Chanda L. Meek

Limitations of an optimum sustainable population or potential biological removal approach for conserving marine mammals: Pacific walrus case study

Decision rules are the agreed-upon points at which specific management interventions are initiated. For marine mammal management under the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), decision rules are usually based on either a numeric population or biological-removal approach. However, for walrus and other ice-associated pinnipeds, the inability to reliably assess population numbers or biological removals highlights a significant gap in the MMPA, particularly when the Arctic environment is rapidly changing. We describe the MMPAs ecosystem-based management goals, and why managers have bypassed these goals in favor of an approach that depends upon numerical population assessment. We then revisit the statutes primary goals in light of current knowledge about the Pacific walrus ecosystem and new developments in environmental governance. We argue that to monitor and respond to changes in the walrus ecosystem, decision rules should be based on scientific criteria that depend less on the currently-impractical goal of accurately enumerating population size and trends, or removals from that population. Rather, managers should base decisions on ecological needs and observed ecological changes. To implement this approach would require an amendment to the MMPA that supports filling the gap in management with achievable decision rules. Alternatively, walrus and other ice-associated pinnipeds will remain largely unmanaged during a period of profound environmental change.

Connecting scientific observations to stakeholder needs in sea ice social–environmental systems: the institutional geography of northern Alaska

Abstract The institutions governing sea ice system services in the Arctic are associated with particular places, species, and environments. Yet scholars rarely consider the way these associations may present barriers to, or facilitate, effective translation of scientific data into broadly available information for stakeholders to create and debate policy. In light of rapidly changing arctic environments how can data best be collected and disseminated to affected stakeholders as usable information to facilitate effective planning? This article explores the linkages between scientific data production and policy implementation related to sea ice loss in the Arctic. The rapid decline of arctic summer sea ice is currently tracked and studied intensively but a comprehensive approach to address the changes is lacking. Our work builds upon earlier research establishing the need to approach sea ice as a complex multi-jurisdictional geophysical–social–ecological feature from a services standpoint. Our research catalogs the geography of sea ice institutions in northern Alaska to demonstrate the fragmentation in data production and distribution. We then examine two case studies. The first is a newly established cross-scale information bridge improving sea-ice and weather information relevant to walrus hunting and management. The second is the case of the emerging arctic marine traffic regime. We argue that in order to maximize data production, dissemination, and participatory capacity across stakeholders: (1) scientific observations should be tied to institutional density and sea ice services, and (2) information bridges should exist across major institutional actors.

Politics and the resilience of ecosystem services

SUMMARY Different sectors of society typically value, need and demand different bundles of ecosystem services. At the same time, important trade-offs exist between the production of different services, and it is not possible to increase the resilience of all ecosystem services simultaneously. Decisions about which services to sustain in a particular social–ecological system therefore require trade-offs that are inherently political. Politics can be described as ‘the authoritative allocation of values for a society’ (Easton 1965). To further complicate matters, the desired mix of services will evolve with changing societal values and preferences, and the resilience of ecosystem services is only one among many desired outcomes (e.g. equality, human rights, democracy) of social–ecological systems. Resolving these trade-offs requires resolution of collective-action dilemmas and intergroup conflicts, a process that comes replete with power inequalities, asymmetric resource bases and unequal outcomes. This chapter discusses some of the asymmetries and power dynamics that underlie decisions of which ecosystem services should form the focus for resilience-building initiatives; the remainder of the book assumes these choices have been made and focuses on how the resilience of some agreed-on mix of ecosystem services may be enhanced. Here, we focus specifically on the social consequences of trade-offs between ecosystem services; asymmetries in the distribution of ecosystem services; and we briefly discuss the broad literature of how these may be addressed through wider deliberative processes. We find that issues associated with the allocation of ecosystem services are poorly integrated into the resilience literature, and suggest that an improved understanding of allocation trade-offs could result from more applied research on use of ecosystem services that integrates perspectives from the social sciences about how and why people make and respond to decisions concerning ecosystem services. INTRODUCTION Prompted by escalating rates of environmental change, resilience thinking is one emerging applied field that explicitly seeks to inform managers and policy-makers in the governance of social–ecological systems (SES) and the ecosystem services they produce (Berkes et al . 2000; Walker and Salt 2006).

Linking classroom learning and research to advance ideas about social-ecological resilience

There is an increasing demand in higher education institutions for training in complex environmental problems. Such training requires a careful mix of conventional methods and innovative solutions, ...