12b

Understanding Robustness of Socio-Ecological Systems from an Institutional Perspective

In this post we focus our attention on the interrelationship between SES robustness and governance.

Robustness

In our previous post we left off discussing the shortfalls of resilience in its application to socio-ecological systems. In essence, resilience focuses on the concept of adaptive capacity which is measured by the ability of ecosystems to adapt to changes, both gradual and sudden without having a drastic change in its processes and structures. It doesn’t really fit in well for socio-ecological systems because of how some elements in the system maybe consciously designed. Thus researchers have developed robustness instead to better fit into socio-ecological systems.

Robustness stems from engineering and refers to the “maintenance of systems performance when subjected to external unpredictable pertubations, or when there is uncertainty about the values of internal design parameters.” (Carlson & Doyle, 2002) Robustness is also traded off against performance. Systems which maximise performance are likely to be less robust than its more “robust” counterpart. However, robust systems do overtake their less-robust counterparts when the counterpart is subject to internal & external stressors.

In this, robustness provides a more cost and benefit perspective to socio-ecological systems as we can compare the cost of having more adaptive capacity (resilience) against making the system run more efficiently (eg: drawing more resources out of the system). (Anderies, Janssen, & Ostrom, 2004)

Framework

In Anderies et al (2004) framework, they hope to address three main issues of socio-ecological systems; that is the resource, its governance system and the infrastructure supporting the system as one coupled system. Also present in the framework are the resource users that ultimately influence all three elements.

Figure 1: Source: A Framework to Analyse the Robustness of Social-Ecological Systems

The framework focuses on the linkages between the 4 objects in the framework and how they could potentially create problems.

Figure 2:Source: A Framework to Analyse the Robustness of Social Ecological Systems

Now that we have the linkages and entities involved in the ecosystem, we can start to analyse how robust the ecosystem is. First, we must identify what the relevant system we are worried about is. For example, we could choose to focus on the water provisioning services that some place like Bedok Reservoir Park provides. Second, we must identify the desired characteristics of the system. In the case of Bedok Reservoir, one characteristic we would want is for there to be a reservoir of water that does not diminish under normal use. Third, we must identify the anchoring points of the ecosystem that if were to collapse would reduce the robustness of the entire ecosystem. For Bedok Reservoir it would be the source of water; that of the grey water collection capability of the surrounding area. If the surrounding area were to lose this collection capacity, then the reservoir of water is bound to run dry.

The difficulty lies in the scale of analysis of socio-ecological systems. For example, a small scale resource might collapse in order to maintain desired functions at a larger scale. Bedok Reservoir park may have to trade its aquatic biodiversity for water provisioning in times of water shortages. The reservoir may have to be drained to supply water for human needs thus leaving the aquatic life without a habitat.

Bibliography

Anderies, J. M., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2004). A Framework to Analyze the Robustness of Social-ecological Systems from an Institutional Perspective. Ecology and Society.

Carlson, J. M., & Doyle, J. (2002). Complexity and Robustness. Proceeedings of the National Academy of Science, 2538-2545.