Adaptive governance is an emergent form of environmental governance that is increasingly called upon by scholars and practitioners to coordinate resource management regimes in the face of the ...complexity and uncertainty associated with rapid environmental change. Although the term “adaptive governance” is not exclusively applied to the governance of social-ecological systems, related research represents a significant outgrowth of literature on resilience, social-ecological systems, and environmental governance. We present a chronology of major scholarship on adaptive governance, synthesizing efforts to define the concept and identifying the array of governance concepts associated with transformation toward adaptive governance. Based on this synthesis, we define adaptive governance as a range of interactions between actors, networks, organizations, and institutions emerging in pursuit of a desired state for social-ecological systems. In addition, we identify and discuss ambiguities in adaptive governance scholarship such as the roles of adaptive management, crisis, and a desired state for governance of social-ecological systems. Finally, we outline a research agenda to examine whether an adaptive governance approach can become institutionalized under current legal frameworks and political contexts. We suggest a further investigation of the relationship between adaptive governance and the principles of good governance; the roles of power and politics in the emergence of adaptive governance; and potential interventions such as legal reform that may catalyze or enhance governance adaptations or transformation toward adaptive governance.
Ecologists have made great strides in developing criteria for describing the resilience of an ecological system. In addition, expansion of that effort to social-ecological systems has begun the ...process of identifying changes to the social system necessary to foster resilience in an ecological system such as the use of adaptive management and integrated ecosystem management. However, these changes to governance needed to foster ecosystem resilience will not be adopted by democratic societies without careful attention to their effect on the social system itself. Delegation of increased flexibility for adaptive management to resource management agencies must include careful attention to assuring that increased flexibility is exercised in a manner that is legitimate and responsive to the social system. Similarly, democratic systems proceed in incremental steps and are not likely to adopt wholesale changes to achieve integrated ecosystem management. This paper uses the concept of legitimacy in governance as a necessary component of any change to achieve greater social-ecological resilience and will turn to network theory as a means to facilitate legitimacy across multiple jurisdictions.
This special feature presents articles on the cross-scale interactions among law, ecosystem dynamics, and governance to address the adaptive capacity of six watersheds in the United States as they ...respond to rapid environmental change. We build on work that assesses resilience and transformation in riverine and wetland social-ecological systems across the United States at a variety of scales, levels of development, and degrees of degradation, focusing specifically on the Anacostia River, Central Platte River, Klamath River, Columbia River, Middle Rio Grand River, and the Everglades wetlands. All of these cases involve complex institutional systems, histories involving ecological and social regime shifts, and are operated under similar constitutional and legal frameworks for the division of authority among federal, state, local, and where applicable, tribal governments. We focus on the legal dimensions of watershed governance that directly relate to ecological resilience and transformability of the social-ecological systems. We synthesize the results of these assessments to advance our understanding of the role of law and governance as a trigger, facilitator, or barrier to adaptation and transformation in the face of rapid environmental change, including shifting climate. This introductory article defines terminology and theoretical concepts to present a bridging framework between U.S. law and ecological resilience that can be used by the remaining articles in this special issue.
Resilience and Water Governance Cosens, Barbara A.; Williams, Mark Kevin
Ecology and society,
01/2012, Letnik:
17, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The 1964 Columbia River Treaty between the United States and Canada is currently under review. Under the treaty, the river is jointly operated by the two countries for hydropower and is the largest ...producer of hydropower in the western hemisphere. In considering the next phase of international river governance, the degree of uncertainty surrounding the drivers of change complicates efforts to predict and manage under traditional approaches that rely on historical ecosystem responses. At the same time, changes in social values have focused attention on ecosystem health, the decline of which has led to the listing of seven salmon and four steelhead populations under the U.S.Endangered Species Act. Although adaptive management is considered one approach to resource management in the face of uncertainty, an early attempt at its implementation in the U.S. portion of the basin failed. We explore these issues in the context of resilience, taking the position that while adaptive management may foster ecological resilience, it is only one factor in the institutional changes needed to foster social-ecological resilience captured in the concept of adaptive governance.
