hidden
Image Database Export Citations

Menu:

Collapse and Reorganization in Social-Ecological Systems: Questions, Some Ideas, and Policy Implications

Show full item record

Type: Journal Article
Author: Abel, Nick; Cumming, David H. M.; Anderies, John M.
Journal: Ecology and Society
Volume: 11
Page(s):
Date: 2006
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/10535/3294
Sector: Social Organization
General & Multiple Resources
Region: Pacific and Australia
Africa
Subject(s): resilience
ecology
adaptive systems
natural resources
social capital
social-ecological systems
Abstract: "We tested the explanatory usefulness and policy relevance of Holling's (2001) 'adaptive cycle' theory in exploring processes of 'collapse,' also called 'release,' and recovery in regional socialecological systems (SESs) in Zimbabwe and Australia. We found that the adaptive cycle is useful in recognizing changes in system behavior during the various phases. However, our small sample of cases did not generally show either the sequential passage of stages or the prerelease decline in resilience that adaptive cycle theory implies. In all cases, however, the reasons for releases were apparent with hindsight. On the other hand, our examples mostly supported the proposition that resilience is controlled by slowly changing variables. Although we found the adaptive cycle, and complex system theory in general, to be useful integrating frameworks, disciplinary theories are required to explain causes and effects in specific cases. We used theories linking distribution of political power to institutional change; to investment in natural, human, social, and physical capitals; and to access to financial capital. We explored patterns of change of these capitals before, during, and after release and reorganization. Both the patterns of change and relative importance of the different capitals during reorganization varied widely, but the importation of resources from broader scales was often a key to recovery. We propose that the resilience of most regional or national SESs can be explained in these terms. The capacity to self-organize emerged from our studies as a critical source of resilience. Although rebuilding this capacity at times requires access to external resources, excessive subsidization can reduce the capacity to self-organize. The policy implication is that cross-scale subsidization should end when self-organization becomes apparent, because subsidization can increase the vulnerability of the system as a whole. When the aim is to recover without changing the system fundamentally, the focus should be upon conserving or investing in the elements of capital critical for this. If the current system is not viable, it is necessary to invest in forms of capital that will enable fundamental change. It will also be necessary to stop investing in the capitals that maintained the unviable regime. The political difficulty of doing this is why SESs so often remain maladapted to current conditions and opportunities and eventually reach the point of collapse."

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
ES-2005-1593.pdf 231.0Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following document type(s)

Show full item record