, resistance, precariousness, and panarchy#8212;most readily portrayed using the metaphor of a stability landscape. Adaptability is the capacity of actors in the system to influence resilience (in a SES, essentially to manage it). There are four general ways in which this can be done, corresponding to the four aspects of resilience. Transformability is the capacity to create a fundamentally new system when ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable. The implications of this interpretation of SES dynamics for sustainability science include changing the focus from seeking optimal states and the determinants of maximum sustainable yield (the MSY paradigm), to resilience analysis, adaptive resource management, and adaptive governance.
|
| [26] |
An overview on the resilience of social-ecological systems [J].社会—生态系统恢复力研究综述 [J].
目前国内外对脆弱性的论述很多，然而关于恢复力的研究却刚刚起步且困难重重。1973年Holling创造性地将恢复力引入到生态系统稳定性的研究中，并将其定义为系统吸收干扰并继续维持其功能、结构、反馈等不发生质变的能力。30多年来这一术语的概念和内涵在大量的案例研究中得到了丰富和完善，然而这些研究对恢复力的不同解释亦造成了大量的混淆，因此需要在统一的理论基础上，根据控制系统变化的属性来构建恢复力的概念并进行应用研究。在社会-生态系统框架下，分析了恢复力研究的基础理论——适应性循环及扰沌，对其概念及内涵做了进展综述，回顾了恢复力的应用案例，探讨了定量化问题，在此基础上对社会．生态系统恢复力的研究进行了展望，提出了面临的关键问题及今后的研究方向。
|
| [27] |
Study on measurement and impact mechanism of social-ecological system resilience in Qiandao Lake [J].千岛湖社会—生态系统恢复力测度与影响机理 [J]. |
| [28] |
Time-dependent regimes of a tourism-based social-ecological system: Period-doubling route to chaos [J].
The period-doubling route to chaos has occupied a prominent position and it is still object of great interest among the different complex phenomena observed in nonlinear dynamical systems. The reason of such interest is that such route to chaos has been observed in many physical, chemical and ecological models when they change over from simple periodic to complex aperiodic motion. In interlinked social鈥揺cological systems (SESs) there might be an apparent great ability to cope with change and adapt if analysed only in their social dimension. However, such an adaptation may be at the expense of changes in the capacity of ecosystems to sustain the adaptation and it could affect the quality of ecosystem goods and services since it could degrade natural renewable and non-renewable resources and generate traps and breakpoints in the whole SES eventually leading to chaotic behaviour. This paper is rooted in previous results on modelling tourism-based SESs, only recently object of theoretical investigations, focusing on the dynamics of the coexistence between mass-tourists and eco-tourists. Here we describe a finer scale analysis of time-dependent regimes in the ranges of the degradation coefficient (bifurcation parameter), for which the system can exhibit coexistence. This bifurcation parameter is determined by objective changes in the real world in the quality of ecosystem goods and services together with whether and how such changes are perceived by different tourist typologies. Varying the bifurcation parameter, the dynamical system may in fact evolve toward an aperiodical dynamical state in many ways, showing that there could be different scenarios for the transition to chaos. This paper provides a further evidence for the period-doubling route to chaos with reference to tourism-based socio-ecological models, and for a period locking behaviour, where a small variation in the bifurcation parameter can lead to alternating regular and chaotic dynamics. Moreover, for many models undergoing chaos via period-doubling, it has been showed that structural perturbations with real ecological justification, may break and reverse the expected period-doublings, hence inhibiting chaos. This feature may be of a certain relevance also in the context of adaptive management of tourism-based SESs: these period-doubling reversals might in fact be used to control chaos, since they potentially act in way to suppress possibly dangerous fluctuations.
|
| [29] |
A socio-ecological model of the Opuntia scrublands in the Peruvian Andes [J].
Opuntia scrublands are important socio-ecological systems (SESs) in the Andean area. Opuntia provides a variety of products employed in the human diet and in animal feed, as well as cochineal insects, a highly valued source of dyes. Land clearance on the scrublands promotes changes in the use of the land and the development of new economic activities. In this article, we describe the development a numerical model, built as a five submodel interactive set under Stella 庐; v9.1.4, to understand the dynamics of this SES in the Andean area of Ayacucho-Peru in terms of its vegetation, scrubland habilitation, cochineal collection, fruit harvest and livestock keeping. Ecological components (cochineal insects and vegetation) are modeled considering system's carrying capacities; social components (fruit, livestock and land) incorporate economic (investments, costs and benefits) and social (participation, association) parameters and processes. The model highlights the role of social capital on land clearance and the effect of the latter on the livelihoods of local farmers.
|
| [30] |
Spatiotemporal change of vulnerability in counties of northwest China [J].西北地区县域脆弱性时空格局演变 [J].
