Maja Schlüter

Mechanisms of Resilience in Common-pool Resource Management Systems: an Agent-based Model of Water Use in a River Basin

The concept of resilience is widely promoted as a promising notion to guide new approaches to ecosystem and resource management that try to enhance a systems capacity to cope with change. A variety of mechanisms of resilience specific for different systems have been proposed. In the context of resource management those include but are not limited to the diversity of response options and flexibility of the social system to adaptively respond to changes on an adequate scale. However, implementation of resilience-based management in specific real-world systems has often proven difficult because of a limited understanding of suitable interventions and their impact on the resilience of the coupled social-ecological system. We propose an agent-based modeling approach to explore system characteristics and mechanisms of resilience in a complex resource management system, based on a case study of water use in the Amudarya River, which is a semiarid river basin. Water resources in its delta are used to sustain irrigated agriculture as well as aquatic ecosystems that provide fish and other ecosystem services. The three subsystems of the social-ecological system, i.e., the social system, the irrigation system, and an aquatic ecosystem, are linked by resource flows and the allocation decision making of actors on different levels. Simulation experiments are carried out to compare the resilience of different institutional settings of water management to changes in the variability and uncertainty of water availability. The aim is to investigate the influence of (1) the organizational structure of water management, (2) information on water availability, and (3) the diversity of water uses on the resilience of the system to short and long-term water scarcity. In this paper, the model concept and first simulation results are presented. As a first illustration of the approach the performances of a centralized and a decentralized regime are compared under different scenarios of information on water availability. Under the given conditions of a regularly fluctuating inflow and compliance of agents with orders from a national authority, the centralized system performs better as long as irrigation is the only type of water use. Diversification of resource use, e.g., irrigation and fishing, increases the performance of the decentralized regime and the resilience of both. Systematic analysis of the performance of different system structures will help to identify properties and mechanisms of resilience. This understanding will be valuable for the identification, development, and evaluation of management interventions in specific river basins.

Principles for building resilience : sustaining ecosystem services in social-ecological systems

List of contributors Foreword Carl Folke Acknowledgements 1. An introduction to the resilience approach and principles to sustain ecosystem services in social-ecological systems Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs, Maja Schluter and Michael L. Schoon 2. Politics and the resilience of ecosystem services Michael L. Schoon, Martin D. Robards, Katrina Brown, Nathan Engle, Chanda L. Meek and Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs 3. Principle 1: maintain diversity and redundancy Karen Kotschy, Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs, Tim Daw, Carl Folke and Paul West 4. Principle 2: manage connectivity Vasilis Dakos, Allyson Quinlan, Jacopo A. Baggio, Elena Bennett, Orjan Bodin and Shauna BurnSilver 5. Principle 3: manage slow variables and feedbacks Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs, Line Gordon, Ciara Raudsepp-Hearne, Maja Schluter and Brian Walker 6. Principle 4: foster complex adaptive systems thinking Erin L. Bohensky, Louisa S. Evans, John M. Anderies, Duan Biggs and Christo Fabricius 7. Principle 5: encourage learning Georgina Cundill, Anne M. Leitch, Lisen Schultz, Derek Armitage and Garry Peterson 8. Principle 6: broaden participation Anne M. Leitch, Georgina Cundill, Lisen Schultz and Chanda L. Meek 9. Principle 7: promote polycentric governance systems Michael L. Schoon, Martin D. Robards, Chanda L. Meek and Victor Galaz 10. Reflections on building resilience: interactions among principles and implications for governance Maja Schluter, Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs, Michael L. Schoon, Martin D. Robards and John M. Anderies Index.

Regime shifts in a social-ecological system

Ecological regime shifts are rarely purely ecological. Not only is the regime shift frequently triggered by human activity, but the responses of relevant actors to ecological dynamics are often crucial to the development and even existence of the regime shift. Here, we show that the dynamics of human behaviour in response to ecological changes can be crucial in determining the overall dynamics of the system. We find a social–ecological regime shift in a model of harvesters of a common-pool resource who avoid over-exploitation of the resource by social ostracism of non-complying harvesters. The regime shift, which can be triggered by several different drivers individually or also in combination, consists of a breakdown of the social norm, sudden collapse of co-operation and an over-exploitation of the resource. We use the approach of generalized modeling to study the robustness of the regime shift to uncertainty over the specific forms of model components such as the ostracism norm and the resource dynamics. Importantly, the regime shift in our model does not occur if the dynamics of harvester behaviour are not included in the model. Finally, we sketch some possible early warning signals for the social–ecological regime shifts we observe in the models.

Social norms as solutions

Policies may influence large-scale behavioral tipping Climate change, biodiversity loss, antibiotic resistance, and other global challenges pose major collective action problems: A group benefits from a certain action, but no individual has sufficient incentive to act alone. Formal institutions, e.g., laws and treaties, have helped address issues like ozone depletion, lead pollution, and acid rain. However, formal institutions are not always able to enforce collectively desirable outcomes. In such cases, informal institutions, such as social norms, can be important. If conditions are right, policy can support social norm changes, helping address even global problems. To judge when this is realistic, and what role policy can play, we discuss three crucial questions: Is a tipping point likely to exist, such that vicious cycles of socially damaging behavior can potentially be turned into virtuous ones? Can policy create tipping points where none exist? Can policy push the system past the tipping point?

The survival of the conformist: social pressure and renewable resource management.

This paper examines the role of other-regarding behavior as a mechanism for the establishment and maintenance of cooperation in resource use under variable social and environmental conditions. By coupling resource stock dynamics with social dynamics concerning compliance to a social norm prescribing non-excessive resource extraction in a common pool resource, we show that when reputational considerations matter and a sufficient level of social stigma affects the violators of a norm, sustainable outcomes are achieved. We find large parameter regions where norm-observing and norm-violating types coexist, and analyze to what extent such coexistence depends on the environment.

Application of the SES Framework for Model-based Analysis of the Dynamics of Social-Ecological Systems

Social-ecological systems (SES) are dynamic systems that continuously change in response to internal or external pressures. A better understanding of the interactions of the social and ecological systems that drive those dynamics is crucial for the development of sustainable management strategies. Dynamic models can serve as tools to explore social-ecological interactions; however, the complexity of the studied systems and the need to integrate knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines pose considerable challenges for their development. We assess the potential of Ostroms general SES framework (SESF) to guide a systematic and transparent process of model development in light of these difficulties. We develop a stepwise procedure for applying SESF to identify variables and their relationships relevant for an analysis of the SES. In doing so we demonstrate how the hierarchy of concepts in SESF and the identification of social-ecological processes using the newly introduced process relationships can help to unpack the system in a systematic and transparent way. We test the procedure by applying it to develop a dynamic model of decision making in the management of recreational fisheries. The added value of the common framework lies in the guidance it provides for (1) a structured approach to identifying major variables and the level of detail needed, and (2) a procedure that enhances model transparency by making explicit underlying assumptions and choices made when selecting variables and their interactions as well as the theories or empirical evidence on which they are based. Both aspects are of great relevance when dealing with the complexity of SES and integrating conceptual backgrounds from different disciplines. We discuss the advantages and difficulties of the application of SESF for model development, and contribute to its further refinement.

Three necessary conditions for establishing effective Sustainable Development Goals in the Anthropocene

The purpose of the United Nations-guided process to establish Sustainable Development Goals is to galvanize governments and civil society to rise to the interlinked environmental, societal, and economic challenges we face in the Anthropocene. We argue that the process of setting Sustainable Development Goals should take three key aspects into consideration. First, it should embrace an integrated social-ecological system perspective and acknowledge the key dynamics that such systems entail, including the role of ecosystems in sustaining human wellbeing, multiple cross-scale interactions, and uncertain thresholds. Second, the process needs to address trade-offs between the ambition of goals and the feasibility in reaching them, recognizing biophysical, social, and political constraints. Third, the goal-setting exercise and the management of goal implementation need to be guided by existing knowledge about the principles, dynamics, and constraints of social change processes at all scales, from the individual to the global. Combining these three aspects will increase the chances of establishing and achieving effective Sustainable Development Goals.

