16 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 16
Working Paper Systems Perspective on the Interrelations between Natural, Human-made and Cultural Capital(1993) Berkes, Fikret; Folke, Carl"In recent years substantial progress has been achieved in the field of ecological economics for clarifying human-nature interrelations. The fundamental role of the life-support functions of the environment (Odum, 1975) for economic development and sustainability has entered from ecology into economics, and has started to be theoretically as well as empirically analyzed. This has, in part, given rise to the terminology of natural capital and human-made capital. In contrast to the assumptions of standard economic theory, ecological economists regard human-made capital and natural capital as fundamentally complementary. Natural capital and its derived goods and services are the preconditions or the basis for economic development. It is not possible for human ingenuity to create human-made capital without support from natural capital (e.g. Daly, 1990). Moreover, it is not possible to approach sustainability by only focusing on these two factors, natural capital and human-made capital interrelations. We need a third dimension, what we refer to as cultural capital, as well. From a systems perspective, we emphasize that the three types of capital are strongly interrelated and form the basis for guiding society towards sustainability."Working Paper Cultural Capital and Natural Capital Interrelations(1992) Folke, Carl; Berkes, Fikret"The importance of natural capital and the relationships between natural capital and human-made capital are of fundamental interest in ecological economics. But a consideration of these two kinds of capital alone fall short of providing the essential elements for the analysis of sustainability. A more complete conceptualization of the interdependency of the economy and the environment requires attention to social/cultural /political systems as well. We use the term cultural capital to refer to factors that provide human societies with the means and adaptations to deal with the natural environment. Cultural capital, as used here, includes factors such as social/political institutions, environmental ethics (world view) and traditional ecological knowledge in a society. The three types of capital are closely interrelated. Natural capital is the basis for cultural capital. Human-made capital is generated by an interaction between natural and cultural capital. Cultural capital will determine how a society uses natural capital to create human-made capital. Aspects of cultural capital, such as institutions involved in the governance of resource use and the environmental world view, are crucial for the potential of a society to develop sustainable relations with its natural environment."Conference Paper Community-Based Use of Mangrove Resources in St. Lucia(1992) Smith, Allan H.; Berkes, Fikret"The sustainable use of mangrove forests can effectively contribute to their conservation. The experience with an integrated conservation-development project in St. Lucia showed that charcoal producers using mangrove fuelwood resources in a Marine Reserve Area have successfully changed their harvesting practices, reversing a trend of mangrove destruction. The conditions under which this change occurred included strengthening the organization of local users and their resource-use rights, and building a community-based management system, leading to the avoidance of open-access conditions. Surveys of the mangrove, undertaken before and after management intervention, showed that while the mean stand diameter of the fuelwood trees did not change significantly, there was an increase in the density of stems and in total basal area of timber."Conference Paper The Interface Between Natural and Social Systems(1993) Berkes, Fikret"This is a background paper on the focus area, interface between social and natural systems. Following definitions, the paper attempts to present some perspectives on the linkage between social and natural systems, and to cover some aspects of the state of knowledge about how natural resource systems and social systems interact under different property rights regimes, and how that interaction affects the performance of natural resource systems."Conference Paper Resilience and the Co-Evolution of Ecosystems and Institutions(1995) Folke, Carl; Berkes, Fikret"Resilience is the ability of a system to cope with change without collapsing. It is the capacity to absorb external perturbations, by actively adapting to an ever changing environment. Reduction in resilience means that vulnerability increases, with the risk that the whole system flips from one equilibrium state to another. Such flips are often a consequence of the misuse of the environment and the inertia of institutions to change. Smaller unpredictable perturbations that previously could be handled turn into major crises when extreme events intersect with internally generated vulnerability due to loss of resilience. To avoid such situations there is a need for institutions with the ability to respond to and manage environmental feedbacks, institutions that can cope with unpredictable perturbations before they accumulate and challenge the existence of the whole social-ecological system. This implies that it is not enough to only understand the institution in question. The dynamics of the ecosystems that form the biophysical precondition for the existence of the institution need to be taken into account as well. This study focuses on the linked social-ecological system, and its dynamic interrelationships. We regard it as one system with its social and ecological components co-evolving over time. It is in this context that we study traditional and newly-emergent social-ecological systems. We are analyzing 1) how the local social system has adapted to and developed a knowledge system for dealing with the dynamics of the ecosystem(s) including the resources and services that it generates, 2) specifically, how the local system maintains ecosystem resilience in the face of perturbations, and 3) those combinations of property rights arrangements, institutions, and knowledge systems which accomplish the above successfully. Examples will be presented from the