人地耦合系统的脆弱性研究作为未来地理科学的十大科学研究命题之一,已成为人地关系和区域可持续发展研究的重要领域。本文以西北地区316个县（市）为研究单元,以2003、2008和2013年社会经济统计数据、气象数据、遥感影像数据和空间矢量数据为基础,综合运用模糊层次分析和变异系数分析等方法,构建西北地区人地系统脆弱性评价模型并说明其时空演化过程。研究表明：1西北地区县域脆弱性指数整体呈现北低南高、东低西高的格局。大中型城市对周边区域产生显著的影响并已形成以自身为核心的低脆弱圈层,各低脆弱圈层逐渐关联形成大范围的低脆弱片区;24个子系统的脆弱性水平分别表现出一定的地域分异格局,社会子系统和经济子系统脆弱性的空间集聚特征明显且变化显著,资源环境子系统和政策子系统脆弱性则趋于碎片化且相对稳定;3西北地区人地系统脆弱性的空间差异度呈缓慢增大趋势,社会脆弱性差异度的变化趋势为先增加后下降,经济脆弱性与资源环境脆弱性差异度均表现出持续下降的态势,政策扶持性在地区间的差异较大且整体格局稳定;4在政策的引导和扶持下,资源开发促使经济发展、环境质量和人类福祉发生转变,最终影响社会发展水平和社会的稳定程度,而社会的发展和稳定又反作用于经济发展、环境质量、资源开发和政策制定。本文以＂脆弱性＂的视角解构西北地区人地系统时空动态变化过程,为西北地区社会经济发展提供理论方法参考和实践应用借鉴。
|
| [31] |
Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: Applicability, usefulness and policy implications [J].
This paper outlines selected approaches to measuring risk and vulnerability to hazards of natural origin using indicators and indices. It discusses their applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Indicators and indices have been developed on different scales and for different purposes. The paper will briefly introduce three global approaches to disaster-risk identification and will juxtapose them with one local approach in order to examine the differences concerning the functions and the purpose of the assessment as well as their impact for policy development. In contrast to an earlier comparative analysis of the three global disaster-risk indicator programmes by Mark Pelling in 2004, which focused primarily on the methodologies used, this paper places more emphasis on aspects of applicability and policy implications and outlines challenges and limitations of the different approaches. Since the assessment and mapping of human vulnerability is less developed than hazard assessment work [Pelling M., 2004. Visions of Risk: A Review of International Indicators of Disaster Risk and its Management. UNDP芒聙聰Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BRCP), Geneva], this paper focuses in greater depth on how the approaches capture vulnerability. Conclusions will be formulated on how to further enhance vulnerability identification, particularly at the sub-national level.
|
| [32] |
Assessing and reducing vulnerability to climate change: Moving from theory to practical decision-support [J].
As climate change continues to impact socio-ecological systems, tools that assist conservation managers to understand vulnerability and target adaptations are essential. Quantitative assessments of vulnerability are rare because available frameworks are complex and lack guidance for dealing with data limitations and integrating across scales and disciplines. This paper describes a semi-quantitative method for assessing vulnerability to climate change that integrates socio-ecological factors to address management objectives and support decision-making. The method applies a framework first adopted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and uses a structured 10-step process. The scores for each framework element are normalized and multiplied to produce a vulnerability score and then the assessed components are ranked from high to low vulnerability. Sensitivity analyses determine which indicators most influence the analysis and the resultant decision-making process so data quality for these indicators can be reviewed to increase robustness. Prioritisation of components for conservation considers other economic, social and cultural values with vulnerability rankings to target actions that reduce vulnerability to climate change by decreasing exposure or sensitivity and/or increasing adaptive capacity. This framework provides practical decision-support and has been applied to marine ecosystems and fisheries, with two case applications provided as examples: (1) food security in Pacific Island nations under climate-driven fish declines, and (2) fisheries in the Gulf of Carpentaria, northern Australia. The step-wise process outlined here is broadly applicable and can be undertaken with minimal resources using existing data, thereby having great potential to inform adaptive natural resource management in diverse locations.
|
| [33] |
A framework for the development of the SERV model: A spatially explicit resilience-Vulnerability model [J].
As a response to vulnerability assessment limitations, this research presents a framework for a Spatially Explicit Resilience-Vulnerability (SERV) model that measures vulnerability at the sub-county level. The SERV model determines varying sub-county vulnerability using socioeconomic, spatial and place-specific indicators that represent exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Statistical analyses were conducted to determine the spatial distribution and differential influence of indicators on overall sub-county vulnerability. The exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity components were then combined to create holistic sub-county vulnerability scores. The results indicate that vulnerability varies at the sub-county level. Results also indicate that the inclusion of spatially explicit indicators in vulnerability assessments aids decision makers in identifying markers of vulnerability in specific areas. Holistic vulnerability scores can help empower decision makers in targeting mitigation efforts toward areas where vulnerability is highest and at indicators that most impact vulnerability.
|
| [34] |
Effect of climate change on the vulnerability of a socio-ecological system in an arid area [J].
