Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Lance Gunderson is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Lance Gunderson.


AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment | 2002

Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations

Carl Folke; Steve Carpenter; Thomas Elmqvist; Lance Gunderson; C. S. Holling; Brian Walker

Abstract Emerging recognition of two fundamental errors under-pinning past polices for natural resource issues heralds awareness of the need for a worldwide fundamental change in thinking and in practice of environmental management. The first error has been an implicit assumption that ecosystem responses to human use are linear, predictable and controllable. The second has been an assumption that human and natural systems can be treated independently. However, evidence that has been accumulating in diverse regions all over the world suggests that natural and social systems behave in nonlinear ways, exhibit marked thresholds in their dynamics, and that social-ecological systems act as strongly coupled, complex and evolving integrated systems. This article is a summary of a report prepared on behalf of the Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government, as input to the process of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa in 26 August 4 September 2002. We use the concept of resilience—the capacity to buffer change, learn and develop—as a framework for understanding how to sustain and enhance adaptive capacity in a complex world of rapid transformations. Two useful tools for resilience-building in social-ecological systems are structured scenarios and active adaptive management. These tools require and facilitate a social context with flexible and open institutions and multi-level governance systems that allow for learning and increase adaptive capacity without foreclosing future development options.


Journal of Wildlife Management | 1997

Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions

Lance Gunderson; C. S. Holling; Stephen S. Light

This volume uses a series of case studies to test an emerging theory of complex adaptive systems that forms the basis for explaining the interrelated dynamics of ecosystems, institutions and society. It deals equally with institutional organization and ecosystem structure.


Ecology and Society | 2006

A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems

Brian Walker; Lance Gunderson; Ann P. Kinzig; Carl Folke; Steve Carpenter; Lisen Schultz

This paper is a work-in-progress account of ideas and propositions about resilience in socialecological systems. It articulates our understanding of how these complex systems change and what determines their ability to absorb disturbances in either their ecological or their social domains. We call them “propositions” because, although they are useful in helping us understand and compare different social-ecological systems, they are not sufficiently well defined to be considered formal hypotheses. These propositions were developed in two workshops, in 2003 and 2004, in which participants compared the dynamics of 15 case studies in a wide range of regions around the world. The propositions raise many questions, and we present a list of some that could help define the next phase of resilience-related research.


Ecology and Society | 2006

Shooting the Rapids: Navigating Transitions to Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems

Per Olsson; Lance Gunderson; Steve Carpenter; Paul Ryan; Louis Lebel; Carl Folke; C. S. Holling

The case studies of Kristianstads Vattenrike, Sweden; the Northern Highlands Lake District and the Everglades in the USA; the Mae Nam Ping Basin, Thailand; and the Goulburn-Broken Catchment, Australia, were compared to assess the outcome of different actions for transforming social-ecological systems (SESs). The transformations consisted of two phases, a preparation phase and a transition phase, linked by a window of opportunity. Key leaders and shadow networks can prepare a system for change by exploring alternative system configurations and developing strategies for choosing from among possible futures. Key leaders can recognize and use or create windows of opportunity and navigate transitions toward adaptive governance. Leadership functions include the ability to span scales of governance, orchestrate networks, integrate and communicate understanding, and reconcile different problem domains. Successful transformations rely on epistemic and shadow networks to provide novel ideas and ways of governing SESs. We conclude by listing some rules of thumb” that can help build leadership and networks for successful transformations toward adaptive governance of social-ecological systems.


Ecosystems | 2006

Ecological Thresholds: The Key to Successful Environmental Management or an Important Concept with No Practical Application?

Peter M. Groffman; Jill S. Baron; Tamara Blett; Arthur J. Gold; Iris A. Goodman; Lance Gunderson; Barbara Levinson; Margaret A. Palmer; Hans W. Paerl; Garry D. Peterson; N. LeRoy Poff; David W. Rejeski; James F. Reynolds; Monica G. Turner; Kathleen C. Weathers; John A. Wiens

An ecological threshold is the point at which there is an abrupt change in an ecosystem quality, property or phenomenon, or where small changes in an environmental driver produce large responses in the ecosystem. Analysis of thresholds is complicated by nonlinear dynamics and by multiple factor controls that operate at diverse spatial and temporal scales. These complexities have challenged the use and utility of threshold concepts in environmental management despite great concern about preventing dramatic state changes in valued ecosystems, the need for determining critical pollutant loads and the ubiquity of other threshold-based environmental problems. In this paper we define the scope of the thresholds concept in ecological science and discuss methods for identifying and investigating thresholds using a variety of examples from terrestrial and aquatic environments, at ecosystem, landscape and regional scales. We end with a discussion of key research needs in this area.


Conservation Ecology | 1999

Resilience, Flexibility and Adaptive Management - - Antidotes for Spurious Certitude?

