Institutions to sustain ecological and social systems

Abstract

Summary The foundation for a sustainable future is the continuation of ecological processes and functions across landscapes dominated by human activity; whether hunter‐gathering, agriculture, pastoralism, suburban living, commercial and industrial centres or wilderness recreation. However, actions to sustain ecological systems, flows and functions must be integrated across the human dimensions of regional landscapes. Such regions encompass natural areas, human living places and a mosaic of other land uses. Institutional change is required to develop new organizational forms, adjust policies and develop adaptive capacity to demonstrate restoration and maintenance of all forms of social, economic and ecological capital. No matter where on the globe, future sustainability will depend on the system of resource governance that mediates the relationship between the society and the economy and, in contrast, the continuation of ecosystem functional processes. The present article examines the forms of capital, social and institutional change that need to be considered to make progress towards sustainable futures. The discussion further considers the spatial management context in which these interweaved social, ecological and economic processes take place. Key words ecological, forms of capital, governance, institutions, landscape, social.

Social Resilience and Commercial Fishers’ Responses to Management Changes in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

“…We suggest that the concept of resilience in the context of GBR management needs to be broadened to include social dimensions, and that doing so would not be inconsistent with current management goals in the GBR. Actively managing for social resilience and incorporating into decision making knowledge about the factors that confer or erode social resilience would aid in the design and implementation of policies that minimize impacts on people while enhancing the sustainability of the GBR ecosystem (Adger 2000, Brunckhorst 2002). …”

‘Eco-civic’ optimisation: A nested framework for planning and managing landscapes

“…There are an increasing number of case studies (e.g., Berkes and Folke, 1998;Brunckhorst, 2000Brunckhorst, , 2002 and resource governance examples (Gunderson et al, 1995;McKean, 1996;Johnson et al, 1999) demonstrating the value of matching scales of social-ecological systems. Redesigning spatial frameworks for resource governance arrangements is no easy task, but might be critically important to civic dialogue, action and adaptation towards future sustainability.…”

“…These approaches also have the potential to create uniquely robust governance institutions that possess the essential dynamic qualities to enable improved adaptive capacities to the emergent processes that constantly challenge rural (non-metropolitan) communities (Reeve, 1992(Reeve, , 1997Shannon, 1992Shannon, , 1998Gunderson et al, 1995;Johnson et al, 1999;Brunckhorst, 2001Brunckhorst, , 2002. Transformation to a more effective resource governance framework will also draw on the notions of a bioregional framework (sensu Brunckhorst, 2000) and an effective nested arrangement that better represent a community's actual interests in a particular regional landscape while retaining the capacity to address resource governance issues at appropriate ecological scales, creating in effect an institutional interface that bridges social and ecological processes while providing workable administrative arrangements (e.g., for natural resource management agencies, Local Government Areas and other government services; see Berkes and Folke, 1998;Omernik and Bailey, 1997;Reeve, 1998).…”

“…In this paper we use the following meanings for society and its institutions (after Reeve, 1992Reeve, , 1997Reeve, , 1998Shannon, 1992Shannon, , 1998Gunderson et al, 1995;Brunckhorst, 2001Brunckhorst, , 2002. A social system refers to any group of people who interact long enough to create a shared set of understandings, norms, or routines to integrate action and established patterns of dominance and resource allocation.…”

“…Nevertheless, society and its institutions may need to become more capable of substantial shifts over shorter time scales to adapt to pressures of change, including resource degradation, and adjust towards more ecologically restorative economies (Brunckhorst et al, 1997;Cortner et al, 1998;Carpenter and Gunderson, 2001;Saunders and Briggs, 2002). Such transformations might require novel approaches to find realistic solutions to social and environmental sustainability issues that the citizenry can adopt and adapt with matching civic skills and knowledge (Reeve, 1992(Reeve, , 1998Brunckhorst, 2002). An increasing number of scientists and policy makers are turning their attention to ecological sustainability issues related to land use, landscape function and ecosystem services, urban infrastructure and services, regional development, policy and institutional arrangements (Forman, 1995;Omernik and Bailey, 1997;Cortner et al, 1998;Knight and Landres, 1998;Turner et al, 2001;Pickett et al, 2004;Reeve et al, in press).…”