The vulnerability of arid areas threatens ecosystems and human existence. With climate change and increasing human activities, addressing this vulnerability has become an important concern. To support this objective, we present a complex index system to analyze vulnerability at a regional scale with a 102km02×02102km resolution. Based on the evaluation framework, which includes natural resources, the natural environment and the social economy, the results indicate that an ecosystem in a mountainous area is more vulnerable than it is in a plain. Land desertification will worsen from 2014 to 2099 under the RCP4.5 scenarios and improve slightly under the RCP8.5 and RCP2.6 scenarios, while the suitable land for agriculture increased slightly under the three scenarios. In addition, a regional sensitivity analysis of vulnerability to climate change shows that the improving region and the worsening region will occupy 1.30% and 74.51%, respectively. In view of this, the socio-ecological system will undergo a worsening trend as a whole. Finally, we simplified how to solve the problem of a socio-ecological system in the future. This research method and results would generate new insights with respect to planning for sustainable development and provide a reference for decision-making.
|
| [35] |
Resilience and sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations [J].
Emerging recognition of two fundamental errors underpinning past polices for natural resource issues heralds awareness of the need for a worldwide fundamental change in and in practice of environmental management. The first error has been an implicit assumption that ecosystem responses to use are linear, predictable and controllable. The second has been an assumption that and natural systems can be treated independently. However, evidence that has been accumulating in diverse regions all over the world suggests that natural and social systems behave in nonlinear ways, exhibit marked thresholds in their dynamics, and that social-ecological systems act as strongly coupled, complex and evolving integrated systems. This article is a summary of a report prepared on behalf of the Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government, as input to the process of the World Summit on Sustainable (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa in 26 August 4 September 2002. We use the concept of resilience--the capacity to buffer change, learn and develop--as a framework for understanding how to sustain and enhance adaptive capacity in a complex world of rapid transformations. Two useful tools for resilience-building in social-ecological systems are structured scenarios and active adaptive management. These tools require and facilitate a social context with flexible and open institutions and multi-level governance systems that allow for and increase adaptive capacity without foreclosing future options.
|
| [36] |
Evaluating sustainable adaptation strategies for vulnerable mega-deltas using system dynamics modelling: Rice agriculture in the Mekong Delta’s An Giang Province, Vietnam [J].
Abstract Challenging dynamics are unfolding in social-ecological systems around the globe as society attempts to mitigate and adapt to climate change while sustaining rapid local development. The IPCC's 5th assessment suggests these changing systems are susceptible to unforeseen and dangerous 'emergent risks'. An archetypal example is the Vietnamese Mekong Delta (VMD) where the river dyke network has been heightened and extended over the last decade with the dual objectives of (1) adapting the delta's 18 million inhabitants and their livelihoods to increasingly intense river-flooding, and (2) developing rice production through a shift from double to triple-cropping. Negative impacts have been associated with this shift, particularly in relation to its exclusion of fluvial sediment deposition from the floodplain. A deficit in our understanding of the dynamics of the rice-sediment system, which involve unintuitive delays, feedbacks, and tipping points, is addressed here, using a system dynamics (SD) approach to inform sustainable adaptation strategies. Specifically, we develop and test a new SD model which simulates the dynamics between the farmers' economic system and their rice agriculture operations, and uniquely, integrates the role of fluvial sediment deposition within their dyke compartment. We use the model to explore a range of alternative rice cultivation strategies. Our results suggest that the current dominant strategy (triple-cropping) is only optimal for wealthier groups within society and over the short-term (ca. 10years post-implementation). The model suggests that the policy of opening sluice gates and leaving paddies fallow during high-flood years, in order to encourage natural sediment deposition and the nutrient replenishment it supplies, is both a more equitable and a more sustainable policy. But, even with this approach, diminished supplies of sediment-bound nutrients and the consequent need to compensate with artificial fertilisers will mean that smaller-scale farmers in the VMD are more vulnerable to accruing debt. Copyright 脗 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
| [37] |
Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems [J]. |
| [38] |
Resilience implications of policy responses to climate change [J].