Wildlife corridors aim to promote species’ persistence by connecting habitat patches across fragmented landscapes. Their implementation is limited by patterns of land ownership and complicated by ...differences in the jurisdictional and regulatory authorities under which lands are managed. Terrestrial corridor conservation requires coordination across jurisdictions and sectors subject to site‐specific overlapping sources of legal authority. Mapping spatial patterns of legal authority concurrent with habitat condition can illustrate opportunities to build or leverage capacity for connectivity conservation. Streamside areas provide pragmatic opportunities to leverage existing policy mechanisms for riverine and terrestrial habitat connectivity across boundaries. Conservation planners and practitioners can make use of these opportunities by harmonizing actions for multiple conservation outcomes. We formulated an integrative, data‐driven method for mapping multiple sources of legal authority weighted by capacity for coordinating terrestrial habitat conservation along streams. We generated a map of capacity to coordinate streamside corridor protections across a wildlife habitat gap to demonstrate this approach. We combined values representing coordination capacity and naturalness to generate an integrated legal‐ecological resistance map for connectivity modeling. We then computed least‐cost corridors across the integrated map, masking the terrestrial landscape to focus on streamside areas. Streamside least‐cost corridors in the integrated, local‐scale model diverged (∼25 km) from national‐scale least‐cost corridors based on naturalness. Spatial categories comparing legal‐ and naturalness‐based resistance values by stream reach highlighted potential locations for building or leveraging existing capacity through spatial coordination of policy mechanisms or restoration actions. Agencies or nongovernmental organizations intending to restore or maintain habitat connectivity across fragmented landscapes can use this approach to inform spatial prioritization and build coordination capacity.
Article impact statement: Combined mapping of legal authority and habitat condition reveals capacity to coordinate actions along streams for clean water and wildlife.
Mapeo de la Autoridad Legal para los Corredores Terrestres de Conservación a lo Largo de Ríos Stahl et al.
Resumen
Los corredores de fauna buscan promover la persistencia de las especies al conectar los fragmentos de hábitat a lo largo de paisajes fragmentados. Su implementación está limitada por los patrones de propiedad de tierras y se complica con las diferencias entre las autoridades jurisdiccionales y regulatorias que las administran. La conservación por corredores terrestres requiere de coordinación entre las jurisdicciones y los sectores sujetos a fuentes de autoridad legal que se traslapan y que son específicas del sitio. El mapeo de los patrones espaciales de la autoridad legal simultánea a la condición del hábitat puede ilustrar oportunidades para construir o hacer uso de la capacidad para la conservación por conectividad. Las áreas adyacentes a los cauces fluviales proporcionan oportunidades prácticas para hacer uso de los mecanismos políticos existentes para la conectividad de hábitats ribereño y terrestre a través de las fronteras. Los planificadores y practicantes de la conservación pueden usar estas oportunidades al armonizar las acciones para múltiples resultados de conservación. Formulamos un método integrativo orientado por los datos para mapear las múltiples fuentes de autoridad legal ponderadas por la capacidad para coordinar la conservación de hábitats terrestres a lo largo de ríos. Generamos un mapa de la capacidad para coordinar los corredores de protección a lo largo de los vacíos en los hábitats de fauna para demostrar esta estrategia. Combinamos los valores por medio de la representación de la capacidad de coordinación y la naturalidad para generar un mapa de resistencia legal y ecológica para el modelado de la conectividad. Después, computamos los corredores de menor costo en todo el mapa integrado, enmascarando el paisaje terrestre para enfocarnos en las áreas adyacentes al cauce fluvial. Los corredores de menor costo adyacentes a los cauces dentro del modelo integrado de escala local difirieron (∼25 km) de los corredores de menor costo basados en la naturalidad a escala nacional. Las categorías espaciales que compararon los valores de resistencia basada en la legalidad y en la naturalidad por alcance del río resaltaron las localidades potenciales para la construcción o el uso de la capacidad existente por medio de la coordinación espacial de los mecanismos de política o de las acciones de restauración. Las agencias y organizaciones no gubernamentales con la intención de restaurar o mantener la conectividad del hábitat en un paisaje fragmentado pueden utilizar esta estrategia para informar la priorización espacial y construir la capacidad de coordinación.
