Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience

Building landscape resilience inspires the cultivation of the landscape’s capacity to recover from disruption and live with changes and uncertainties. However, integrating ecosystem and society within such a unified lens—that is, socio–ecological system (SES) resilience—clashes with many cornerstone...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Sustainability 2021-03, Vol.13 (5), p.2629
Hauptverfasser: Xu, Hongzhang, Peng, Meng, Pittock, Jamie, Xu, Jiayu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 5
container_start_page 2629
container_title Sustainability
container_volume 13
creator Xu, Hongzhang
Peng, Meng
Pittock, Jamie
Xu, Jiayu
description Building landscape resilience inspires the cultivation of the landscape’s capacity to recover from disruption and live with changes and uncertainties. However, integrating ecosystem and society within such a unified lens—that is, socio–ecological system (SES) resilience—clashes with many cornerstone concepts in social science, such as power, democracy, rights, and culture. In short, a landscape cannot provide the same values to everyone. However, can building landscape resilience be an effective and just environmental management strategy? Research on this question is limited. A scoping literature review was conducted first to synthesise and map landscape management change based on 111,653 records. Then, we used the Nuozhadu (NZD) catchment as a case study to validate our findings from the literature. We summarised current critiques and created a framework including seven normative categories, or common difficulties, namely resilience for “whom”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “why”, as well as “can” and “how” we apply resilience normatively. We found that these difficulties are overlooked and avoided despite their instructive roles to achieve just landscape management more transparently. Without clear targets and boundaries in building resilience, we found that some groups consume resources and services at the expense of others. The NZD case demonstrates that a strategy of building the NZD’s resilience has improved the conservation of the NZD’s forest ecosystems but overlooked trade-offs between sustaining people and the environment, and between sustainable development for people at different scales. Future researchers, managers, and decision-makers are thereby needed to think resilience more normatively and address the questions in the “seven difficulties” framework before intervening to build landscape resilience.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/su13052629
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2497468648</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2497468648</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-bc326d66d81a04566194dd29336a419eb32aba947ce002f8bbd0aa266c55c24e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkM1Kw0AUhQdRsNRufIKAOyE6f5lklrX-QkQsdR1uZibtlDiJM4ngrg-iL9cnMbWC3s29nHs4Bz6ETgm-YEziy9AThhMqqDxAI4pTEhOc4MN_9zGahLDGwzBGJBEj9PwIDpbWLaM5dCvjo8UKXDR9b6zeidvN57WtKqv6urMmbDdfkXXRVW_rn3cOTgcFrYnmJtjaGqfMCTqqoA5m8rvH6OX2ZjG7j_Onu4fZNI8VlUkXl4pRoYXQGQHMEyGI5FpTyZgATqQpGYUSJE-VwZhWWVlqDECFUEmiKDdsjM72ua1v3noTumLd9N4NlQXlMuUiEzwbXOd7l_JNCN5URevtK_iPguBiR634o8a-AUSAYBM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2497468648</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience</title><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Xu, Hongzhang ; Peng, Meng ; Pittock, Jamie ; Xu, Jiayu</creator><creatorcontrib>Xu, Hongzhang ; Peng, Meng ; Pittock, Jamie ; Xu, Jiayu</creatorcontrib><description>Building landscape resilience inspires the cultivation of the landscape’s capacity to recover from disruption and live with changes and uncertainties. However, integrating ecosystem and society within such a unified lens—that is, socio–ecological system (SES) resilience—clashes with many cornerstone concepts in social science, such as power, democracy, rights, and culture. In short, a landscape cannot provide the same values to everyone. However, can building landscape resilience be an effective and just environmental management strategy? Research on this question is limited. A scoping literature review was conducted first to synthesise and map landscape management change based on 111,653 records. Then, we used the Nuozhadu (NZD) catchment as a case study to validate our findings from the literature. We summarised current critiques and created a framework including seven normative categories, or common difficulties, namely resilience for “whom”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “why”, as well as “can” and “how” we apply resilience normatively. We found that these difficulties are overlooked and avoided despite their instructive roles to achieve just landscape management more transparently. Without clear targets and boundaries in building resilience, we found that some groups consume resources and services at the expense of others. The NZD case demonstrates that a strategy of building the NZD’s resilience has improved the conservation of the NZD’s forest ecosystems but overlooked trade-offs between sustaining people and the environment, and between sustainable development for people at different scales. Future researchers, managers, and decision-makers are thereby needed to think resilience more normatively and address the questions in the “seven difficulties” framework before intervening to build landscape resilience.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su13052629</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Agricultural production ; Biodiversity ; Climate change ; Community ; Democracy ; Ecosystems ; Environmental changes ; Environmental management ; Food supply ; Forest conservation ; Forest ecosystems ; Landscape ; Literature reviews ; Natural resources ; Resilience ; Social sciences ; Society ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development ; Trends</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2021-03, Vol.13 (5), p.2629</ispartof><rights>2021. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-bc326d66d81a04566194dd29336a419eb32aba947ce002f8bbd0aa266c55c24e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-bc326d66d81a04566194dd29336a419eb32aba947ce002f8bbd0aa266c55c24e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6293-996X ; 0000-0001-8904-2976</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Xu, Hongzhang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Meng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pittock, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Jiayu</creatorcontrib><title>Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>Building landscape resilience inspires the cultivation of the landscape’s capacity to recover from disruption and live with changes and uncertainties. However, integrating ecosystem and society within such a unified lens—that is, socio–ecological system (SES) resilience—clashes with many cornerstone concepts in social science, such as power, democracy, rights, and culture. In short, a landscape cannot provide the same values to everyone. However, can building landscape resilience