Abstract This article examines whether some response strategies to climate variability and change have the potential to undermine long-term resilience of social鈥揺cological systems. We define the parameters of a resilience approach, suggesting that resilience is characterized by the ability to absorb perturbations without changing overall system function, the ability to adapt within the resources of the system itself, and the ability to learn, innovate, and change. We evaluate nine current regional climate change policy responses and examine governance, sensitivity to feedbacks, and problem framing to evaluate impacts on characteristics of a resilient system. We find that some responses, such as the increase in harvest rates to deal with pine beetle infestations in Canada and expansion of biofuels globally, have the potential to undermine long-term resilience of resource systems. Other responses, such as decentralized water planning in Brazil and tropical storm disaster management in Caribbean islands, have the potential to increase long-term resilience. We argue that there are multiple sources of resilience in most systems and hence policy should identify such sources and strengthen capacities to adapt and learn. WIREs Clim Change 2011 2 757鈥766 DOI: 10.1002/wcc.133 For further resources related to this article, please visit the TODO: clickthrough URL WIREs website
|
| [39] |
Knight-Lenihan S, van Roon M. Sense shaping place: Repositioning the role of sense of place in social-ecological systems from a bioregional planning viewpoint [J].
Dynamic landscape change affects and is affected by human attitudes. The effect of pattern on process has been investigated mainly in landscape ecological sciences, focusing on whether and how the human influence on spatial organization of landscape creates stable, functioning ecosystems. In earlier ecological studies, despite embedding their values, perception and attitudes when delineating a place, humans have been treated as an independent, separate entity. Equally, the ecological imperative expressed through operational models of conservation planning changes the physical organization of landscape in such a way that it affects public connection to landscape and influences views and attitudes towards ecosystem governance. A more comprehensive understanding is needed of these two phenomena, addressing the linkages between ecosystem conservation and how people respond to dynamic change. Therefore we employ ‘sense of place’ as a broad concept to assess and evaluate the way in which people shape their responsiveness to place through a bio - regional planning approach. . This paper focuses on the attitudinal dimension of sense of place in planning-based activities. The results suggest that although place connection strongly empowers protective and ethical -based actions, it remains unclear how planning renders the negotiation of the different actors’ values with respect to the concept of place. A conceptual framework is proposed, to assess the role of sense of place as an integrative concept in understanding the linkages of social -ecological systems and the need for future research to investigate how planning is receptive to the multitude of actor’s values and attitudes that shape social -ecological changes across the landscape.
|
| [40] |
Tracing life’s circuitry [J].
Abstract A new movement called systems biology aims to integrate biology, mathematics, and engineering; even if its objective is hard to define, it is all the rage in the academic world.
|
| [41] |
Correction in the community based on the society ecosystem theory [J].社会生态系统理论视角下的社区矫正与和谐社区建设 [J].
作为社会工作的重要基础理论之一,社会生态系统理论将系统理论的抽象与力求解决实际问题的社会工作之注重实务性联系起来,社区矫正是社会生态系统理论框架下的一种新的社会工作实践模式,强调从人与环境的互动出发去解决实际问题.社会生态系统理论分析问题的出发点不是有问题的个人本身,而是聚焦于个人与其生活环境之间的相互影响和相互联系,社会生态系统理论为我们深入理解人与社会环境的复杂联系提供了重要的理论参考,有助于我们从社会工作的视角逐步改变或完善人类行为得以产生的各种微观、中观、宏观系统,这为当前构建和谐社会、和谐社区建设所借鉴.社区矫正的介入,应该把个人与环境的构成状况作为介入的焦点,将矫正对象置于该群体形成、发展的整个系统中,以优势视角去整合各种社会资源,结合社会工作的基本理念,强调从人与环境的互动出发去构建新型的社区矫正介入模式.本文以社会生态系统理论视角来分析社区矫正的介入,以期为和谐社区的建设和发展提供有益的借鉴.
|
| [42] |
Cognitive and institutional influences on farmers’ adaptive capacity: Insights into barriers and opportunities for transformative change in central Arizona [J].
The prospect of unprecedented environmental change, combined with increasing demand on limited resources, demands adaptive responses at multiple levels. In this article, we analyze different attributes of farm-level capacity in central Arizona, USA, in relation to farmers’ responses to recent dynamism in commodity and land markets, and the institutional and social contexts of farmers’ water and production portfolios. Irrigated agriculture is at the heart of the history and identity of the American Southwest, although the future of agriculture is now threatened by the prospect of “mega-droughts,” urbanization and associated inter-sector and inter-state competition over water in an era of climatic change. We use farm-level survey data, supplemented by in-depth interviews, to explore the cross-level dimensions of capacity in the agriculture–urban nexus of central Arizona. The surveyed farmers demonstrate an interest in learning, capacity for adaptive management and risk-taking attitudes consistent with emerging theory of capacity for land use and livelihood transformation. However, many respondents perceive their self-efficacy in the face of future climatic and hydrological change as uncertain. Our study suggests that the components of transformational capacity will necessarily need to go beyond the objective resources and cognitive capacities of individuals to incorporate “linking” capacities: the political and social attributes necessary for collective strategy formation to shape choice and opportunity in the future.
|
| [43] |
Exploring agricultural production systems and their fundamental components with system dynamics modelling [J].