摘要
野生动物廊道旨在通过连接破碎景观中的栖息地斑块来提高物种的续存, 但其建设受限于土地所有制模式, 还会因管理土地的管辖及监管机构不同而更加复杂。陆地廊道保护需要多个司法管辖区和各地受到多种法定权威管制的部门之间的协调。将法定权威的空间格局与栖息地条件的分布地图相叠加, 将有利于开展廊道连接度保护的能力建设及利用。河流沿岸地区为现有的跨境河流及陆地栖息地连接度的相关政策机制的应用提供了实践机会。保护规划者和实施者可以利用这些机会协调多方行动以取得各方面的保护成效。我们制定了一个综合的、基于数据驱动的方法, 可以将协调河流沿岸陆地栖息地保护的能力作为权重来绘制多个法定权威来源的地图。为了演示这个方法, 我们绘制了一张协调跨越野生动物栖息地空缺地带的河流沿岸廊道保护力地图。我们将代表协调能力和自然特性的数值相结合, 生成了一张用于连接度建模的法律‐生态抵抗力综合地图。随后, 我们忽略陆地景观, 将重点放在河流沿岸地区, 计算了整个综合地图的最低成本廊道。结果显示, 由局部尺度的综合模型得到的河流沿岸最低成本廊道与基于自然特性的国家尺度最低成本廊道偏离约 25 公里。河流沿岸基于法律和自然特性抵抗力比较的空间分类进一步展示了可以通过政策机制或恢复行动的空间协调来建设和利用现有能力的潜在地点。计划恢复或维持破碎景观之间的栖息地连接度的机构或非政府组织可以应用这种方法确定优先保护的空间并建立协调力。【翻译: 胡怡思; 审校: 聂永刚】
The role of law in adaptive governance Cosens, Barbara A.; Craig, Robin K.; Hirsch, Shana Lee ...
Ecology and society,
03/2017, Letnik:
22, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The term “governance” encompasses both governmental and nongovernmental participation in collective choice and action. Law dictates the structure, boundaries, rules, and processes within which ...governmental action takes place, and in doing so becomes one of the focal points for analysis of barriers to adaptation as the effects of climate change are felt. Adaptive governance must therefore contemplate a level of flexibility and evolution in governmental action beyond that currently found in the heavily administrative governments of many democracies. Nevertheless, over time, law itself has proven highly adaptive in western systems of government, evolving to address and even facilitate the emergence of new social norms (such as the rights of women and minorities) or to provide remedies for emerging problems (such as pollution). Thus, there is no question that law can adapt, evolve, and be reformed to make room for adaptive governance. In doing this, not only may barriers be removed, but law may be adjusted to facilitate adaptive governance and to aid in institutionalizing new and emerging approaches to governance. The key is to do so in a way that also enhances legitimacy, accountability, and justice, or else such reforms will never be adopted by democratic societies, or if adopted, will destabilize those societies. By identifying those aspects of the frameworks for adaptive governance reviewed in the introduction to this special feature relevant to the legal system, we present guidelines for evaluating the role of law in environmental governance to identify the ways in which law can be used, adapted, and reformed to facilitate adaptive governance and to do so in a way that enhances the legitimacy of governmental action.
