Building trust through collaboration, institutional development, and social learning enhances efforts to foster ecosystem management and resolve multi‐scale society–environment dilemmas. One emerging approach aimed at addressing these dilemmas is adaptive co‐management. This method draws explicit attention to the learning (experiential and experimental) and collaboration (vertical and horizontal) functions necessary to improve our understanding of, and ability to respond to, complex social–ecological systems. Here, we identify and outline the core features of adaptive co‐management, which include innovative institutional arrangements and incentives across spatiotemporal scales and levels, learning through complexity and change, monitoring and assessment of interventions, the role of power, and opportunities to link science with policy.

ABSTRACT. This paper explores the linkages between social-ecological resilience and adaptive learning. We refer to adaptive learning as a method to capture the two-way relationship between people and their socialecological environment. In this paper, we focus on traditional ecological knowledge. Research was undertaken with the Anishinaabe people of Iskatewizaagegan No. 39 Independent First Nation, in northwestern Ontario, Canada. The research was carried out over two field seasons, with verification workshops following each field season. The methodology was based on site visits and transects determined by the elders as appropriate to answer a specific question, find specific plants, or locate plant communities. During site visits and transect walks, research themes such as plant nomenclature, plant use, habitat descriptions, biogeophysical landscape vocabulary, and place names were discussed. Working with elders allowed us to record a rich set of vocabulary to describe the spatial characteristics of the biogeophysical landscape. However, elders also directed our attention to places they knew through personal experiences and journeys and remembered from stories and collective history. We documented elders' perceptions of the temporal dynamics of the landscape through discussion of disturbance events and cycles. Again, elders drew our attention to the ways in which time was marked by cultural references to seasons and moons. The social memory of landscape dynamics was documented as a combination of biogeophysical structures and processes, along with the stories by which Iskatewizaagegan people wrote their histories upon the land. Adaptive learning for social-ecological resilience, as suggested by this research, requires maintaining the web of relationships of people and places. Such relationships allow social memory to frame creativity, while allowing knowledge to evolve in the face of change. Social memory does not actually evolve directly out of ecosystem dynamics. Rather, social memory both frames creativity within, and emerges from, a dynamic social-ecological environment.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The goal of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework to understand the processes by which rural communities are using commons-based social enterprises to engage global actors and forge local places. Design/methodology/approach -The paper uses a four-step conceptualization of commons-based social enterprises within a complex world: deal with communities as complex systems embedded in larger complex systems, understand cross-scale linkages between communities and other levels of organization, identify drivers of change, and build adaptive capacity to increase the resilience of communities in the face of globalization. The paper draws upon an international set of cases undertaken by the Centre for Community-based Resource Management to illustrate each step. Findings -Social enterprises are one means by which rural communities are negotiating with global actors through recent processes of globalization. The social enterprise provides a mechanism for rural people to secure tenure for common-pool resources and allows them to make direct decisions regarding their management. Research limitations/implications -To further develop the understanding of commons-based social enterprises will require further integration of theory regarding commons and social enterprises. Practical implications -States and development agencies lack enabling policies for commons-based social enterprises that support the multiple goal strategies of rural communities for natural resources. Originality/value -Commons and social enterprise literature have tended to exist in separate domains and this paper makes a first step toward their integration.

There is a relationship between biodiversity conservation and the cultural practices of indigenous and traditional peoples regarding land and resource use. To conserve biodiversity we need to understand how these cultures interact with landscapes and shape them in ways that contribute to the continued renewal of ecosystems. This article examines the significance of traditional knowledge and management systems and their implications for biodiversity conservation. We start by introducing one key traditional ecological practice, succession management, in particular through the use of fire. We then turn to the example of the indigenous use of boreal forest ecosystems of northern Canada, with a focus on the Anishnaabe (Ojibwa) of north‐western Ontario. Their traditional practices and cultural landscapes provide temporal and spatial biodiversity, and examples of the mechanisms that conserve biodiversity. Learning from traditional systems is important for broadening conservation objectives that can accommodate the sustainable livelihoods of local people. The lens of cultural landscapes provides a mechanism to understand how multiple objectives (timber production, non‐timber forest products, protected areas, tourism) are central to sustainable forest management in landscapes that conserve heritage values and support the livelihood needs of local people. The use of broader and more inclusive definitions of conservation and multiple, integrated objectives can help reconcile local livelihood needs and biodiversity conservation.

No abstract