You are here:
Barriers and Bridges to the Integration of Social-ecological Resilience and Law
Citation:
Green, O., A. Garmestani, C. Allen, L. Gunderson, J. Ruhl, C. Arnold, N. Graham, B. Cosens, D. Angeler, B. Chaffin, AND C. Holling. Barriers and Bridges to the Integration of Social-ecological Resilience and Law. FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. Ecological Society of America, Ithaca, NY, 13(6):332-337, (2015).
Impact/Purpose:
Resilience theory emerged in response to growing knowledge about surprising, abrupt change in social-ecological systems. Resilience defines a system’s capacity to remain within a regime while experiencing internal or external disturbance. When the capacity of a system to absorb change is exceeded, it may cross a threshold and self-organize into a regime characterized by a different set of processes and structures. Many ecosystems exhibit multiple regimes and non-linear dynamics. Resilience researchers have advocated for policy that encourages the ability to deal with surprise and reduce uncertainty by learning more about a system rather than engineering away uncertainty (i.e., controlling nature).
Description:
There is a fundamental rift between how ecologists and lawyers view uncertainty. In the study of ecology, uncertainty is a catalyst for exploration. However, uncertainty is antithetical to the rule of law. This issue is particularly troubling in environmental management, where the tension between law and ecology becomes apparent. Rather than acknowledge uncertainties in management actions, legal frameworks often force a spurious certitude in linking cause and effect. While adaptive management has been developed to confront scientific uncertainty, laws and legal wrangling can be obstacles to implementation. In this article, we recommend resilience-based ecosystem governance—adaptive governance—as a means to begin bridging the rift between law and ecology.
