Towards a bridging concept for undesirable resilience in social-ecological systems

IF 4.6 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Global Sustainability Pub Date : 2020-07-21 DOI:10.1017/sus.2020.15
A. Dornelles, E. Boyd, R. Nunes, M. Asquith, W. J. Boonstra, I. Delabre, J. Denney, V. Grimm, A. Jentsch, K. Nicholas, M. Schröter, R. Seppelt, J. Settele, N. Shackelford, R. Standish, G. Yengoh, T. Oliver
{"title":"Towards a bridging concept for undesirable resilience in social-ecological systems","authors":"A. Dornelles, E. Boyd, R. Nunes, M. Asquith, W. J. Boonstra, I. Delabre, J. Denney, V. Grimm, A. Jentsch, K. Nicholas, M. Schröter, R. Seppelt, J. Settele, N. Shackelford, R. Standish, G. Yengoh, T. Oliver","doi":"10.1017/sus.2020.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Non-technical summary Resilience is a cross-disciplinary concept that is relevant for understanding the sustainability of the social and environmental conditions in which we live. Most research normatively focuses on building or strengthening resilience, despite growing recognition of the importance of breaking the resilience of, and thus transforming, unsustainable social-ecological systems. Undesirable resilience (cf. lock-ins, social-ecological traps), however, is not only less explored in the academic literature, but its understanding is also more fragmented across different disciplines. This disparity can inhibit collaboration among researchers exploring interdependent challenges in sustainability sciences. In this article, we propose that the term lock-in may contribute to a common understanding of undesirable resilience across scientific fields. Technical summary Resilience is an extendable concept that bridges the social and life sciences. Studies increasingly interpret resilience normatively as a desirable property of social-ecological systems, despite growing awareness of resilient properties leading to social and ecological degradation, vulnerability or barriers that hinder sustainability transformations (i.e., ‘undesirable’ resilience). This is the first study to qualify, quantify and compare the conceptualization of ‘desirable’ and ‘undesirable’ resilience across academic disciplines. Our literature analysis found that various synonyms are used to denote undesirable resilience (e.g., path dependency, social-ecological traps, institutional inertia). Compared to resilience as a desirable property, research on undesirable resilience is substantially less frequent and scattered across distinct scientific fields. Amongst synonyms for undesirable resilience, the term lock-in is more frequently and evenly used across academic disciplines. We propose that lock-in therefore has the potential to reconcile diverse interpretations of the mechanisms that constrain system transformation – explicitly and coherently addressing characteristics of reversibility and plausibility – and thus enabling integrative understanding of social-ecological system dynamics. Social media summary ‘Lock-in’ as a bridging concept for interdisciplinary understanding of barriers to desirable sustainability transitions.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/sus.2020.15","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

Non-technical summary Resilience is a cross-disciplinary concept that is relevant for understanding the sustainability of the social and environmental conditions in which we live. Most research normatively focuses on building or strengthening resilience, despite growing recognition of the importance of breaking the resilience of, and thus transforming, unsustainable social-ecological systems. Undesirable resilience (cf. lock-ins, social-ecological traps), however, is not only less explored in the academic literature, but its understanding is also more fragmented across different disciplines. This disparity can inhibit collaboration among researchers exploring interdependent challenges in sustainability sciences. In this article, we propose that the term lock-in may contribute to a common understanding of undesirable resilience across scientific fields. Technical summary Resilience is an extendable concept that bridges the social and life sciences. Studies increasingly interpret resilience normatively as a desirable property of social-ecological systems, despite growing awareness of resilient properties leading to social and ecological degradation, vulnerability or barriers that hinder sustainability transformations (i.e., ‘undesirable’ resilience). This is the first study to qualify, quantify and compare the conceptualization of ‘desirable’ and ‘undesirable’ resilience across academic disciplines. Our literature analysis found that various synonyms are used to denote undesirable resilience (e.g., path dependency, social-ecological traps, institutional inertia). Compared to resilience as a desirable property, research on undesirable resilience is substantially less frequent and scattered across distinct scientific fields. Amongst synonyms for undesirable resilience, the term lock-in is more frequently and evenly used across academic disciplines. We propose that lock-in therefore has the potential to reconcile diverse interpretations of the mechanisms that constrain system transformation – explicitly and coherently addressing characteristics of reversibility and plausibility – and thus enabling integrative understanding of social-ecological system dynamics. Social media summary ‘Lock-in’ as a bridging concept for interdisciplinary understanding of barriers to desirable sustainability transitions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建立社会生态系统中不良复原力的桥梁概念
非技术性总结韧性是一个跨学科的概念,与理解我们生活的社会和环境条件的可持续性有关。尽管人们越来越认识到打破不可持续的社会生态系统的韧性并从而改变其重要性,但大多数研究都规范地侧重于建立或加强韧性。然而,学术文献中对不受欢迎的复原力(参见锁定、社会生态陷阱)的探索不仅较少,而且不同学科对其的理解也更加零散。这种差异可能会阻碍研究可持续发展科学中相互依存挑战的研究人员之间的合作。在这篇文章中,我们提出“锁定”一词可能有助于在科学领域对不理想的复原力达成共识。技术摘要弹性是一个可扩展的概念,它连接了社会科学和生命科学。研究越来越多地将复原力规范地解释为社会生态系统的一种可取特性,尽管人们越来越意识到复原力特性会导致社会和生态退化、脆弱性或阻碍可持续性转变的障碍(即“不可取的”复原力)。这是第一项对学术学科中“理想”和“不理想”弹性的概念化进行限定、量化和比较的研究。我们的文献分析发现,各种同义词被用来表示不理想的韧性(例如,路径依赖、社会生态陷阱、制度惯性)。与弹性作为一种理想特性相比,对不理想弹性的研究频率要低得多,而且分散在不同的科学领域。在不受欢迎的韧性的同义词中,“锁定”一词在各个学科中的使用频率更高,也更均匀。因此,我们提出,锁定有可能调和对约束系统转换的机制的不同解释——明确而连贯地解决可逆性和合理性的特征——从而实现对社会生态系统动力学的综合理解。社交媒体摘要“锁定”作为跨学科理解理想可持续性转型障碍的桥梁概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Global Sustainability
Global Sustainability Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
3.60%
发文量
19
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reassessing the need for carbon dioxide removal: moral implications of alternative climate target pathways Attitudes toward water resilience and potential for improvement Justice in benefitting from carbon removal Ten New Insights in Climate Science 2023/2024 From climate science to climate action
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1