Agricultural production in the United States is undergoing marked changes due to rapid shifts in consumer demands, input costs, and concerns for food safety and environmental impact. Agricultural production systems are comprised of multidimensional components and drivers that interact in complex ways to influence production sustainability. In a mixed-methods approach, we combine qualitative and quantitative data to develop and simulate a system dynamics model that explores the systemic interaction of these drivers on the economic, environmental and social sustainability of agricultural production. We then use this model to evaluate the role of each driver in determining the differences in sustainability between three distinct production systems: crops only, livestock only, and an integrated crops and livestock system. The result from these modelling efforts found that the greatest potential for sustainability existed with the crops only production system. While this study presents a stand-alone contribution to sector knowledge and practice, it encourages future research in this sector that employs similar systems-based methods to enable more sustainable practices and policies within agricultural production.
|
| [44] |
Progress and perspective on ecosystem services trade-offs [J].生态系统服务权衡/协同研究进展与趋势展望 [J].
生态系统服务之间存在的此消彼长的权衡或彼此增益的协同关系,是生态系统服务管理研究的重要内容。科学理解生态系统服务权衡/协同的作用特征、表现形式、驱动机制和尺度效应,对于提升人类福祉和实现人类社会和生态系统的＂双赢＂有重要意义,也是当前生态经济学、环境经济学、地理学等众多学科的研究热点和前沿。在综合分析国内外相关文献的基础上,总结了生态系统服务权衡/协同研究的理论基础,评述了生态系统服务权衡/协同表现形式、驱动机制和尺度效应的国内外研究进展和不足,并进一步探讨和展望了未来生态系统服务权衡/协同研究的重要内容,包括生态系统服务分类和评估优化,服务之间相互作用的量化模型、与自然—人文复合系统之间的反馈机制和尺度效应。
|
| [45] |
Social-ecological resilience of a Nuosu community-linked watershed, southwest Sichuan, China [J].
Farmers of the Nuosu Yi ethnic group in the Upper Baiwu watershed report reductions in the availability of local forest resources. A team of interdisciplinary scientists worked in partnership with this community to assess the type and extent of social-ecological change in the watershed and to identify key drivers of those changes. Here, we combine a framework for institutional analysis with resilience concepts to assess system dynamics and interactions among resource users, resources, and institutions over the past century. The current state of this system reflects a legacy of past responses to institutional disturbances initiated at the larger, national system scale. Beginning with the Communist Revolution in 1957 and continuing through the next two decades, centralized forest regulations imposed a mismatch between the scale of management and the scale of the ecological processes being managed. A newly implemented forest property rights policy is shifting greater control over the management of forest resources to individuals in rural communities. Collective forest users will be allowed to manage commodity forests for profit through the transfer of long-term leases to private contractors. Villagers are seeking guidance on how to develop sustainable and resilient forest management practices under the new policy, a responsibility returned to them after half a century and with less abundant and fewer natural resources, a larger and aggregated population, and greater influence from external forces. We assess the watershed#8217;s current state in light of the past and identify future opportunities to strengthen local institutions for governance of forest resources.
|
| [46] |
The role of diversification in dynamic small-scale fisheries: Lessons from Baja California Sur, Mexico [J].
Globally, small-scale fisheries are critical for livelihoods and food security yet face increasing uncertainty and variability from processes such as overfishing, globalization, and climate change. Enhancing the number of options for human response through increased access to marine resources, diverse livelihood approaches, and generalist fishing strategies may attenuate the negative effects of change and disturbance. My research explores the relative importance of diversification strategies for achieving resilient small-scale fishing communities and cooperatives of Baja California Sur, Mexico. Specifically, interview data and long-term catch and economic data were used to develop an economic metric of resilience, in addition to income diversification indices, for fishing cooperatives. Fishing cooperative characteristics and environmental conditions were then evaluated as possible predictors of cooperatives鈥 relative ability to diversify. I found that while diversification was important for risk mitigation and stabilizing income, the ability of cooperatives to specialize during favorable conditions may be important for poverty reduction and wealth accumulation. Thus, the flexibility to move across fishing strategies given changing environmental conditions is important for the adaptive capacity of small-scale fishing cooperatives. My findings will contribute to a better understanding of the institutional arrangements that promote a resilient small-scale fishery, and therefore, will be invaluable for practitioners of small-scale fisheries.
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
What is sustainability science? [J].什么是可持续性科学? [J].
