Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theoretical Frameworks for the Analysis of Social–Ecological Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social-Ecological Systems in Transition

Part of the book series: Global Environmental Studies ((GENVST))

Abstract

Although the growing field of research on social–ecological systems (SESs) deals with some of the most important questions of our time, the study of SESs lacks an overarching theoretical framework. The development of such a framework is desirable because it would greatly improve our ability to generalize from individual case studies, to distinguish important from less important results, and ultimately to draw on the power of the scientific method to predict the consequence of management and policy interventions and to build greater resilience in SESs. Existing frameworks for the analysis of SESs can be grouped into five categories: (1) hypothesis-oriented frameworks; (2) assessment-oriented frameworks; (3) action-oriented frameworks; (4) problem-oriented frameworks; and (5) theory-oriented or overarching frameworks. Focusing on the fifth category, theory-oriented frameworks, seven assessment criteria are proposed that a satisfactory framework should meet: (1) it should provide a clear way of linking social and ecological systems and be strong in both disciplines; (2) it should be supported by rigorous empirical studies, key theories should meet Popper’s falsifiability criterion, and frameworks should include translation modes that allow theory to be connected to empirical observations, and vice-versa; (3) frameworks should offer insights into causality, ideally being based on first principles, and should offer clear statements of cause and effect; (4) frameworks should deal with the dynamic aspects of SESs and the nature of change through time, as well as with the spatial nature of SES and spatial variation; (5) frameworks should build on previous frameworks and, ideally, should be able explain their weaknesses and/or incorporate their strengths; (6) frameworks for SESs should be able to cope with, and offer connections between, complementary perspectives and different epistemologies; and (7) frameworks should provide direction for the study of SESs by suggesting or guiding new empirical studies that will advance our theoretical understanding of SESs. Illustrative examples are offered from eight existing frameworks that meet some of these criteria, but highlight the fact that no existing framework meets all the criteria well. The development of a stronger theoretical framework remains an important goal for SES theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16:268–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adger WN, Jordan A (2009) Sustainability: exploring the processes and outcomes of governance. In: Adger WN, Jordan A (eds) Governing sustainability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Adger WN, Hughes T, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Rockström J (2005) Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science 309:1036–1039

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal C, Green GM, Grove J, Evans TP, Schweik CM (2002) A review and assessment of land-use change models: dynamics of space, time, and human choice. In: General Technical Report NE-297. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal A, Gibson CC (1999) Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World Dev 27:629–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderies JM, Janssen MA, Ostrom E (2004) A framework to analyze the robustness of social-ecological systems from an institutional perspective. Ecol Soc 9(1):18

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunch M, McCarthy D, Waltner-Toews D (2008) A family of origin for an ecosystem approach to managing for sustainability. In: Waltner-Toews D, Kay JJ, Lister N-ME (eds) The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 125–138

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR (2002) Ecological futures: building an ecology of the long now. Ecology 83:2069–2083

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland P (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199:1302–1310

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Andrade F, Antunes P, van den Belt M, Boesch D, Boersma D, Catarino F, Hannah S, Limburg K, Lowj B, Molitor M, Pereira JG, Rayner S, Santos R, Wilson J, Young M (1999) Ecological economics and sustainable governance of the oceans. Ecol Econ 31:171–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford S, Ostrom E (1995) A grammar of institutions. Am Pol Sci Rev 89:582–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming GS (2011) Spatial resilience in social-ecological systems. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cundill G, Cumming GS, Biggs D, Fabricius C (2012) Soft systems thinking and social learning for adaptive management. Conserv Biol 26:13–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Glob Environ Change 16:253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Holling CS, Perrings C (1996) Biological diversity, ecosystems, and the human scale. Ecol Appl 6:1018–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergel SE, Bennett EM, Greenfield BK, King S, Overdevest CA, Stumborg B (2004) A test of the environmental Kuznets curve using long-term watershed inputs. Ecol Appl 14:555–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson CC, Andersson K, Ostrom E, Shivakumar S (2005) The Samaritan’s dilemma: the political economy of development aid. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Glymour C, Danks D, Glymour B, Eberhardt F, Ramsey J, Scheines R, Spirtes P, Teng CM, Zhang J (2009) Actual causation: a stone soup essay. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-009-9497-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm V, Revilla E, Berger U, Jeltsch F, Mooij WM, Railsback SF, Thulke H-H, Weiner J, Weigand T, DeAngelis D (2005) Pattern-oriented modeling of agent-based complex systems: lessons from ecology. Science 310:987–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) (2002) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1992) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1995) Hidden order: how adaptation builds complexity. Perseus Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, social and ecological systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Gunderson LH (2002) Resilience and adaptive cycles. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, pp 25–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Meffe GK (1996) Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conserv Biol 10:328–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imperial MT (1999) Institutional analysis and ecosystem-based management: the institutional analysis and development framework. Environ Manag 24:449–465

