Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system

In the past decades, social-ecological systems (SESs) worldwide have undergone dramatic transformations with often detrimental consequences for livelihoods. Although resilience thinking offers promising conceptual frameworks to understand SES transformations, empirical resilience assessments of real...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecology and society 2016-09, Vol.21 (3), p.1
Hauptverfasser: Linstädter, Anja, Kuhn, Arnim, Naumann, Christiane, Rasch, Sebastian, Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra, Amelung, Wulf, Jordaan, Jorrie, Preez, Chris CDu, Bollig, Michael
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 3
container_start_page 1
container_title Ecology and society
container_volume 21
creator Linstädter, Anja
Kuhn, Arnim
Naumann, Christiane
Rasch, Sebastian
Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra
Amelung, Wulf
Jordaan, Jorrie
Preez, Chris CDu
Bollig, Michael
description In the past decades, social-ecological systems (SESs) worldwide have undergone dramatic transformations with often detrimental consequences for livelihoods. Although resilience thinking offers promising conceptual frameworks to understand SES transformations, empirical resilience assessments of real-world SESs are still rare because SES complexity requires integrating knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines. Taking up this challenge, we empirically assess the resilience of a South African pastoral SES to drought using various methods from natural and social sciences. In the ecological subsystem, we analyze rangelands’ ability to buffer drought effects on forage provision, using soil and vegetation indicators. In the social subsystem, we assess households’ and communities’ capacities to mitigate drought effects, applying agronomic and institutional indicators and benchmarking against practices and institutions in traditional pastoral SESs. Our results indicate that a decoupling of livelihoods from livestock-generated income was initiated by government interventions in the 1930s. In the post-apartheid phase, minimum-input strategies of herd management were adopted, leading to a recovery of rangeland vegetation due to unintentionally reduced stocking densities. Because current livelihood security is mainly based on external monetary resources (pensions, child grants, and disability grants), household resilience to drought is higher than in historical phases. Our study is one of the first to use a truly multidisciplinary resilience assessment. Conflicting results from partial assessments underline that measuring narrow indicator sets may impede a deeper understanding of SES transformations. The results also imply that the resilience of contemporary, open SESs cannot be explained by an inward-looking approach because essential connections and drivers at other scales have become relevant in the globalized world. Our study thus has helped to identify pitfalls in empirical resilience assessment and to improve the conceptualization of SES dynamics.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1829439329</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4216673511</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_18294393293</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNj81qAkEQhAdB8Cd5hwbPC-uu4K43kYTc9S7DbK-29E6v0zMJPkbeOAMJOXsqiqr6oCZmvt6WTVGXzXZmFqq3sqzaTVPNzfdeFVXJXyBeEQIqMaF3CNKDzd5y8SWBO1BxlA06YbmQswz60IjDDjgDxCv0QYa8GRJH6kgdjUzehgfgp-VkI4n_pR4lxSvs-5AxHkarUcI_78VMe8uKr3-6NKv3t9PhoxiD3BNqPN8kBZ-j87rJL-q2rtr6udYPNXlXmQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1829439329</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>JSTOR Open Access Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Linstädter, Anja ; Kuhn, Arnim ; Naumann, Christiane ; Rasch, Sebastian ; Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra ; Amelung, Wulf ; Jordaan, Jorrie ; Preez, Chris CDu ; Bollig, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Linstädter, Anja ; Kuhn, Arnim ; Naumann, Christiane ; Rasch, Sebastian ; Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra ; Amelung, Wulf ; Jordaan, Jorrie ; Preez, Chris CDu ; Bollig, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>In the past decades, social-ecological systems (SESs) worldwide have undergone dramatic transformations with often detrimental consequences for livelihoods. Although resilience thinking offers promising conceptual frameworks to understand SES transformations, empirical resilience assessments of real-world SESs are still rare because SES complexity requires integrating knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines. Taking up this challenge, we empirically assess the resilience of a South African pastoral SES to drought using various methods from natural and social sciences. In the ecological subsystem, we analyze rangelands’ ability to buffer drought effects on forage provision, using soil and vegetation indicators. In the social subsystem, we assess households’ and communities’ capacities to mitigate drought effects, applying agronomic and institutional indicators and benchmarking against practices and institutions in traditional pastoral SESs. Our results indicate that a decoupling of livelihoods from livestock-generated income was initiated by government interventions in the 1930s. In the post-apartheid phase, minimum-input strategies of herd management were adopted, leading to a recovery of rangeland vegetation due to unintentionally reduced stocking densities. Because current livelihood security is mainly based on external monetary resources (pensions, child grants, and disability grants), household resilience to drought is higher than in historical phases. Our study is one of the first to use a truly multidisciplinary resilience assessment. Conflicting results from partial assessments underline that measuring narrow indicator sets may impede a deeper understanding of SES transformations. The results also imply that the resilience of contemporary, open SESs cannot be explained by an inward-looking approach because essential connections and drivers at other scales have become relevant in the globalized world. Our study thus has helped to identify pitfalls in empirical resilience assessment and to improve the conceptualization of SES dynamics.