Quantifying uncertainty and trade-offs in resilience assessments
Craig R. Allen, U.S. Geological Survey, Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Hannah E. Birge, Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
David G. Angeler, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Uppsala, Sweden
Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold, Brandeis School of Law, Department of Urban and Public Affairs
University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
Brian C. Chaffin, W.A. Franke College of Forestry & Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, USA
Daniel A. DeCaro, Social Decision Making and Sustainability Lab
Department of Urban and Public Affairs, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
Ahjond S. Garmestani, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Lance Gunderson, Department of Environmental Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Full Text: HTML
Several frameworks have been developed to assess the resilience of social-ecological systems, but most require substantial data inputs, time, and technical expertise. Stakeholders and practitioners often lack the resources for such intensive efforts. Furthermore, most end with problem framing and fail to explicitly address trade-offs and uncertainty. To remedy this gap, we developed a rapid survey assessment that compares the relative resilience of social-ecological systems with respect to a number of resilience properties. This approach generates large amounts of information relative to stakeholder inputs. We targeted four stakeholder categories: government (policy, regulation, management), end users (farmers, ranchers, landowners, industry), agency/public science (research, university, extension), and NGOs (environmental, citizen, social justice) in four North American watersheds, to assess social-ecological resilience through surveys. Conceptually, social-ecological systems are comprised of components ranging from strictly human to strictly ecological, but that relate directly or indirectly to one another. They have soft boundaries and several important dimensions or axes that together describe the nature of social-ecological interactions, e.g., variability, diversity, modularity, slow variables, feedbacks, capital, innovation, redundancy, and ecosystem services. There is no absolute measure of resilience, so our design takes advantage of cross-watershed comparisons and therefore focuses on relative resilience. Our approach quantifies and compares the relative resilience across watershed systems and potential trade-offs among different aspects of the social-ecological system, e.g., between social, economic, and ecological contributions. This approach permits explicit assessment of several types of uncertainty (e.g., self-assigned uncertainty for stakeholders; uncertainty across respondents, watersheds, and subsystems), and subjectivity in perceptions of resilience among key actors and decision makers and provides an efficient way to develop the mental models that inform our stakeholders and stakeholder categories.
coupled human-natural system; resilience assessment; social-ecological system; stressed watersheds
Copyright © 2018 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. You may share and adapt the work for noncommercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license.