Riu 2 resilience thinking andre f van rooyen
-
Upload
cgiar-challenge-program-on-water-and-food -
Category
Technology
-
view
356 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Riu 2 resilience thinking andre f van rooyen
Resilience thinking: Towards new
conceptual models in
Agricultural/Rural/Basin
development….development….
and modeling
Andre F van Rooyen
Complex systems Ostrom 2007
Three aspects of decomposability of complex subsystems are important:
1. conceptual partitioning of variables into classes and subclasses. subclasses.
2. is the existence of relatively separable subsystems that are independent of each other in the accomplishment of many functions and development but eventually affect each other’s performance.
3. that complex systems are greater than the sum of their parts.
What is resilience and why should we be
concerned?
The ability of a “system” (social-ecological or SES) to recover from shock/perturbation;
3 defining characteristics:
1. The amount change a system can undergo and still 1. The amount change a system can undergo and still retain the same controls on function and structure;
2. The degree to which a system is capable of self-organization and re-organization after shock/change
3. The degree to which the system can learn/share knowledge and adapt.
Walker et al. 2002
Folke et al. (2003) defined four clusters of factors, that interact
across temporal and spatial scales which increase the resilience
of SES
• Learning to live with change and uncertainty
• Nurturing diversity in its various forms
• Combining different types of knowledge for learning • Combining different types of knowledge for learning
• Creating opportunity for self-organization and cross-scale
linkages
Back to Plant Ecology 101
• Sustainability
• Succession models – Linear models
• Equilibrium systems
• Disequilibrium• Disequilibrium
• Hollings and Walker
Cup and ball models…
Cup and ball models…
Cup and ball models…
Cup and ball models…
State-and-transition-models
Bare soil
Small shrubs
Closed unpalatable woodland
Savanna
Annual grasses
Mixed annual grass/shrubland
Transitions can be caused by:
• Grazing
– Inefficient grazing systems – lack of infrastructure
– Inappropriate water provision
– Policy – open access systems
• Fire• Fire
• Frost
Obviously the opposite of these will normally have positive
impact!
Stable degraded states
• Some transitions are irreversible!
• Caused by changes in soil, chemistry, structure
• Plant spp composition changes and seed
banksbanks
• Long lived unpalatable spp.
Stable degraded states are often very resilient
I.e. its very difficult to get out of these states.
Now, apply the same thinking to the whole system
socio-ecological systems (SES)
• How do the GD interact within the SES in your basin?
• What are the specific barriers preventing regime changes?
• What are the facilitating environments/conditions which could drive DES in you area forward?
Think in terms of:Think in terms of:
• Technologies
• Policies
• Markets
• Incentives
• Environmental conditions/constraints/opportunities
Resilience management:
• To prevent the system from moving to
undesired system configuration when shocked
of challenged/disturbed
• To nurture and preserve the elements that • To nurture and preserve the elements that
enable the system to renew and reorganize
itself following major chock or change
Fig. 1. A framework for the analysis of resilience in
social-ecological systems.
Step 2
Step 1 Description of System
Key processes, ecosystem, structures and actors
Exploring external shocks
Plausible
policies
Exploring
visions
Step 4
Step 3 Resilience analysis
3-5 scenarios
Stakeholder evaluation (processes and products)
Better Integrated Theories
Policy and Management
Actions
Fig. 6. The current and possible future states in the western Australian wheatbelt and some of the keythresholds.
Copyright © 2006 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.Kinzig, A. P., P. Ryan, M. Etienne, H. Allison, T. Elmqvist, and B. H. Walker. 2006. Resilience and regimeshifts: assessing cascading effects. Ecology and Society 11(1): 20. [online] URL:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art20/
Copyright © 2006 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.Kinzig, A. P., P. Ryan, M. Etienne, H. Allison, T. Elmqvist, and B. H. Walker. 2006. Resilience and regimeshifts: assessing cascading effects. Ecology and Society 11(1): 20. [online] URL:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art20/
Development trajectories and a conceptual
model of rural/agricultural development
• Berkes (2007 p.287) suggested: “the creation
of platforms for dialogue and innovation,
following a crisis, is key to the stimulation of
learning to deal with uncertainties. It helps learning to deal with uncertainties. It helps
reorganize conceptual models and paradigms,
based on a revised understanding of the
conditions generating the crisis.”
Innovation systems/multi-stakeholder
platforms… blah blah blah…
(i) Learning to live with change and uncertainty: the IP evaluates
strategies to cope with changing environments and capitalize on
emerging opportunities;
(ii) Nurturing diversity: by including a diversity of players and partnerships,
the IP introduces diverse technologies to increase livelihood options;the IP introduces diverse technologies to increase livelihood options;
(iii) Combining different types of knowledge for learning: cross-scale
dialogue between partners brings different types of knowledge and
viewpoints and stimulates learning through the iterative evaluation of
interventions;
(iv) Creating opportunity for self-organization: the functioning of the IP
promotes self-organization based on production or market interests.