<p>可持续发展是我们时代的主题，也是人类面临的最大挑战.自20世纪70年代，尤其是近20年来，可持续发展的概念日益频繁地出现在学术文章、政府文件以及公益宣传和商业广告之中.然而，为可持续发展提供理论基础和实践指导的科学——可持续性科学——是在21世纪初才开始形成的.该科学在短短的十几年中迅速开拓、不断发展，正在形成其科学概念框架和研究体系.中国是世界大国，是可持续性科学的哲学思想——“天人合一”——的故乡，有必要承担起时代之重任，在追求“中国梦”的同时促进全球可持续发展，并积极参与进而引领可持续性科学的研究和实践.为了帮助实现这一宏伟而远大目标，本文拟对可持续性科学的基本概念、研究论题和发展前景作一概述.可持续性科学是研究人与环境之间动态关系——特别是耦合系统的脆弱性、抗扰性、弹性和稳定性——的整合型科学.它穿越自然科学和人文与社会科学，以环境、经济和社会的相互关系为核心，将基础性研究和应用研究融为一体.可持续发展的核心内容往往因时、因地、 因人而异.因此，可持续性科学必须注重多尺度研究，同时应特别关注 50到100年的时间尺度和景观以及区域的空间尺度. 景观和区域不但是最可操作的空间尺度，同时也是上通全球、下达局地的枢纽尺度.可持续性科学需要聚焦于生态系统服务和人类福祉的相互关系，进而探讨生物多样性和生态系统过程，以及气候变化、土地利用变化和其他社会经济驱动过程对这一关系的影响.我们认为，景观和可持续性是可持续性科学的核心研究内容，也将是可持续性科学在以后几十年的研究热点.</p>
|
| [49] |
Review of the research on social-ecological systems conceptual framework [J].社会—生态系统概念性框架研究综述 [J].
人与自然的矛盾已成为全球性问题,可持续发展理论把人类对于生存与环境的认识推向了一个新的境界。近年来,以社会-生态系统作为研究对象,成为了可持续发展和全球变化研究的一个新视角。在社会-生态系统的概念性框架下,本文对社会-生态系统的动态运行机制和属性进行了详细的综述。社会-生态系统是复杂适应性系统,受自身和外界干扰的影响,具有不可预期性、自组织、非线性、多样性、多稳态等特点。适应性循环是一个启发性模型,有助于理解复杂系统的动态运行机制。恢复力、适应力和转化力是社会-生态系统的三个主要属性。并对社会-生态系统理论研究中面临的问题进行了展望,提出了在以后研究中可以适用的研究方法。
|
| [50] |
A worldwide country-based assessment of social-ecological status (c.2010) using the social-ecological status index [J].
It is not uncommon today that countries worldwide are assessed or ranked using major composite social (e.g. human development index) or ecological (e.g. biodiversity index) indicators. However, until today they have not been assessed or ranked using a social-ecological status indicator. Knowledge of the status of a social-ecological system, a system that includes human and environmental subsystems interacting together, is important for socio-economic development and for natural resources and disaster management. Hence in this article, we assessed the social-ecological status of various countries around the world (c. 2010) using a composite social-ecological status indicator built upon the three pillars of sustainability (economic prosperity, social justice, and environmental quality), called the SESI (social-ecological status index). The value of the SESI ranges from 鈭1 (least desirable) to +1 (most desirable). Out of the 144 countries evaluated, 69 (47.92%) have SESI values that are below the overall average SESI value (0.197). Geographically, most of the countries with low SESI are distributed across the continents of Asia and the Americas, but especially Africa. The results can be used for conveying to the public the social-ecological status of various countries around the world, including their potential sources of social-ecological resilience and pressure.
|
| [51] |
Reorganizing resource use in a communal livestock production socio-ecological system in South Africa [J].
Livestock production on South Africa’s commons contributes significantly to the livelihoods of communal households, offering status, food, income and savings. Management innovations are generally top-down and informed by commercial practices such as rotational grazing in combination with conservative stocking. Implementations often ignore how the specific socio-ecological context affects outcomes and the impact on equity. Science now acknowledges that rangeland management must be context specific and that a universally agreed-upon recommendation for managing semi-arid rangelands does not exist. We present a socio-ecological simulation model derived from a case study in South Africa and use it to assess the socio-ecological effects of rotational vs. continuous grazing under conservative and opportunistic stocking rates. We find that continuous grazing under conservative stocking rates leads to the most favourable outcomes from the social and the ecological perspectives. However, the past legacy under apartheid and participants’ expectations renders its successful application unlikely because enforceability is not ensured.
|
| [52] |
A comparison of influences on the landscape of two social-ecological systems [J].
