Exploring "big picture" scenarios for resilience in social-ecological systems: transdisciplinary cross-impact balances modeling in the Red River Basin.

Climate change is increasing the frequency and the severity of extreme events in river basins around the world. Efforts to build resilience to these impacts are complicated by the social-ecological interactions, cross-scale feedbacks, and diverse actor interests that influence the dynamics of change in social-ecological systems (SESs). In this study, we aimed to explore big-picture scenarios of a river basin under climate change by characterizing future change as emergent from interactions between diverse efforts to build resilience and a complex, cross-scale SES. To do so, we facilitated a transdisciplinary scenario modeling process structured by the cross-impact balances (CIB) method, a semi-quantitative method that applies systems theory to generate internally consistent narrative scenarios from a network of interacting drivers of change. Thus, we also aimed to explore the potential for the CIB method to surface diverse perspectives and drivers of change in SESs. We situated this process in the Red River Basin, a transboundary basin shared by the United States and Canada where significant natural climatic variability is worsened by climate change. The process generated 15 interacting drivers ranging from agricultural markets to ecological integrity, generating eight consistent scenarios that are robust to model uncertainty. The scenario analysis and the debrief workshop reveal important insights, including the transformative changes required to achieve desirable outcomes and the cornerstone role of Indigenous water rights. In sum, our analysis surfaced significant complexities surrounding efforts to build resilience and affirmed the potential for the CIB method to generate unique insights about the trajectory of SESs. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-023-01308-1.

Disrupting and diversifying the values, voices and governance principles that shape biodiversity science and management.

With climate, biodiversity and inequity crises squarely upon us, never has there been a more pressing time to rethink how we conceptualize, understand and manage our relationship with Earth's biodiversity. Here, we describe governance principles of 17 Indigenous Nations from the Northwest Coast of North America used to understand and steward relationships among all components of nature, including humans. We then chart the colonial origins of biodiversity science and use the complex case of sea otter recovery to illuminate how ancestral governance principles can be mobilized to characterize, manage and restore biodiversity in more inclusive, integrative and equitable ways. To enhance environmental sustainability, resilience and social justice amid today's crises, we need to broaden who benefits from and participates in the sciences of biodiversity by expanding the values and methodologies that shape such initiatives. In practice, biodiversity conservation and natural resource management need to shift from centralized, siloed approaches to those that can accommodate plurality in values, objectives, governance systems, legal traditions and ways of knowing. In doing so, developing solutions to our planetary crises becomes a shared responsibility. This article is part of the theme issue 'Detecting and attributing the causes of biodiversity change: needs, gaps and solutions'.

Fish, People, and Systems of Power: Understanding and Disrupting Feedback between Colonialism and Fisheries Science.

AbstractThis essay explores shifting scientific understandings of fish and the evolution of fisheries science, and it grapples with colonialism as a system of power. We trace the rise of fisheries science to a time when Western nation-states were industrializing fishing fleets and competing for access to distant fishing grounds. A theory of fishing called "maximum sustainable yield" (MSY) that understands fish species in aggregate was espoused. Although alternatives to MSY have been developed, decision-making continues to be informed by statistical models developed within fisheries science. A challenge for structured management systems now rests in attending to different systems of knowledge and addressing local objectives, values, and circumstances. To deepen and illustrate key points, we examine Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii) and the expansion of commercial herring fisheries and state-led management in British Columbia, Canada. A feedback between colonialism and fisheries science is evident: colonialism generated the initial conditions for expansion and has been reinforced through the implementation of approaches and tools from fisheries science that define and quantify conservation in particular ways. Some features may be unique to the herring illustration, but important aspects of the feedback are more broadly generalizable. We propose three interconnected goals: (a) transform the siloed institutions and practices of Western science, (b) reimagine and rebuild pathways between information (including diverse values and perspectives) and decision-making, and (c) devolve governance authority and broaden governance processes such that multiple ways of knowing share equal footing.

Lessons from bright-spots for advancing knowledge exchange at the interface of marine science and policy.

