在美国城市抗灾规划中开展 FEW nexus 合作的途径

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecology and Society Pub Date : 2024-07-31 DOI:10.5751/es-15187-290305
J. Leah Jones-Crank
{"title":"在美国城市抗灾规划中开展 FEW nexus 合作的途径","authors":"J. Leah Jones-Crank","doi":"10.5751/es-15187-290305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The food-energy-water (FEW) nexus has been argued as an approach to improve system resilience and sustainability theoretically. However, there is limited empirical understanding of which governance factors lead to FEW nexus collaboration in practice. The purpose of this study is to investigate the conditions associated with FEW nexus collaboration in cities in resilience planning: does it arise from risk of resource insecurity, pre-existing governance mechanisms, or both? The study analyzed the 22 cities in the United States that are part of the Resilient Cities Network using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The results show that food, energy, and water insecurity are not sufficient to explain FEW nexus collaboration in resilience planning. However, the results do show that FEW nexus collaboration is present in resilience planning in (a) cities that do experience water insecurity and employ two of three investigated governance conditions—policy coherence, stakeholder participation, or institutional support—or (b) that employ all three governance conditions, regardless of whether or not they experience water insecurity. It concludes that the risk of resource insecurity alone is not sufficient to explain cities&#8217; implementation of FEW nexus collaborations and provides policy recommendations for increased FEW nexus collaboration in practice.</p>\n<p>The post Pathways for FEW nexus collaboration in U.S. city resilience planning first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>","PeriodicalId":51028,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pathways for FEW nexus collaboration in U.S. city resilience planning\",\"authors\":\"J. Leah Jones-Crank\",\"doi\":\"10.5751/es-15187-290305\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The food-energy-water (FEW) nexus has been argued as an approach to improve system resilience and sustainability theoretically. However, there is limited empirical understanding of which governance factors lead to FEW nexus collaboration in practice. The purpose of this study is to investigate the conditions associated with FEW nexus collaboration in cities in resilience planning: does it arise from risk of resource insecurity, pre-existing governance mechanisms, or both? The study analyzed the 22 cities in the United States that are part of the Resilient Cities Network using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The results show that food, energy, and water insecurity are not sufficient to explain FEW nexus collaboration in resilience planning. However, the results do show that FEW nexus collaboration is present in resilience planning in (a) cities that do experience water insecurity and employ two of three investigated governance conditions—policy coherence, stakeholder participation, or institutional support—or (b) that employ all three governance conditions, regardless of whether or not they experience water insecurity. It concludes that the risk of resource insecurity alone is not sufficient to explain cities&#8217; implementation of FEW nexus collaborations and provides policy recommendations for increased FEW nexus collaboration in practice.</p>\\n<p>The post Pathways for FEW nexus collaboration in U.S. city resilience planning first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15187-290305\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15187-290305","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从理论上讲,粮食-能源-水(FEW)关系被认为是提高系统复原力和可持续性的一种方法。然而,在实践中,人们对哪些治理因素会导致粮食-能源-水(FEW)关系合作的经验性理解却很有限。本研究的目的是调查城市在抗灾规划中与 FEW nexus 合作的相关条件:是资源不安全的风险,还是已有的治理机制,抑或两者兼而有之?本研究采用模糊集定性比较分析法对美国 22 个隶属于抗灾城市网络的城市进行了分析。结果表明,粮食、能源和水的不安全不足以解释抗灾规划中的 FEW 关系合作。然而,研究结果确实表明,在以下城市的抗灾规划中存在 FEW 关系合作:(a) 确实存在水不安全问题,并且采用了三个调查治理条件中的两个--政策一致性、利益相关者参与或机构支持--或 (b) 无论是否存在水不安全问题,采用了所有三个治理条件的城市。研究得出结论,资源不安全的风险本身不足以解释城市与水资源之间关系合作的实施情况,并为在实践中加强与水资源之间关系合作提供了政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Pathways for FEW nexus collaboration in U.S. city resilience planning

The food-energy-water (FEW) nexus has been argued as an approach to improve system resilience and sustainability theoretically. However, there is limited empirical understanding of which governance factors lead to FEW nexus collaboration in practice. The purpose of this study is to investigate the conditions associated with FEW nexus collaboration in cities in resilience planning: does it arise from risk of resource insecurity, pre-existing governance mechanisms, or both? The study analyzed the 22 cities in the United States that are part of the Resilient Cities Network using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The results show that food, energy, and water insecurity are not sufficient to explain FEW nexus collaboration in resilience planning. However, the results do show that FEW nexus collaboration is present in resilience planning in (a) cities that do experience water insecurity and employ two of three investigated governance conditions—policy coherence, stakeholder participation, or institutional support—or (b) that employ all three governance conditions, regardless of whether or not they experience water insecurity. It concludes that the risk of resource insecurity alone is not sufficient to explain cities’ implementation of FEW nexus collaborations and provides policy recommendations for increased FEW nexus collaboration in practice.

The post Pathways for FEW nexus collaboration in U.S. city resilience planning first appeared on Ecology & Society.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecology and Society
Ecology and Society 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
109
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Ecology and Society is an electronic, peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal devoted to the rapid dissemination of current research. Manuscript submission, peer review, and publication are all handled on the Internet. Software developed for the journal automates all clerical steps during peer review, facilitates a double-blind peer review process, and allows authors and editors to follow the progress of peer review on the Internet. As articles are accepted, they are published in an "Issue in Progress." At four month intervals the Issue-in-Progress is declared a New Issue, and subscribers receive the Table of Contents of the issue via email. Our turn-around time (submission to publication) averages around 350 days. We encourage publication of special features. Special features are comprised of a set of manuscripts that address a single theme, and include an introductory and summary manuscript. The individual contributions are published in regular issues, and the special feature manuscripts are linked through a table of contents and announced on the journal''s main page. The journal seeks papers that are novel, integrative and written in a way that is accessible to a wide audience that includes an array of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities concerned with the relationship between society and the life-supporting ecosystems on which human wellbeing ultimately depends.
期刊最新文献
Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions Examining the influence of sociodemographics, residential segregation, and historical redlining on eBird and iNaturalist data disparities in three U.S. cities What does it take to build resilience against droughts in food value chains? Incorporating climate change into restoration decisions: perspectives from dam removal practitioners Exploring perceptions to improve the outcomes of a marine protected area
×
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