Practices and Lessons Learned in Coping with Climatic Hazards at the River-Basin Scale: Floods and Droughts

Climatic hazards such as floods and droughts have always been a primary matter of concern for human populations. Severe floods damage settlements, transport networks, and arable land. Although devastating droughts are harmful primarily for agriculture and terrestrial ecosystems, they can also lead to local water supply shortages. Despite significant achievements in science and technology and success stories in environmental management in the 20th century, people still continue to suffer the consequences of climate hazards worldwide. This paper provides an overview of existing practices for coping with floods and droughts, compares strategies in different river basins, and outlines the areas that need improvement. First, the existing protection measures and response strategies against floods and droughts are briefly described. An overview is given of expected climate change and existing coping strategies for floods and droughts in seven case study basins. Four of the basins, namely the Elbe, Guadiana, Rhine, and Tisza, are located in Europe; the Nile and the Orange are in Africa; and the Amudarya is in Central Asia. Analysis of the coping strategies shows that structural measures exist in all seven river basins, but that nonstructural measures are generally not very extensive and/or advanced. Finally, the success stories in dealing with climatic hazards and lessons learned, taken partly from the seven case study basins and partly from literature, are summarized.

Enhancing the Ostrom social-ecological system framework through formalization

Frameworks play an important role in analyzing social-ecological systems (SESs) because they provide shared concepts and variables that enable comparison between and accumulation of knowledge across multiple cases. One prominent SES framework focusing on local resource use has been developed by Elinor Ostrom and her colleagues. This framework is an extensive multi-tier collection of concepts and variables that have demonstrated relevance for explaining outcomes in a large number of case studies in the context of fishery, water, and forestry common-pool resources. The further development of this framework has raised a number of issues related to the formal relationships between the large number of concepts and variables involved. In particular, issues related to criteria for ordering the concepts into tiers, adding new concepts, defining outcomes metrics, and representing dynamics in the framework have been identified. We address these issues by applying methods from research fields that study formal relationships between concepts such as domain-specific languages, knowledge representation, and software engineering. We find that SES frameworks could include the following seven formal components: variables, concepts, attribution relationships, subsumption relationships, process relationships, aggregation relationships, and evaluation metrics. Applying these components to the Ostrom framework and a case study of recreational fishery, we find that they provide clear criteria for structuring concepts into tiers, defining outcome metrics, and representing dynamics. The components identified are generic, and the insights gained from this exercise may also be beneficial for the development of other SES frameworks.

Exploring Resilience and Transformability of a River Basin in the Face of Socioeconomic and Ecological Crisis: an Example from the Amudarya River Basin, Central Asia

Water from the Amudarya River is a vital and strategic resource for semi-arid Uzbekistan because of its heavy reliance on irrigated agriculture. The Uzbek water management regime, however, has proven to be rather reluctant to adapt to changing environmental and socio-political conditions despite recent massive pressures caused by political, environmental, or donor-induced developments in the region. The aim of this paper is to explore reasons for the low adaptability of the Uzbek water sector and assess implications for the resilience of the Uzbek social-ecological system (SES). By analyzing past losses of resilience as well as first attempts at institutional change in land and water management, we identify drivers as well as structural factors and mechanisms that act as barriers for adaptation and transformation towards a more sustainable system. With the collapse of the Aral Sea fisheries and the basin-wide large scale soil salinization, the SES in the Amudarya River Basin has shifted to a new, less desirable regime. However, the high resilience of the social system is keeping it in its current undesirable state and further degrades its long-term resilience. Our analysis identifies reinforcing feedbacks caused by ecological dynamics, vested interests, and a patronage system that contribute to the resistance to change and keep the system locked in its current unsustainable state. These factors are rooted in the history of the SES in the river basin, such as the economic dependence on cotton and the state-centered management approach. The window of opportunity for significant changes of the larger scale institutional setting that might have been open after the breakup of the Soviet Union was or could not be used to achieve a transformation to more sustainable resources use. Measures aimed at an incremental improvement of the current situation are not sufficient to prevent further losses of resilience. Resilience and transformability of the larger scale SES (political, economic, and institutional settings) are needed to enable the smaller scales (regional and local water management) to adapt and change. However, we identified opportunities for change arising from the slow acceptance of bottom-up management institutions in the water sector and from the extensive restoration capacity of the ecosystems.