Cree Indians of the Canadian eastern subartic and their resource management, and pastoral herders and rangeland management in semi-arid Africa."Conference Paper Cultural and Natural Capital: A Systems Approach Revisited(1998) Berkes, Fikret"This paper does not claim to provide an 'ecological perspective' on social capital. Ecology has little to say directly on social capital. But the paper does emphasise social system-ecosystem interactions, along the lines of our recent book. First, let's place social capital in perspective. There is a spectrum of concepts on the social dimensions of sustainability. These include social indicators, as used for example in Robert Allen's new book still in press, and a diversity of concepts of social and cultural wellbeing: -- equity: fairness, social justice, distributional issues; -- empowerment: ability of people to exert a degree of control over decisions affecting their lives; -- sustainable livelihoods: capacity to generate and maintain one's means of living; -- cultural sustainability: ability to retain cultural identity, and to allow change to be guided in ways consistent with the cultural values of a people; -- social cohesion: shared values and commitment to a community - as the foundation stone of social order, as used by Jane Jenson and others; and as social capital: -- social organisational features, such as trust, norms and networks."Conference Paper Livelihood Systems, Adaptive Strategies and Sustainability Indicators in the Western Indian Himalayas(1996) Berkes, Fikret; Duffield, Colin E.; Ham, Laurie"The paper is based on an interdisciplinary team project in Kullu District, Himachal Pradesh, in the Western Indian Himalaya, and concentrates on three themes: land use and property-rights systems through which the local people interact with their environment; adaptive strategies used for sustainable livelihood security in the face of ecological, social and economic change, with focus on women's roles; and changes in the forest ecosystem and 'signs and signals' of sustainability as perceived by the people of the area. Local villagers are recognized as actors who define what is important and relevant, rather than merely the objects of study. Their perspectives provide two important findings: (1) adaptive strategies used by households and villages are diverse and contribute to the resilience of the social system and the natural system, and (2)villagers recognize a complex array of signs and signals, that are biophysical, social and economic in nature, and that may be seen as indices of sustainability. Village institutions are 'fuzzy' and resilient, and are the basis of both the system of adaptive strategies and the system of signs and signals. These institutions seem well adapted to fit into a decentralized, integrated, participatory resource management framework."Conference Paper Solutions to the 'Tragedy of the Commons': Sea Urchin Management in St. Lucia, West Indies(1990) Smith, Allan H.; Berkes, Fikret"Possible solutions to the commons problem have rarely been investigated systematically by the use of biological data on the sustainability of the resource. The edible sear urchin (Tripneustes ventricosus) resource of St. Lucia is highly prized but vulnerable to over-exploitation because of its shallow water distribution. We examined sustainability in three study areas. The resource was depleted in the study area in which access was free and open. It remained sustainable in the other two areas in which there were access controls. In one case, the area was under government control as a marine reserve, a measure that enjoyed local support; in the other, there was a locally practiced 'closed season' and community-based management of access into the bay. The results indicated that both government controls and informal, community-level controls can lead to successful resource management outcomes."Working Paper Linking Social and Ecological Systems for Resilience and Sustainability(1994) Berkes, Fikret; Folke, Carl"Traditional resource management systems or other local-level systems, based on the knowledge and experience of the resource users themselves, may have the potential to improve management of a number of ecosystems types. A considerable amount of evidence has accumulated to suggest that ecologically sensible indigenous practices have or had existed, for example, in the case of some tropical forests, island ecosystems, tropical fisheries, and semi-arid grazing lands. Given that Western resource management has not been all that successful in many of these environments, perhaps there are lessons to be learned from the cultural capital of societies which have elaborated these practices, a view echoed in Our Common Future. Ancient cultures and indigenous peoples do not have monopoly over ecological wisdom; there are cases of local, newly emergent or 'neo-traditional' resource management systems which cannot claim historical continuity over generations but which are nevertheless based on local knowledge and practice appropriately adapted to the ecological systems in which they occur."Conference Paper Current Approaches to Co-Management in Manitoba(1991) Haugh, Allison; Berkes, Fikret"Cooperative management, as a regime for sharing resource management authority between government agencies, interest groups and user communities has been introduced in Manitoba on a number of occasions and in a variety of settings. It is important to note at the outset that co-management does not have a single prescription: it can denote stronger forms of community involvement (i.e. formal joint management of resources, or even self-management of resources by the communities themselves), or it can mean weaker forms of local involvement (i.e. consultative management through an advisory board). This study explores the current status of co-management in Manitoba, with an emphasis on the level of community involvement in such management strategies. While the term "co-management" tends to be used primarily in the area of wildlife and fisheries management, the following examples demonstrate that co-management can also apply to other resource-based industries, such as forestry and wild rice harvesting. The rationale for such agreements, and the issues or problems particular to each setting are explored."