Evidence-informed decision-making is in increasing demand given growing pressures on marine environments. A way to facilitate this is by knowledge exchange among marine scientists and decision-makers. While many barriers are reported in the literature, there are also examples whereby research has successfully informed marine decision-making (i.e., 'bright-spots'). Here, we identify and analyze 25 bright-spots from a wide range of marine fields, contexts, and locations to provide insights into how to improve knowledge exchange at the interface of marine science and policy. Through qualitative surveys we investigate what initiated the bright-spots, their goals, and approaches to knowledge exchange. We also seek to identify what outcomes/impacts have been achieved, the enablers of success, and what lessons can be learnt to guide future knowledge exchange efforts. Results show that a diversity of approaches were used for knowledge exchange, from consultative engagement to genuine knowledge co-production. We show that diverse successes at the interface of marine science and policy are achievable and include impacts on policy, people, and governance. Such successes were enabled by factors related to the actors, processes, support, context, and timing. For example, the importance of involving diverse actors and managing positive relationships is a key lesson for success. However, enabling routine success will require: 1) transforming the ways in which we train scientists to include a greater focus on interpersonal skills, 2) institutionalizing and supporting knowledge exchange activities in organizational agendas, 3) conceptualizing and implementing broader research impact metrics, and 4) transforming funding mechanisms to focus on need-based interventions, impact planning, and an acknowledgement of the required time and effort that underpin knowledge exchange activities.

Governing offshore fish aggregating devices in the Eastern Caribbean: Exploring trade-offs using a qualitative network model.

The use of moored Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) in small-scale fisheries is a potential solution to food security concerns, economic development needs, and the overexploitation of nearshore coastal fisheries in the Eastern Caribbean. However, moored FADs also generate novel and largely unstudied governance challenges involving (1) the provisioning of FADs, (2) fisheries resource appropriation, (3) human wellbeing, and (4) food web impacts. We examine the relative performance of three governance scenarios to address these challenges: private-individual, community-based, and top-down governance. We construct a qualitative network model (QNM) of the fishery based on semi-structured interviews (n = 60) with fishers and fisheries managers, established food web and economic models, and expert knowledge. We simulate the social-ecological impacts of the three governance scenarios. The models suggest that community-based and top-down governance scenarios result in low levels of conflict, but provide limited incentives to develop and maintain moored FADs. The private-individual governance scenario tends to increase conflict and incentives for monitoring FADs, but has no impact on incentives for maintaining and deploying FADs.

Emergence of Collaborative Environmental Governance: What are the Causal Mechanisms?

Conflict in environmental governance is common, and bringing together stakeholders with diverse perspectives in situations of conflict is extremely difficult. However, case studies of how diverse stakeholders form self-organized coalitions under these circumstances exist and provide invaluable opportunities to understand the causal mechanisms that operate in the process. We focus on the case of the Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve nomination process, which unfolded over several years and moved the region from a series of serious conflicts to one where stakeholders came together to support a Biosphere Reserve nomination. Causal mechanisms identified from the literature and considered most relevant to the case were confirmed in it, using an 'explaining outcomes' process tracing methodology. Perceived severity of the problem, institutional emulation, and institutional entrepreneurship all played an important role in the coalition-building process. The fear of marginalization was identified as a potential causal mechanism that requires further study. The findings here contribute to filling an important gap in the literature related to causal mechanisms for self-organized coalition-building under conflict, and contribute to practice with important considerations when building a coalition for natural resource management and governance.

How Does Socio-institutional Diversity Affect Collaborative Governance of Social-Ecological Systems in Practice?

