The Experts below are selected from a list of 814449 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Carl Folke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Capturing emergent phenomena in Social-Ecological Systems : an analytical framework
Ecology and Society, 2019Co-Authors: Maja Schlüter, Steven J. Lade, L. Jamila Haider, Emilie Lindkvist, Romina Martin, Kirill Orach, Nanda Wijermans, Carl FolkeAbstract:Social-Ecological Systems (SES) are complex adaptive Systems. Social-Ecological system phenomena, such as regime shifts, transformations, or traps, emerge from interactions among and between human ...
-
Social-Ecological Systems Insights for Navigating the Dynamics of the Anthropocene
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 2018Co-Authors: Belinda Reyers, Carl Folke, Reinette Biggs, Michele-lee Moore, Victor GalazAbstract:Social-Ecological Systems (SES) research offers new theory and evidence to transform sustainable development to better contend with the challenges of the Anthropocene. Four insights from contempora ...
-
Advancing sustainability through mainstreaming a social–ecological Systems perspective
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2015Co-Authors: Joern Fischer, Carl Folke, Toby A. Gardner, Elena M. Bennett, Patricia Balvanera, Reinette Biggs, Stephen R. Carpenter, Tim M. Daw, Rosemary Hill, Terry P. HughesAbstract:The concept of social–ecological Systems is useful for understanding the interlinked dynamics of environmental and societal change. The concept has helped facilitate: (1) increased recognition of the dependence of humanity on ecoSystems; (2) improved collaboration across disciplines, and between science and society; (3) increased methodological pluralism leading to improved Systems understanding; and (4) major policy frameworks considering social–ecological interactions. Despite these advances, the potential of a social–ecological Systems perspective to improve sustainability outcomes has not been fully realized. Key priorities are to: (1) better understand and govern social–ecological interactions between regions; (2) pay greater attention to long-term drivers; (3) better understand the interactions among power relations, justice, and ecosystem stewardship; and (4) develop a stronger science–society interface.
-
A theory of transformative agency in linked Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2013Co-Authors: Frances R. Westley, Ola Tjornbo, Beatrice Crona, Per Olsson, Carl Folke, Lisen Schultz, Orjan BodinAbstract:We reviewed the literature on leadership in linked Social-Ecological Systems and combined it with the literature on institutional entrepreneurship in complex adaptive Systems to develop a new theory of transformative agency in linked Social-Ecological Systems. Although there is evidence of the importance of strategic agency in introducing innovation and transforming approaches to management and governance of such Systems, there is no coherent theory to explain the wide diversity of strategies identified. Using Hollings adaptive cycle as a model of phases present in innovation and transformation of resilient Social-Ecological Systems, overlaid by Dorados model of opportunity context (opaque, hazy, transparent) in complex adaptive Systems, we propose a more coherent theory of strategic agency, which links particular strategies, on the part of transformative agents, to phases of system change.
-
Social-Ecological Systems as complex adaptive Systems: modeling and policy implications
Environment and Development Economics, 2012Co-Authors: Simon A. Levin, Carl Folke, Terry P. Hughes, Tasos Xepapadeas, Anne-sophie Crépin, Jon Norberg, Aart De Zeeuw, Kenneth J. Arrow, Scott Barrett, Gretchen C. DailyAbstract:Systems linking people and nature, known as Social-Ecological Systems, are increasingly understood as complex adaptive Systems. Essential features of these complex adaptive Systems – such as nonlinear feedbacks, strategic interactions, individual and spatial heterogeneity, and varying time scales – pose substantial challenges for modeling. However, ignoring these characteristics can distort our picture of how these Systems work, causing policies to be less effective or even counterproductive. In this paper we present recent developments in modeling Social-Ecological Systems, illustrate some of these challenges with examples related to coral reefs and grasslands, and identify the implications for economic and policy analysis.
