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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sustainability 2021-03, Vol.13 (5), p.2629 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 |