be an effective and just environmental management strategy? Research on this question is limited. A scoping literature review was conducted first to synthesise and map landscape management change based on 111,653 records. Then, we used the Nuozhadu (NZD) catchment as a case study to validate our findings from the literature. We summarised current critiques and created a framework including seven normative categories, or common difficulties, namely resilience for “whom”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “why”, as well as “can” and “how” we apply resilience normatively. We found that these difficulties are overlooked and avoided despite their instructive roles to achieve just landscape management more transparently. Without clear targets and boundaries in building resilience, we found that some groups consume resources and services at the expense of others. The NZD case demonstrates that a strategy of building the NZD’s resilience has improved the conservation of the NZD’s forest ecosystems but overlooked trade-offs between sustaining people and the environment, and between sustainable development for people at different scales. Future researchers, managers, and decision-makers are thereby needed to think resilience more normatively and address the questions in the “seven difficulties” framework before intervening to build landscape resilience.</description><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Community</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental changes</subject><subject>Environmental management</subject><subject>Food supply</subject><subject>Forest conservation</subject><subject>Forest ecosystems</subject><subject>Landscape</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Resilience</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Trends</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkM1Kw0AUhQdRsNRufIKAOyE6f5lklrX-QkQsdR1uZibtlDiJM4ngrg-iL9cnMbWC3s29nHs4Bz6ETgm-YEziy9AThhMqqDxAI4pTEhOc4MN_9zGahLDGwzBGJBEj9PwIDpbWLaM5dCvjo8UKXDR9b6zeidvN57WtKqv6urMmbDdfkXXRVW_rn3cOTgcFrYnmJtjaGqfMCTqqoA5m8rvH6OX2ZjG7j_Onu4fZNI8VlUkXl4pRoYXQGQHMEyGI5FpTyZgATqQpGYUSJE-VwZhWWVlqDECFUEmiKDdsjM72ua1v3noTumLd9N4NlQXlMuUiEzwbXOd7l_JNCN5URevtK_iPguBiR634o8a-AUSAYBM</recordid><startdate>20210301</startdate><enddate>20210301</enddate><creator>Xu, Hongzhang</creator><creator>Peng, Meng</creator><creator>Pittock, Jamie</creator><creator>Xu, Jiayu</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6293-996X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8904-2976</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210301</creationdate><title>Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience</title><author>Xu, Hongzhang ; Peng, Meng ; Pittock, Jamie ; Xu, Jiayu</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c295t-bc326d66d81a04566194dd29336a419eb32aba947ce002f8bbd0aa266c55c24e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Community</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental changes</topic><topic>Environmental management</topic><topic>Food supply</topic><topic>Forest conservation</topic><topic>Forest ecosystems</topic><topic>Landscape</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Resilience</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Trends</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Xu, Hongzhang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Meng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pittock, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Jiayu</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Xu, Hongzhang</au><au>Peng, Meng</au><au>Pittock, Jamie</au><au>Xu, Jiayu</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2021-03-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2629</spage><pages>2629-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>Building landscape resilience inspires the cultivation of the landscape’s capacity to recover from disruption and live with changes and uncertainties. However, integrating ecosystem and society within such a unified lens—that is, socio–ecological system (SES) resilience—clashes with many cornerstone concepts in social science, such as power, democracy, rights, and culture. In short, a landscape cannot provide the same values to everyone. However, can building landscape resilience be an effective and just environmental management strategy? Research on this question is limited. A scoping literature review was conducted first to synthesise and map landscape management change based on 111,653 records. Then, we used the Nuozhadu (NZD) catchment as a case study to validate our findings from the literature. We summarised current critiques and created a framework including seven normative categories, or common difficulties, namely resilience for “whom”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “why”, as well as “can” and “how” we apply resilience normatively. We found that these difficulties are overlooked and avoided despite their instructive roles to achieve just landscape management more transparently. Without clear targets and boundaries in building resilience, we found that some groups consume resources and services at the expense of others. The NZD case demonstrates that a strategy of building the NZD’s resilience has improved the conservation of the NZD’s forest ecosystems but overlooked trade-offs between sustaining people and the environment, and between sustainable development for people at different scales. Future researchers, managers, and decision-makers are thereby needed to think resilience more normatively and address the questions in the “seven difficulties” framework before intervening to build landscape resilience.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su13052629</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6293-996X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8904-2976</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2071-1050
ispartof Sustainability, 2021-03, Vol.13 (5), p.2629
issn 2071-1050
2071-1050
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2497468648
source MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB Electronic Journals Library
subjects Agricultural production
Biodiversity
Climate change
Community
Democracy
Ecosystems
Environmental changes
Environmental management
Food supply
Forest conservation
Forest ecosystems
Landscape
Literature reviews
Natural resources
Resilience
Social sciences
Society
Sustainability
Sustainable development
Trends
title Managing Rather Than Avoiding “Difficulties” in Building Landscape Resilience
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T13%3A48%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Managing%20Rather%20Than%20Avoiding%20%E2%80%9CDifficulties%E2%80%9D%20in%20Building%20Landscape%20Resilience&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Xu,%20Hongzhang&rft.date=2021-03-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2629&rft.pages=2629-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su13052629&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2497468648%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2497468648&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true