John M. Anderies - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Refining the Robustness of Social-Ecological Systems Framework for comparative analysis of coastal system adaptation to global change
Regional Environmental Change, 2019Co-Authors: John M. Anderies, Olivier Barreteau, Ute BradyAbstract:There are numerous frameworks for studying the governance of shared resources that have been discussed extensively in the literature. Although these frameworks have been applied to multiple case studies, these applications are often idiosyncratic, subject to the interpretation of the researcher, and raise concerns regarding the operational use of frameworks for case-study comparisons. As a result, insights from these studies have not lived up to the aspirations of the frameworks to generate generalizable knowledge. Here, based on several case studies and our experience using various frameworks for analyzing Social-Ecological Systems, we undertake the task of providing a mechanism to systematically qualify interactions among ecological, social, institutional, and built infrastructure Systems that impact the governance of shared resources. Specifically, we generate a series of archetypal Social-Ecological Systems and extract from them a verb list to represent key interactions in the Robustness of Coupled Infrastructure Systems Framework. We then extend and refine the list based on three case studies of coastal Social-Ecological Systems. We categorize these verbs and use them to demonstrate governance patterns across the case studies. We find that governance entities predominantly seek control over paths of change directed at lower governance levels rather than acting at their own level. Governance entities shed responsibility to lower governance levels without providing necessary resources. Finally, we find high potential for the cancelation of efforts due to lack of coordination among governance entities. The set of system archetypes and associated verb list is a first step in laying the foundation for a general typology of and a standardized protocol for representing the dynamics of CIS.
-
Robustness Trade-offs in Social-Ecological Systems
The International Journal of the Commons, 2007Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, John M. AnderiesAbstract:The governance of common-pool resources can be meaningfully examined from the somewhat broader perspective of the governance of Social-Ecological Systems (SESs). Governance of SESs invariably involves trade-offs; trade-offs between different stakeholder objectives, trade-offs between risk and productivity, and trade-offs between short-term and long-term goals. This is especially true in the case of robustness in Social-Ecological Systems - i.e. the capacity to continue to meet a performance objective in the face of uncertainty and shocks. In this paper we suggest that effective governance under uncertainty must include the ongoing analysis of trade-offs between robustness and performance, and between investments in robustness to different types of perturbations. The nature of such trade-offs will depend on society's perception of risk, the dynamics of the underlying resource, and the governance regime. Specifically, we argue that it is impossible to define robustness in absolute terms. The choice for society is not only whether to invest in becoming robust to a particular disturbance, but rather, what suit of disturbances to address and what set of associated vulnerabilities is it willing to accept as a necessary consequence.
-
toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
-
Toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
-
exploring resilience in social ecological Systems through comparative studies and theory development introduction to the special issue
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Brian Walker, John M. Anderies, Ann P. Kinzig, Paul RyanAbstract:This special issue of Ecology and Society on exploring resilience in Social-Ecological Systems draws together insights from comparisons of 15 case studies conducted during two Resilience Alliance workshops in 2003 and 2004. As such, it represents our current understanding of resilience theory and the issues encountered in our attempts to apply it.
Paul Ryan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
-
Toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
-
exploring resilience in social ecological Systems through comparative studies and theory development introduction to the special issue
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Brian Walker, John M. Anderies, Ann P. Kinzig, Paul RyanAbstract:This special issue of Ecology and Society on exploring resilience in Social-Ecological Systems draws together insights from comparisons of 15 case studies conducted during two Resilience Alliance workshops in 2003 and 2004. As such, it represents our current understanding of resilience theory and the issues encountered in our attempts to apply it.
-
Insight, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: (1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
-
Insight, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Shooting the Rapids: Navigating Transitions to Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems
2006Co-Authors: Per Olsson, Carl Folke, Paul Ryan, Lance Gunderson, S. R. Carpenter, Louis Lebel, C. S. HollingAbstract:The case studies of Kristianstads Vattenrike, Sweden; the Northern Highlands Lake District and the Everglades in the USA; the Mae Nam Ping Basin, Thailand; and the Goulburn-Broken Catchment, Australia, were compared to assess the outcome of different actions for transforming Social-Ecological Systems (SESs). The transformations consisted of two phases, a preparation phase and a transition phase, linked by a window of opportunity. Key leaders and shadow networks can prepare a system for change by exploring alternative system configurations and developing strategies for choosing from among possible futures. Key leaders can recognize and use or create windows of opportunity and navigate transitions toward adaptive governance. Leadership functions include the ability to span scales of governance, orchestrate networks, integrate and communicate understanding, and reconcile different problem domains. Successful transformations rely on epistemic and shadow networks to provide novel ideas and ways of governing SESs. We conclude by listing some rules of thumb" that can help build leadership and networks for successful transformations toward adaptive governance of Social-Ecological Systems.
Marco A. Janssen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Experimental platforms for behavioral experiments on Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2014Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Allen Lee, Timothy M. WaringAbstract:Recently, there has been an increased interest in using behavioral experiments to study hypotheses on the governance of Social-Ecological Systems. A diversity of software tools are used to implement such experiments. We evaluated various publicly available platforms that could be used in research and education on the governance of Social-Ecological Systems. The aims of the various platforms are distinct, and this is noticeable in the differences in their user-friendliness and their adaptability to novel research questions. The more easily accessible platforms are useful for prototyping experiments and for educational purposes to illustrate theoretical concepts. To advance novel research aims, more elaborate programming experience is required to either implement an experiment from scratch or adjust existing experimental software. There is no ideal platform best suited for all possible use cases, but we have provided a menu of options and their associated trade-offs.
-
Robustness Trade-offs in Social-Ecological Systems
The International Journal of the Commons, 2007Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, John M. AnderiesAbstract:The governance of common-pool resources can be meaningfully examined from the somewhat broader perspective of the governance of Social-Ecological Systems (SESs). Governance of SESs invariably involves trade-offs; trade-offs between different stakeholder objectives, trade-offs between risk and productivity, and trade-offs between short-term and long-term goals. This is especially true in the case of robustness in Social-Ecological Systems - i.e. the capacity to continue to meet a performance objective in the face of uncertainty and shocks. In this paper we suggest that effective governance under uncertainty must include the ongoing analysis of trade-offs between robustness and performance, and between investments in robustness to different types of perturbations. The nature of such trade-offs will depend on society's perception of risk, the dynamics of the underlying resource, and the governance regime. Specifically, we argue that it is impossible to define robustness in absolute terms. The choice for society is not only whether to invest in becoming robust to a particular disturbance, but rather, what suit of disturbances to address and what set of associated vulnerabilities is it willing to accept as a necessary consequence.
-
Historical institutional analysis of Social-Ecological Systems
Journal of Institutional Economics, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. JanssenAbstract:Institutions, the rules that govern interactions between people, evolve over time. This special issue presents a number of detailed case studies of human–environment interactions during a significant historical period. With Social-Ecological Systems we mean a set of people, their natural and human-made resources, and the relationships among them (Anderies et al., 2004, Janssen et al., 2005).
-
GOVERNING Social-Ecological Systems
Handbook of Computational Economics, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Elinor OstromAbstract:Social-Ecological Systems are complex adaptive Systems where social and biophysical agents are interacting at multiple temporal and spatial scales. The main challenge for the study of governance of Social-Ecological Systems is improving our understanding of the conditions under which cooperative solutions are sustained, how social actors can make robust decisions in the face of uncertainty and how the topology of interactions between social and biophysical actors affect governance. We review the contributions of agent-based modeling to these challenges for theoretical studies, studies which combines models with laboratory experiments and applications of practical case studies.Empirical studies from laboratory experiments and field work have challenged the predictions of the conventional model of the selfish rational agent for common pool resources and public-good games. Agent-based models have been used to test alternative models of decision-making which are more in line with the empirical record. Those models include bounded rationality, other regarding preferences and heterogeneity among the attributes of agents. Uncertainty and incomplete knowledge are directly related to the study of governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Agent-based models have been developed to explore the consequences of incomplete knowledge and to identify adaptive responses that limited the undesirable consequences of uncertainties. Finally, the studies on the topology of agent interactions mainly focus on land use change, in which models of decision-making are combined with geographical information Systems.Conventional approaches in environmental economics do not explicitly include non-convex dynamics of ecoSystems, non-random interactions of agents, incomplete understanding, and empirically based models of behavior in collective action. Although agent-based modeling for Social-Ecological Systems is in its infancy, it addresses the above features explicitly and is therefore potentially useful to address the current challenges in the study of governance of Social-Ecological Systems.
-
toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
Orjan Bodin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The social structural foundations of adaptation and transformation in Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2017Co-Authors: Michele L. Barnes, Orjan Bodin, Steven M. Alexander, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Angela M. Guerrero, Garry RobinsAbstract:Social networks are frequently cited as vital for facilitating successful adaptation and transformation in linked Social-Ecological Systems to overcome pressing resource management challenges. Yet confusion remains over the precise nature of adaptation vs. transformation and the specific social network structures that facilitate these processes. Here, we adopt a network perspective to theorize a continuum of structural capacities in Social-Ecological Systems that set the stage for effective adaptation and transformation. We begin by drawing on the resilience literature and the multilayered action situation to link processes of change in Social-Ecological Systems to decision making across multiple layers of rules underpinning societal organization. We then present a framework that hypothesizes seven specific Social-Ecological network configurations that lay the structural foundation necessary for facilitating adaptation and transformation, given the type and magnitude of human action required. A key contribution of the framework is explicit consideration of how social networks relate to ecological structures and the particular environmental problem at hand. Of the seven configurations identified, three are linked to capacities conducive to adaptation and three to transformation, and one is hypothesized to be important for facilitating both processes. We discuss how our theoretical framework can be applied in practice by highlighting existing empirical examples from related environmental governance contexts. Further extension of our hypotheses, particularly as more data become available, can ultimately help guide the design of institutional arrangements to be more effective at dealing with change.