Lance Gunderson

In many cases, a predicate of adaptive environmental assessment and management (AEAM) has been a search for flexibility in management institutions, or for resilience in the ecological system prior to structuring actions that are designed for learning. Many of the observed impediments to AEAM occur when there is little or no resilience in the ecological components (e.g., when there is fear of an ecosystem shift to an unwanted stability domain), or when there is a lack of flexibility in the extant power relationships among stakeholders. In these cases, a pragmatic solution is to seek to restore resilience or flexibility rather than to pursue a course of broad-scale, active adaptive management. Restoration of resilience and flexibility may occur through novel assessments or small-scale experiments, or it may occur when an unforeseen policy crisis allows for reformation or restructuring of power relationships among stakeholders.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2010

Navigating transformations in governance of Chilean marine coastal resources

Stefan Gelcich; Terry P. Hughes; Per Olsson; Carl Folke; Omar Defeo; Miriam Fernández; Simon Foale; Lance Gunderson; Carlos Rodríguez-Sickert; Marten Scheffer; Robert S. Steneck; Juan Carlos Castilla

Marine ecosystems are in decline. New transformational changes in governance are urgently required to cope with overfishing, pollution, global changes, and other drivers of degradation. Here we explore social, political, and ecological aspects of a transformation in governance of Chiles coastal marine resources, from 1980 to today. Critical elements in the initial preparatory phase of the transformation were (i) recognition of the depletion of resource stocks, (ii) scientific knowledge on the ecology and resilience of targeted species and their role in ecosystem dynamics, and (iii) demonstration-scale experimental trials, building on smaller-scale scientific experiments, which identified new management pathways. The trials improved cooperation among scientists and fishers, integrating knowledge and establishing trust. Political turbulence and resource stock collapse provided a window of opportunity that triggered the transformation, supported by new enabling legislation. Essential elements to navigate this transformation were the ability to network knowledge from the local level to influence the decision-making processes at the national level, and a preexisting social network of fishers that provided political leverage through a national confederation of artisanal fishing collectives. The resultant governance scheme includes a revolutionary national system of marine tenure that allocates user rights and responsibilities to fisher collectives. Although fine tuning is necessary to build resilience of this new regime, this transformation has improved the sustainability of the interconnected social–ecological system. Our analysis of how this transformation unfolded provides insights into how the Chilean system could be further developed and identifies generalized pathways for improved governance of marine resources around the world.


BioScience | 2001

Coping with Collapse: Ecological and Social Dynamics in Ecosystem Management

Stephen R. Carpenter; Lance Gunderson

The role of ecological expertise in policymaking is evolving. In fields such as engineering or medicine, longestablished professional standards guide the application of expertise in public decisionmaking. Professional ecologists, however, participate in decisionmaking in variable and changing ways. Some function as technicians, providing factual information used by decisionmakers; others as detectives, drawing attention to some previously unrecognized problem; and still others as advocates, adducing information designed to support a particular position.


Journal of Environmental Management | 2011

Pathology and failure in the design and implementation of adaptive management

Craig R. Allen; Lance Gunderson

The conceptual underpinnings for adaptive management are simple; there will always be inherent uncertainty and unpredictability in the dynamics and behavior of complex ecological systems as a result non-linear interactions among components and emergence, yet management decisions must still be made. The strength of adaptive management is in the recognition and confrontation of such uncertainty. Rather than ignore uncertainty, or use it to preclude management actions, adaptive management can foster resilience and flexibility to cope with an uncertain future, and develop safe to fail management approaches that acknowledge inevitable changes and surprises. Since its initial introduction, adaptive management has been hailed as a solution to endless trial and error approaches to complex natural resource management challenges. However, its implementation has failed more often than not. It does not produce easy answers, and it is appropriate in only a subset of natural resource management problems. Clearly adaptive management has great potential when applied appropriately. Just as clearly adaptive management has seemingly failed to live up to its high expectations. Why? We outline nine pathologies and challenges that can lead to failure in adaptive management programs. We focus on general sources of failures in adaptive management, so that others can avoid these pitfalls in the future. Adaptive management can be a powerful and beneficial tool when applied correctly to appropriate management problems; the challenge is to keep the concept of adaptive management from being hijacked for inappropriate use.


Ecosystems | 2005

The Use of Discontinuities and Functional Groups to Assess Relative Resilience in Complex Systems

Craig R. Allen; Lance Gunderson; Alan R. Johnson

It is evident when the resilience of a system has been exceeded and the system qualitatively changed. However, it is not clear how to measure resilience in a system prior to the demonstration that the capacity for resilient response has been exceeded. We argue that self-organizing human and natural systems are structured by a relatively small set of processes operating across scales in time and space. These structuring processes should generate a discontinuous distribution of structures and frequencies, where discontinuities mark the transition from one scale to another. Resilience is not driven by the identity of elements of a system, but rather by the functions those elements provide, and their distribution within and across scales. A self-organizing system that is resilient should maintain patterns of function within and across scales despite the turnover of specific elements (for example, species, cities). However, the loss of functions, or a decrease in functional representation at certain scales will decrease system resilience. It follows that some distributions of function should be more resilient than others. We propose that the determination of discontinuities, and the quantification of function both within and across scales, produce relative measures of resilience in ecological and other systems. We describe a set of methods to assess the relative resilience of a system based upon the determination of discontinuities and the quantification of the distribution of functions in relation to those discontinuities.

Collaboration


Dive into the Lance Gunderson's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Carl Folke

Stellenbosch University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Craig R. Allen

University of Nebraska–Lincoln

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David G. Angeler

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Marten Scheffer

Wageningen University and Research Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge