Bernhard Glaeser

Towards a framework for cross-scale and multi-level analysis of coastal and marine social-ecological systems dynamics

As the Anthropocene proceeds, regional and local sustainability problems are ever more likely to originate at multiple levels of the earth system. The rate of global environmental change is now vastly outpacing our policy response, and social-ecological systems analysis needs to support global environmental governance. To respond to this challenge, this paper initiates the development of a coastal social-ecological typology and applies it in an exemplary fashion to nine coastal and marine case studies. We use an explicit distinction between the definitions of scale and level and a problem or issue-specific approach to the delineation of social-ecological units. A current major challenge to social-ecological systems analysis is the identification of the cross-level and cross-scale interactions and links which play key roles in shaping coastal and marine social-ecological dynamics and outcomes. We show that the regional level is the best point of departure to generate sustainability-oriented cross-scale and multi-level analyses and offers the outline of a typology in which different disciplinary and other forms of knowledge can be integrated as both part of regionally grounded analysis and action which engages with global sustainability challenges.

Natur in der Krise? Ein kulturelles Mißverständnis

Ist die sogenannte Umweltkrise eigentlich eine Kulturkrise? Was heist Umweltkrise in diesem Sinne, und welches sind ihre auslosenden Faktoren? Sind sie ideologischer Herkunft - in der ideengeschichtlichen und nicht in der interessengebundenen Bedeutung? Ist die Umweltkrise folglich eine »ideologische Krise« und in diesem Sinne (auch) kulturell bedingt? Welches sind die Verknupfungen zwischen Umwelt und Natur und die Abhangigkeiten zwischen Natur und Kultur, ohne die die Rede von Krise vermutlich gar nicht entstehen konnte? Der folgende Gedankengang versucht, einen Schritt zur Beantwortung der obigen Fragen zu tun.

Global change, ensuing vulnerabilities, and social responses in marine environments

Far above the world, Planet Earth is blue, And there’s nothing I can do— David Bowie Davis Bowie is wrong. But not about our planet being blue. Our planet is habitable because it is blue, and it is blue because it is largely composed of oceans. Our oceans are essential for all life on earth, providing us with the air that we breathe, absorbing the carbon dioxide that we exhale, providing us with food for survival and soothing our human souls via its aesthetic qualities. Globally, we have taken our oceans for granted, being largely ignorant of their many functions that are indispensable to us, and assuming them to be inexhaustible. Yet, they have limits, and contradicting Bowie, there is much that can be done to keep our planet blue and its natural and social components healthy. We can think of oceans as complex systems, composed of physical and biotic components and processes that interact at multiple spatial and temporal scales. From physical oceanography to biogeochemical cycles through food web interactions to human use of the oceans, a complex set of drivers and responses, and interactions are in dynamic interplay. Such complex systems require the expertise of many disciplines that span the natural and social sciences and humanities, e.g., physical oceanographers, biogeochemists, ecologists, sociologists, anthropologists, historians and folklorists. From intertidal coastal areas to the open seas, oceans have been subject to the impacts of multiple human activities for centuries (e.g., Jackson et al. 2001; Lotze et al. 2006; Harnik et al. 2012) and our planet is under threat from the cumulative impacts of these activities. Overexploitation, climate change, coastal development, war, and global change are major drivers of change. Addressing the impacts of these drivers requires new approaches in sciences, policy and governance. It requires scientists from multiple disciplines to work together collaboratively on specific issues; it requires transdisciplinary research, which includes non-academic participants. Quintessentially, it requires, as is now being more widely recognized (Editorial 2015; Victor 2015), the active engagement of social sciences to question the very nature of how we respond to and make sense of global change (Lövbrand et al. 2015). There is a lot that can be done for the blue planet: we just have to figure out how. Researchers, community activists, and leaders are starting to do exactly that, as illustrated in this special collection of papers. The IMBER & Alida Bundy alida.bundy@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

From global sustainability research matrix to typology: a tool to analyze coastal and marine social-ecological systems

An attempt is made to develop a coastal and marine social-ecological typology. An explicitly regional focus is taken to explore how a regionally grounded, multi-scale analysis may support multi-level local to global sustainability efforts. A case study from Indonesia exemplifies this approach. Social-ecological sustainability problems, caused by drivers at different earth system levels, lead the way into the proposed typology. A social-ecological system consists of a biogeophysical territory, an identified issue and the associated social agents. It can extend across disciplines as well as across spatial and institutional levels and scales. A global sustainability research matrix, which is based on ecozones and problem types, can thus be constructed and serves as a research-driven multi-level typology. The regional application links directly to stakeholder agendas at the problem level. It is argued that some of the central functions of coastal and marine social-ecological systems are resource provision, livelihood access, and storm and erosion protection, which need special attention in a coastal and marine social-ecological typology, as exemplified in the Indonesian case study used. This contribution is an exploratory research to propose steps toward such a typology. It is extended to the social-ecological subsystems—natural, social, governance—and applied to additional cases. A two-dimensional, hierarchical typology is proposed as a tool to analyze, compare and classify coastal and marine systems. A policy typology is added to assess changes. A governance baseline is assumed to foster normative sustainability goals. A subsystems appraisal typology is meant to evaluate action results. Finally, unresolved methodological questions are discussed.