-
Theorizing the Social Structural Foundations of Adaptation and Transformation in Social-Ecological Systems
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017Co-Authors: Michele L. Barnes, Orjan Bodin, Steven M. Alexander, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Angela M. Guerrero, Garry RobinsAbstract:Social networks are frequently cited as vital for facilitating successful adaptation and transformation in linked Social-Ecological Systems to overcome pressing resource management challenges. Yet confusion remains over the precise nature of adaptation versus transformation, and the specific social network structures that facilitate these processes. Here we adopt a network perspective to theorize a continuum of structural capacities in Social-Ecological Systems that set the stage for effective adaptation and transformation. We begin by drawing on the resilience literature and the multilayered action situation to link processes of change in Social-Ecological Systems to decision making across multiple layers of rules underpinning societal organization. We then present a framework that hypotheses seven specific Social-Ecological network configurations that lay the structural foundation necessary for facilitating adaptation and transformation, given the type and magnitude of human action required. A key contribution of the framework is explicit consideration of how social networks relate to ecological structures and the particular environmental problem at hand. Of the seven configurations identified, three are linked to capacities conducive for adaptation and three to transformation, while one is hypothesized to be important for facilitating both processes. We discuss how our theoretical framework can be applied in practice by highlighting existing empirical examples from related environmental governance contexts. Further extension of our hypotheses, particularly as more data become available, can ultimately help guide the design of institutional arrangements more effective at dealing with change.
-
A theory of transformative agency in linked Social-Ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2013Co-Authors: Frances R. Westley, Ola Tjornbo, Beatrice Crona, Per Olsson, Carl Folke, Lisen Schultz, Orjan BodinAbstract:We reviewed the literature on leadership in linked Social-Ecological Systems and combined it with the literature on institutional entrepreneurship in complex adaptive Systems to develop a new theory of transformative agency in linked Social-Ecological Systems. Although there is evidence of the importance of strategic agency in introducing innovation and transforming approaches to management and governance of such Systems, there is no coherent theory to explain the wide diversity of strategies identified. Using Hollings adaptive cycle as a model of phases present in innovation and transformation of resilient Social-Ecological Systems, overlaid by Dorados model of opportunity context (opaque, hazy, transparent) in complex adaptive Systems, we propose a more coherent theory of strategic agency, which links particular strategies, on the part of transformative agents, to phases of system change.
-
Building Transformative Capacity for Ecosystem Stewardship in Social–Ecological Systems
Springer Series on Environmental Management, 2010Co-Authors: Per Olsson, Orjan Bodin, Carl FolkeAbstract:We use a “resilience lens” to identify gaps in the understanding of capacity to transform Social-Ecological Systems’ (SES) trajectories toward ecosystem stewardship and highlight some challenges that need to be addressed. We draw on the organizational evolution literature in combination with the latest insights on SES transformations to give a more detailed understanding of what constitute transformative capacity. Two case studies illustrate the possibilities and challenges. SES transformations require knowledge and skills that can link ecosystem and social system dynamics, and develop strategies to overcome barriers and enable institutional changes that foster transformations. We identify some criteria that seem important for developing a framework for analyzing transformations and assessing transformative capacity in Social-Ecological Systems. These criteria include experimentation and innovation, agency and social networks, opportunity context, diversity, boundaries, and collaboration.
-
toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social ecological Systems
Ecology and Society, 2006Co-Authors: Marco A. Janssen, Orjan Bodin, Per Olsson, John M. Anderies, Thomas Elmqvist, Henrik Ernstson, Ryan R. J. Mcallister, Paul RyanAbstract:Formal models used to study the resilience of Social-Ecological Systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for Social-Ecological Systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of Social-Ecological Systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of Social-Ecological networks: ( 1) ecoSystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, ( 2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and ( 3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation Systems. Each of these three archytypal Social-Ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease.
