Ways forward for resilience thinking: lessons from the field for those exploring social-ecological systems in agriculture and natural resource management

Abstract

. 2017. Ways forward for resilience thinking: lessons from the field for those exploring social-ecological systems in agriculture and natural resource management. Ecology and Society 22 (4) ABSTRACT. Resilience thinking appears to offer a holistic approach that can be used by social researchers to interpret past and contemporary conditions and identify possible futures for social-ecological systems (SES). Resilience thinking is shaping contemporary environmental policy and its implementation in Australia, Europe, and North America. At the same time, social researchers have raised concerns about the limitations of resilience thinking, particularly in its handling of human agency, power relationships, social thresholds, and the social construction of SES definitions. We argue for a reflexive turn in resilience thinking as a way to address these concerns. We draw on lessons from three Australian case studies where a reflexive application of resilience thinking generated insights for research and practice. We propose six areas for reflexive inquiry: (1) focal scale and level, (2) SES definition, (3) narratives of change, (4) processes of knowledge production, (5) social transition trajectories, and ( 6) social thresholds. In so doing, the assumptions of resilience thinking are politicized and problematized, which improves its theoretical analytical utility, and in practice generates new insights into social processes. Reflexivity offers opportunity for greater cross-disciplinary dialogue between resilience thinking and the social sciences, while allowing methodologies with differing ontologies and epistemologies to be applied in a complementary manner.

Agroecosystem resilience. A conceptual and methodological framework for evaluation

“…Without weighing variables, certain factors such as soil fertility, slope or access to public services would be considered on an equal level as criteria related to community agency or agrarian structure. The proposed methodology includes aspects that are normally invisible, revealing power relations and transformation processes that alter structures and predominant social dynamics within communities (21,85).…”

“…From the point of view of the elite, resilience is understood to be adaptation to conditions of inequality and injustice, which agrees well with neoliberal (20) and Keynesian discourse, in other words, maintaining the status quo . On the other hand, those with less power understand resilience to be transformation conducive of conditions ofjustice, which can lead to the destruction of the predominant social system (1,21–24).…”

Assessment of Resilience of Pistachio Agroecosystems in Rafsanjan Plain in Iran

“…Sinclair et al [51] reported that the role of human agency is critical to understanding system resilience, which is the capacity of individuals to make sense of change. The results revealed that the indicators of the use of organic fertilizers and pesticides, the soil fertility index, water use efficiency (g/m 3 ), trust in government, access to advisory services (extension), on-the-job training, and diversity of marketing are at the manageable (moderate) level.…”

Agroecosystem resilience. A conceptual and methodological framework for evaluation

“…Without weighing variables, certain factors such as soil fertility, slope or access to public services would be considered on an equal level as criteria related to community agency or agrarian structure. The proposed methodology includes aspects that are normally invisible, revealing power relations and transformation processes that alter structures and predominant social dynamics within communities [21,103]. Fig 4 shows the results of calculating resilience without considering AS or agency, utilizing criteria associated with productive practices and biophysical conditions in comparison with the weighted average using all the proposed variables.…”