In the twenty-first century, our planet is facing a period of rapid and fundamental change resulting from human domination so extensive it is expected to be visible in the geologic record. The ...accelerating rate of change compounds the global social-ecological challenges already deemed wicked due to conflicting goals and scientific uncertainty. Understanding how connected natural and human systems respond to change is essential to understanding the governance required to navigate these modern wicked problems. This Article views change through the lens of complexity and resilience theories to inform the challenges of governance in a world dominated by such massive and relentless disruption. The new theories of governance discussed in this Article have been developed through empirical observation of emerging governance innovation to fill governance gaps that have opened with the increasing complexity of society. Among them, adaptive governance has been described as emerging in environmental governance and described in the resilience literature as a promising means to manage modern wicked problems. Adaptive governance is observed to emerge, and does so, in situations of conflict with high uncertainty in environmental management outcomes. This Article contributes to the development of adaptive governance theory by articulating and situating the role of formal law and government as the facilitator, but not central controller, of adaptive governance. To advance the understanding of adaptive governance, we argue that it can be understood in the broader context of scholarship covering the observed emergence of new governance, the efforts to develop theoretical understandings through decentered theory, and the refinement of constitutional understanding through democratic experimentalism. Synthesis of these three themes in turn informs the role of law and government in working with emergent governance responses to complexity to manage change and wicked problems. This inter- and transdisciplinary exercise reveals that the role of law and government in adaptive governance is to leave space for local innovation and private governance. Law and government must provide the catalyzation, facilitation, steering, and oversight essential for public and private institutions to respond at the rate and complexity of change in large-scale social-ecological systems, and they must do so while advancing good governance.†
In this article we summarize histories of nonlinear, complex interactions among societal, legal, and ecosystem dynamics in six North American water basins, as they respond to changing climate. These ...case studies were chosen to explore the conditions for emergence of adaptive governance in heavily regulated and developed social-ecological systems nested within a hierarchical governmental system. We summarize resilience assessments conducted in each system to provide a synthesis and reference by the other articles in this special feature. We also present a general framework used to evaluate the interactions between society and ecosystem regimes and the governance regimes chosen to mediate those interactions. The case studies show different ways that adaptive governance may be triggered, facilitated, or constrained by ecological and/or legal processes. The resilience assessments indicate that complex interactions among the governance and ecosystem components of these systems can produce different trajectories, which include patterns of (a) development and stabilization, (b) cycles of crisis and recovery, which includes lurches in adaptation and learning, and (3) periods of innovation, novelty, and transformation. Exploration of cross scale (Panarchy) interactions among levels and sectors of government and society illustrate that they may constrain development trajectories, but may also provide stability during crisis or innovation at smaller scales; create crises, but may also facilitate recovery; and constrain system transformation, but may also provide windows of opportunity in which transformation, and the resources to accomplish it, may occur. The framework is the starting point for our exploration of how law might play a role in enhancing the capacity of social-ecological systems to adapt to climate change.
When the availability of a vital resource varies between times of overabundance and extreme scarcity, management regimes must manifest flexibility and authority to adapt while maintaining legitimacy. ...Unfortunately, the need for adaptability often conflicts with the desire for certainty in legal and regulatory regimes, and laws that fail to account for variability often result in conflict when the inevitable disturbance occurs. Additional keys to resilience are collaboration among physical scientists, political actors, local leaders, and other stakeholders, and, when the commons is shared among sovereign states, collaboration between and among institutions with authority to act at different scales or with respect to different aspects of an ecological system. At the scale of transboundary river basins, where treaties govern water utilization, particular treaty mechanisms can reduce conflict potential by fostering collaboration and accounting for change. One necessary element is a mechanism for coordination and collaboration at the scale of the basin. This could be satisfied by mechanisms ranging from informal networks to the establishment of an international commission to jointly manage water, but a mechanism for collaboration at the basin scale alone does not ensure sound water management. To better guide resource management, study of applied resilience theory has revealed a number of management practices that are integral for adaptive governance. Here, we describe key resilience principles for treaty design and adaptive governance and then apply the principles to a case study of one transboundary basin where the need and willingness to manage collaboratively and iteratively is high—the Okavango River Basin of southwest Africa. This descriptive and applied approach should be particularly instructive for treaty negotiators, transboundary resource managers, and should aid program developers.
Adaptive governance is an emergent phenomenon resulting from the interaction of locally driven collaborative efforts with a hierarchy of governmental regulation and management and is thought to be ...capable of navigating social−ecological change as society responds to the effects of climate change. The assertion of Native American water rights on highly developed water systems in North America has triggered governance innovations that resemble certain aspects of adaptive governance, and have emerged to accommodate the need for Indigenous water development and restoration of cultural and ecological resources. Similar innovations are observed in the assertion of Indigenous voices in Australia. This presents an opportunity to analyze the emergence of adaptive processes within complex legal systems. We explore the role of law in locally driven innovation in this context, concluding that any system of governance that requires greater flexibility will only be viewed as legitimate, and thus succeed, if attention is given not only to adaptive capacity, but also to aspects of good governance. Through examples of the assertion of Indigenous rights, we illustrate critical links between adaptive capacity in water management, good governance, and law.
PDF