Social and institutional diversity ("diversity" hereafter) are important dimensions in collaborative environmental governance, but lack empirical assessment. In this paper, we examine three aspects of diversity hypothesized in the literature as being important in collaborative forms of environmental governance-the presence of diverse actors, diverse perspectives, and diverse institutions. The presence of these aspects and formative conjectures were empirically considered using a mixed methods approach in four biosphere reserves in Sweden and Canada. We found that the diversity of actors involved and domains of authority varied among cases, that stakeholder perspectives were highly diverse in all cases, and that institutional variety (in terms of strategies, norms, and rules) was evident in all cases, but differed among them. Empirical support from the cases further affirms that diversity contributes to the ability to engage with a broader set of issues and challenges; diversity contributes to novel approaches to solving problems within the governance group; and diversity contributes to the flexibility of the group involved in governance in terms of addressing challenges. One conjecture, that diversity decreases the efficiency of governance in decision-making and responding to issues, was not supported by the data. However, our analysis indicates that there might be a trade-off between diversity and efficiency. The findings highlight differences in the ways in which diversity is conceptualized in the literature and on the ground, emphasizing the pragmatic advantages of actively seeking diversity in terms of competencies and capacities.

How do environmental governance processes shape evaluation of outcomes by stakeholders? A causal pathways approach.

Multi-stakeholder environmental management and governance processes are essential to realize social and ecological outcomes. Participation, collaboration, and learning are emphasized in these processes; to gain insights into how they influence stakeholders' evaluations of outcomes in relation to management and governance interventions we use a path analysis approach to examine their relationships in individuals in four UNESCO Biosphere Reserves. We confirm a model showing that participation in more activities leads to greater ratings of process, and in turn, better evaluations of outcomes. We show the effects of participation in activities on evaluation of outcomes appear to be driven by learning more than collaboration. Original insights are offered as to how the evaluations of outcomes by stakeholders are shaped by their participation in activities and their experiences in management and governance processes. Understanding stakeholder perceptions about the processes in which they are involved and their evaluation of outcomes is imperative, and influences current and future levels of engagement. As such, the evaluation of outcomes themselves are an important tangible product from initiatives. Our research contributes to a future research agenda aimed at better understanding these pathways and their implications for engagement in stewardship and ultimately social and ecological outcomes, and to developing recommendations for practitioners engaged in environmental management and governance.

Bridging Organizations Drive Effective Governance Outcomes for Conservation of Indonesia's Marine Systems.

This study empirically investigates the influence of bridging organizations on governance outcomes for marine conservation in Indonesia. Conservation challenges require ways of governing that are collaborative and adaptive across boundaries, and where conservation actions are better coordinated, information flows improved, and knowledge better integrated and mobilized. We combine quantitative social network analysis and qualitative data to analyze bridging organizations and their networks, and to understand their contributions and constraints in two case studies in Bali, Indonesia. The analysis shows 1) bridging organizations help to navigate the 'messiness' inherent in conservation settings by compensating for sparse linkages, 2) the particular structure and function of bridging organizations influence governing processes (i.e., collaboration, knowledge sharing) and subsequent conservation outcomes, 3) 'bridging' is accomplished using different strategies and platforms for collaboration and social learning, and 4) bridging organizations enhance flexibility to adjust to changing marine conservation contexts and needs. Understanding the organizations that occupy bridging positions, and how they utilize their positionality in a governance network is emerging as an important determinant of successful conservation outcomes. Our findings contribute to a relatively new body of literature on bridging organizations in marine conservation contexts, and add needed empirical investigation into their value to governance and conservation in Coral Triangle nations and beyond.

Science-policy processes for transboundary water governance.

In this policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective science-policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to science-policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.

Adaptive capacity and community-based natural resource management.

Why do some community-based natural resource management strategies perform better than others? Commons theorists have approached this question by developing institutional design principles to address collective choice situations, while other analysts have critiqued the underlying assumptions of community-based resource management. However, efforts to enhance community-based natural resource management performance also require an analysis of exogenous and endogenous variables that influence how social actors not only act collectively but do so in ways that respond to changing circumstances, foster learning, and build capacity for management adaptation. Drawing on examples from northern Canada and Southeast Asia, this article examines the relationship among adaptive capacity, community-based resource management performance, and the socio-institutional determinants of collective action, such as technical, financial, and legal constraints, and complex issues of politics, scale, knowledge, community and culture. An emphasis on adaptive capacity responds to a conceptual weakness in community-based natural resource management and highlights an emerging research and policy discourse that builds upon static design principles and the contested concepts in current management practice.