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1708-3087</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ottawa: Resilience Alliance</publisher><subject>Agronomy ; Assessments ; Decoupling ; Drought ; Ecological effects ; Ecological monitoring ; Ecology ; Empirical analysis ; Environmental policy ; Grants ; Households ; Indicators ; Livestock ; Pastoralism ; Range management ; Rangelands ; Resilience ; Security ; Social sciences ; Transformations ; Vegetation</subject><ispartof>Ecology and society, 2016-09, Vol.21 (3), p.1</ispartof><rights>Copyright Resilience Alliance 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27866</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Linstädter, Anja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhn, Arnim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naumann, Christiane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rasch, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amelung, Wulf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordaan, Jorrie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Preez, Chris CDu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bollig, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system</title><title>Ecology and society</title><description>In the past decades, social-ecological systems (SESs) worldwide have undergone dramatic transformations with often detrimental consequences for livelihoods. Although resilience thinking offers promising conceptual frameworks to understand SES transformations, empirical resilience assessments of real-world SESs are still rare because SES complexity requires integrating knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines. Taking up this challenge, we empirically assess the resilience of a South African pastoral SES to drought using various methods from natural and social sciences. In the ecological subsystem, we analyze rangelands’ ability to buffer drought effects on forage provision, using soil and vegetation indicators. In the social subsystem, we assess households’ and communities’ capacities to mitigate drought effects, applying agronomic and institutional indicators and benchmarking against practices and institutions in traditional pastoral SESs. Our results indicate that a decoupling of livelihoods from livestock-generated income was initiated by government interventions in the 1930s. In the post-apartheid phase, minimum-input strategies of herd management were adopted, leading to a recovery of rangeland vegetation due to unintentionally reduced stocking densities. Because current livelihood security is mainly based on external monetary resources (pensions, child grants, and disability grants), household resilience to drought is higher than in historical phases. Our study is one of the first to use a truly multidisciplinary resilience assessment. Conflicting results from partial assessments underline that measuring narrow indicator sets may impede a deeper understanding of SES transformations. The results also imply that the resilience of contemporary, open SESs cannot be explained by an inward-looking approach because essential connections and drivers at other scales have become relevant in the globalized world. Our study thus has helped to identify pitfalls in empirical resilience assessment and to improve the conceptualization of SES dynamics.</description><subject>Agronomy</subject><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Decoupling</subject><subject>Drought</subject><subject>Ecological effects</subject><subject>Ecological monitoring</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Empirical analysis</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Grants</subject><subject>Households</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Pastoralism</subject><subject>Range management</subject><subject>Rangelands</subject><subject>Resilience</subject><subject>Security</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>Transformations</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><issn>1708-3087</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNj81qAkEQhAdB8Cd5hwbPC-uu4K43kYTc9S7DbK-29E6v0zMJPkbeOAMJOXsqiqr6oCZmvt6WTVGXzXZmFqq3sqzaTVPNzfdeFVXJXyBeEQIqMaF3CNKDzd5y8SWBO1BxlA06YbmQswz60IjDDjgDxCv0QYa8GRJH6kgdjUzehgfgp-VkI4n_pR4lxSvs-5AxHkarUcI_78VMe8uKr3-6NKv3t9PhoxiD3BNqPN8kBZ-j87rJL-q2rtr6udYPNXlXmQ</recordid><startdate>20160901</startdate><enddate>20160901</enddate><creator>Linstädter, Anja</creator><creator>Kuhn, Arnim</creator><creator>Naumann, Christiane</creator><creator>Rasch, Sebastian</creator><creator>Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra</creator><creator>Amelung, Wulf</creator><creator>Jordaan, Jorrie</creator><creator>Preez, Chris CDu</creator><creator>Bollig, Michael</creator><general>Resilience Alliance</general><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>H9R</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160901</creationdate><title>Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system</title><author>Linstädter, Anja ; Kuhn, Arnim ; Naumann, Christiane ; Rasch, Sebastian ; Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra ; Amelung, Wulf ; Jordaan, Jorrie ; Preez, Chris CDu ; Bollig, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_18294393293</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Agronomy</topic><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Decoupling</topic><topic>Drought</topic><topic>Ecological effects</topic><topic>Ecological monitoring</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Empirical analysis</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Grants</topic><topic>Households</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Pastoralism</topic><topic>Range management</topic><topic>Rangelands</topic><topic>Resilience</topic><topic>Security</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>Transformations</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Linstädter, Anja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhn, Arnim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naumann, Christiane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rasch, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amelung, Wulf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordaan, Jorrie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Preez, Chris CDu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bollig, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Illustrata: Natural Sciences</collection><jtitle>Ecology and society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Linstädter, Anja</au><au>Kuhn, Arnim</au><au>Naumann, Christiane</au><au>Rasch, Sebastian</au><au>Sandhage-Hofmann, Alexandra</au><au>Amelung, Wulf</au><au>Jordaan, Jorrie</au><au>Preez, Chris CDu</au><au>Bollig, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system</atitle><jtitle>Ecology and society</jtitle><date>2016-09-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1</spage><pages>1-</pages><eissn>1708-3087</eissn><abstract>In the past decades, social-ecological systems (SESs) worldwide have undergone dramatic transformations with often detrimental consequences for livelihoods. Although resilience thinking offers promising conceptual frameworks to understand SES transformations, empirical resilience assessments of real-world SESs are still rare because SES complexity requires integrating knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines. Taking up this challenge, we empirically assess the resilience of a South African pastoral SES to drought using various methods from natural and social sciences. In the ecological subsystem, we analyze rangelands’ ability to buffer drought effects on forage provision, using soil and vegetation indicators. In the social subsystem, we assess households’ and communities’ capacities to mitigate drought effects, applying agronomic and institutional indicators and benchmarking against practices and institutions in traditional pastoral SESs. Our results indicate that a decoupling of livelihoods from livestock-generated income was initiated by government interventions in the 1930s. In the post-apartheid phase, minimum-input strategies of herd management were adopted, leading to a recovery of rangeland vegetation due to unintentionally reduced stocking densities. Because current livelihood security is mainly based on external monetary resources (pensions, child grants, and disability grants), household resilience to drought is higher than in historical phases. Our study is one of the first to use a truly multidisciplinary resilience assessment. Conflicting results from partial assessments underline that measuring narrow indicator sets may impede a deeper understanding of SES transformations. The results also imply that the resilience of contemporary, open SESs cannot be explained by an inward-looking approach because essential connections and drivers at other scales have become relevant in the globalized world. Our study thus has helped to identify pitfalls in empirical resilience assessment and to improve the conceptualization of SES dynamics.</abstract><cop>Ottawa</cop><pub>Resilience Alliance</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1708-3087
ispartof Ecology and society, 2016-09, Vol.21 (3), p.1
issn 1708-3087
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1829439329
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PAIS Index; JSTOR Open Access Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Agronomy
Assessments
Decoupling
Drought
Ecological effects
Ecological monitoring
Ecology
Empirical analysis
Environmental policy
Grants
Households
Indicators
Livestock
Pastoralism
Range management
Rangelands
Resilience
Security
Social sciences
Transformations
Vegetation
title Assessing the resilience of a real-world social-ecological system: lessons from a multidisciplinary evaluation of a South African pastoral system
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T23%3A32%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessing%20the%20resilience%20of%20a%20real-world%20social-ecological%20system:%20lessons%20from%20a%20multidisciplinary%20evaluation%20of%20a%20South%20African%20pastoral%20system&rft.jtitle=Ecology%20and%20society&rft.au=Linst%C3%A4dter,%20Anja&rft.date=2016-09-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1&rft.pages=1-&rft.eissn=1708-3087&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E4216673511%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1829439329&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true