Case studies of social-ecological landscapes that consider local, spatially explicit land cover changes are necessary for the development of generalised knowledge on deforestation. This study focussed on two indigenous territories of eastern Panama that share the same settlement history, size and location but are perceived by local dwellers to differ in terms of land cover. By considering the territories social-ecological systems made up of Resource Systems, Resource Units, Actors and Governance Structures, following Ostrom’s framework for analysing the sustainability of social-ecological systems (McGinnis and Ostrom, 2014), we sought to determine which social-ecological factors could have led to divergent land cover outcomes to address local leaders’ concerns and inform future land management strategies. We conducted quantitative, spatial analysis using ArcGIS and multivariate statistics from numerical ecology on land cover data from participatory maps, and household level socio-economic data from semi-structured interviews and surveys. Results illustrate that the Resource System’s topography and Actors’ socioeconomics, namely number of people at home and household land ownership, are constraining variables on land cover and help explain divergent forest cover. To reconstruct the influence of history and Governance Structure on the landscapes, we conducted qualitative data collection, namely participatory pebble scoring of historical land cover, interviews with key informants, an archival search, and creation of a participatory historical timeline. Historical governmental timber extraction in the region pre-settlement, guided by topography constraints, may have led to degraded Resource Units (forests) susceptible to clearing. The Governance Structure’s self-organizing, monitoring and networking activities with outside institutions in scientific projects, enabled by Actors’ leadership and social capital, likely encouraged forest conservation in the forest-rich territory. Future land management could therefore benefit from establishment of a local non-governmental organisation to coordinate a communal vision of management and harness external conservation resources. Our findings suggest that inputting both qualitative and quantitative data obtained by participatory methods into Ostrom’s framework can help diagnose territories with divergent landscapes, and thereby inform both forest conservation science and local land management.
|
| [53] |
Research progress in sustainable development indicator systems both at home and abroad [J].国内外可持续发展指标体系研究进展 [J].
可持续发展是人类社会发展的必由之路。可持续发展指标的筛选和指标体系的构建，是人类全面实施可持续发展战略的重要组成部分，是人类社会可持续发展研究中的前沿性课题。20世纪90年代以来可持续发展研究的热点已经从可持续发展的定义转向可持续发展的评价，特别是指标体系的构建。20多年来，可持续发展指标体系的研究已经出现了从理论探讨走向了实际应用的趋势。通过分析20世纪90年代以来国内外有代表性的不同尺度上的可持续发展指标体系：联合国可持续发展委员会（UNCSD）的可持续发展指标体系、世界银行衡量可持续发展的新指标体系、波罗的海21世纪议程、英国、瑞典、芬兰、德国、美国、瑞士、丹麦及中国等国的可持续发展指标体系、欧洲城市可持续发展指标体系、新西兰玛努卡市的可持续发展指标体系、美国西雅图市社区可持续发展指标体系、中国的云南省、海南省、山东省等省以及南京市和哈尔滨市的可持续发展指标体系、山西交口县可持续发展指标体系、云南山区民族行政村可持续发展指标体系，对国内外可持续发展指标体系研究进行了总体评价。结果发现如果在以西方文明为主的现代化和城市化的框架下进行区域可持续发展的分析和评判，那得到的结论本质上是区域现代化或城市化程度的反映，而不是对区域可持续发展现状和趋势的评判。20多年来，国内外可持续发展指标体系的研究取得了丰硕的成果，为人类实施可持续发展战略打下了坚实的基础。
|
| [54] |
Trends and priority areas in ecosystem research of China [J].我国生态系统研究的发展趋势与优先领域 [J].
进入21世纪以来,生态系统研究取得了重要进展,在国际上形成了一系列的研究热点,包括生物多样性与生态系统功能、生态系统管理、生态风险与生态安全、全球变化的生态响应与效应等,表现出向着机理深化、多尺度系统监测与模拟、社会经济自然综合评价与管理对策等多维方向发展的总体趋势。中国的资源环境问题已经成为经济社会发展所面临的重要挑战。为应对挑战,我国已经开展了大规模生态保护、生态恢复重建等方面的生态工程,从而对生态系统研究提出了一系列亟待解决的科学问题。在综合分析中国国情和国际学术研究前沿领域与发展趋势的基础上,本文提出了我国未来生态系统研究的优先领域和重点方向。
|
| [55] |
Comment on the Ostrom’s general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems [J].奥斯特罗姆的社会生态系统可持续发展总体分析框架述评 [J]. |
| [56] |
Vulnerabilities and displacements: Adaptation and mitigation to climate change as a new development mantra [J].
ABSTRACT The past decade has witnessed significant growth across the globe of domestic and international initiatives designed to ameliorate both existing and potential impacts of climate change. The threat of altered environments and possibility of mass migrations of people have spurred intensive planning as well as the commitment of considerable resources to addressing such threats. Indeed, the primacy of climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts and planning has become so pronounced that one might argue that this is a new and pre-eminent form of development in the international arena. As with previous developmental preoccupations such as progress, modernity, gender, microcredit, participation and good governance, climate change adaptation and mitigation is today a central part of the development mantra. In this paper I examine the ‘climate change turn’ in development work by focusing on the case of Bangladesh, a country often discussed in both scholarly literature and popular discourse as one of the most vulnerable countries in the world to the possible effects of climate change. Images of rising waters, flooded fields and displaced farmers in the region have become an iconic symbol deployed during debates on climate change both locally and globally. As a result Bangladesh has emerged as a laboratory of sorts in which a series of national-level strategic plans, projects, programmes, trust funds and financing schemes are being designed and tested in partnership with international donors and development agencies, all built around the idea of climate change and resilience. Looking specifically at some of the most marginalised communities in Bangladesh – such as char dwellers and slum populations – I question in this paper what impact these efforts to combat climate change may have, in particular the possibility of being displaced not by climate change but rather by development processes meant to ameliorate its effects.
|
| [57] |
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [J].
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is perceived as the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. In the 23 years since its founding, it has become a key framework for the exchange of scientific dialogue on climate change within the scientific community as well as across the science and policy arenas. This article provides an introduction to the IPCC (its establishment, structure, procedures, and publications) and briefly discusses the solutions proposed by the IPCC in the face of recent criticism and media scrutiny. The philosophical framework of the science/policy interface in which the IPCC functions is presented. Finally, this article concludes with a presentation of the challenges facing the IPCC in the ongoing preparation of its 5th assessment report including exploration of the entire solutions space, ensuring a comparable set of scenarios across IPCC working groups and a consistent treatment of uncertainty.
|
| [58] |
Emerging meta-organisations and adaptation to global climate change: Evidence from implementing adaptation in Nepal, Pakistan and Ghana [J].
As developing countries move from policy to implementing adaptation to climate change, formal operational structures are emerging that exceed the expertise of any one actor. We refer to these arrangements as ‘meta-organisations’ that comprise many autonomous component organisations tackling adaptation. The meta-organisations set standards, define purposes, and specify appropriate means-ends criteria for delivering adaptation. Using empirical data from the three cases, Nepal, Pakistan and Ghana, the study identifies and analyses six attributes of the meta and component organisational structures. We argue that organisational structures are crucial to understanding adaptation, specifying policy and implementation. Our analysis demonstrates that while each country promotes similar objectives, the emerging structures are quite distinct, shaped by country-specific attributes and issues that lead to different outcomes. Nepal’s priority for a formal process has come at the cost of delayed implementation. Pakistan’s devolved approach lacks legitimacy to scale up the process nationally. Ghana’s use of existing decentralised structures and budgets relegates adaptation below other development priorities. These divergent structures arise from the different needs for legitimacy and accountability, and the relative priority attached to adaptation against other needs.
|
| [59] |
The social-economic-natural complex ecosystem [J].社会—经济—自然复合生态系统 [J].
当代若干重大社会问题,都直接或间接关系到社会体制、经济发展状况以及人类赖以生存的自然环境。社会、经济和自然是三个不同性质的系统,但其各自的生存和发展都受其它系统结构、功能的制约,必须当成一个复合系统来考虑,我们称其为社会-经济-自然复合生态系统。本文分析了该复合系统的生态特征,提出了衡量该复合系统的三个指标:(1)自然系统的合理性;(2)经济系统的利润;(3)社会系统的效益。指出复合生态系统的研究是一个多目标决策过程,应在经济生态学原则的指导下拟定具体的社会目标,经济目标和生态目标,使系统的综合效益最高,风险最小,存活机会最大。文中还提出了一些复合生态系统的研究方向和具体决策步骤。最后给出了三个复合系统的事例。
|
| [60] |
Marine ecosystem-based management: Definition, principles, framework and practice [J].基于生态系统的海洋管理:概念、原则、框架与实践途径 [J].
基于生态系统的海洋管理(MEBM)是一种跨学科的管理方法,该方法以科学理解生态系统的关联性、完整性和生物多样性为基础,结合生态系统的动态特征,以海洋生态系统而不是行政范围为管理对象,以达到海域资源的可持续利用为目标,对社会、经济和生态效益进行耦合以达到最大化的管理体系。在梳理国内外生态系统管理及相关研究进展的基础上,总结了基于生态系统的海域资源管理的基本理论、概念、原则、框架,对国外典型案例进行了介绍,并针对我国实际情况提出了建议,有利于我国海洋管理部门在海洋主体功能区规划等已有管理框架的基础上,强化生态科学与海洋管理的结合,推进我国海洋生态系统保护和海域资源的可持续利用。
|
甘公网安备62010202000687
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
