2021
DOI: 10.1111/conl.12826
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sustainability of social–ecological systems: The difference between social rules and management rules

Abstract: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A number of past papers have called for more attention to the social sciences in conservation (Mascia et al, 2003;Sandbrook et al, 2013;Bennett et al, 2017b), and there have been numerous explorations of the human dimensions of specific conservation issues, such as human-wildlife interactions (Bruskotter and Shelby, 2010;Decker et al, 2012), private land conservation (Knight et al, 2010;Prokopy et al, 2019), river management (Dunham et al, 2018), invasive species (Head, 2017), bird conservation (Dayer et al, 2020), insect conservation (Hall and Martins, 2020), marine protected areas (Charles and Wilson, 2009;Christie et al, 2017), and ecological restoration (Egan et al, 2012;Stanturf et al, 2012). Within the context of working landscapes or seascapes, quite a few papers also focus on specific conservation social science topics, including culture (Poe et al, 2014;Cuerrier et al, 2015;Brown and Hausner, 2017), social networks (Cohen et al, 2012;Bixler et al, 2016;Zinngrebe et al, 2020), and governance (Nagendra and Ostrom, 2012;den Uyl and Driessen, 2015;Imperial et al, 2016;Boucquey, 2020;Chiaravalloti et al, 2021) to name a few. Yet, based on our review and knowledge of the literature, there has been no comprehensive exploration of potential conservation social science contributions to working landscape and seascape initiatives.…”
Section: Problem and Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of past papers have called for more attention to the social sciences in conservation (Mascia et al, 2003;Sandbrook et al, 2013;Bennett et al, 2017b), and there have been numerous explorations of the human dimensions of specific conservation issues, such as human-wildlife interactions (Bruskotter and Shelby, 2010;Decker et al, 2012), private land conservation (Knight et al, 2010;Prokopy et al, 2019), river management (Dunham et al, 2018), invasive species (Head, 2017), bird conservation (Dayer et al, 2020), insect conservation (Hall and Martins, 2020), marine protected areas (Charles and Wilson, 2009;Christie et al, 2017), and ecological restoration (Egan et al, 2012;Stanturf et al, 2012). Within the context of working landscapes or seascapes, quite a few papers also focus on specific conservation social science topics, including culture (Poe et al, 2014;Cuerrier et al, 2015;Brown and Hausner, 2017), social networks (Cohen et al, 2012;Bixler et al, 2016;Zinngrebe et al, 2020), and governance (Nagendra and Ostrom, 2012;den Uyl and Driessen, 2015;Imperial et al, 2016;Boucquey, 2020;Chiaravalloti et al, 2021) to name a few. Yet, based on our review and knowledge of the literature, there has been no comprehensive exploration of potential conservation social science contributions to working landscape and seascape initiatives.…”
Section: Problem and Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the challenge is to attract tourists to pay for something that may not happen. Researchers argue that for unpredictable resources, socio-ecological systems tend to have a rather opposite structure predicted by the property theory 11 . They argue that sustainability is reached through a high level of mobility and information or resource sharing, with rules focused on increasing the chance of accessing the resources instead of clear limits between people and the resources they use 12 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%