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007a) Climate change (2007): impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007b) Climate change (2007): the physical science basis. In: Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Johns D (2009) A new conservation politics: power, organization building and effectiveness. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay J, Boyle M (2008) Self-organizing, holarchic, open systems (SOHOs). In: Waltner-Toews D, Kay JJ, Lister N-M (eds) The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Koontz TM, Bodine J (2008) Implementing ecosystem management in public agencies: lessons from the U.S. Bureau of land management and the forest service. Conserv Biol 22:60–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuznets S (1955) Economic growth and income inequality. Am Econ Rev 45:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. Island Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg J, Cumming GS (2008) Complexity theory for a sustainable future. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:15181–15187

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 352:419–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett STA, Jones C, Kolasa J (2007) Ecological understanding: the nature of theory and the theory of nature. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P (2004) Political ecology: a critical introduction. Blackwell Publishing, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  • Roura-Pascual N, Richardson DM, Krug RM, Brown A, Chapman RA, Forsyth GG, Le Maitre DC, Robertson MP, Stafford L, Van Wilgen BW, Wannenburgh A, Wessels N (2009) Ecology and management of alien plant invasions in South African fynbos: accommodating key complexities in objective decision making. Biol Conserv 142:1595–1604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwaninger M (2006) System dynamics and the evolution of the systems movement. Syst Res Behav Sci 23:583–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stommel H (1963) The varieties of oceanographic experience. Science 139:572–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • The Nature Conservancy (TNC) (2003) The five-S framework for site conservation: a practitioner’s handbook for site conservation planning and measuring conservation success, 3rd edn. http://www.nature.org

  • The Resilience Alliance (2007a) Assessing and managing resilience in social-ecological systems: a practitioner’s workbook, vol 1. version 1.0. http://www.resalliance.org/3871.php

  • The Resilience Alliance (2007b) Assessing resilience in social-ecological systems: a scientist’s workbook. http://www.resalliance.org/3871.php

  • Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner BLI, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Kasperson JX, Luers A, Martello ML, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A (2003a) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:8074–8079

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner BLI, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Hovelsrud-Broda GK, Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Luers A, Martello ML, Mathiesen S, Naylor R, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A, Selin H, Tyler N (2003b) Illustrating the coupled human-environment system for vulnerability analysis: three case studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:8080–8085

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker B, Carpenter S, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming GS, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson GD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6:14

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker BH, Gunderson LH, Kinzig AP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Schultz L (2006) A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11:13

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltner-Toews D, Kay JJ, Lister N-ME (eds) (2008) The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilber K (1997) An integral theory of consciousness. J Conscious Stud 4:71–72

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

    Graeme S. Cumming

Authors
  1. Graeme S. Cumming
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Graeme S. Cumming .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Ecological Research, Kyoto University, Otsu, Shiga, Japan

    Shoko Sakai

  2. Graduate School of Fisheries Science and Environmental Studies, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Nagasaki, Japan

    Chieko Umetsu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Japan

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cumming, G.S. (2014). Theoretical Frameworks for the Analysis of Social–Ecological Systems. In: Sakai, S., Umetsu, C. (eds) Social-Ecological Systems in Transition. Global Environmental Studies. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54910-9_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation