Folke et al. (2002) argued that active adaptive management can help resilience-building in social-ecological systems. Active adaptive management, by their definition, considers policy as a set of experiments designed to reveal underlying processes that build or maintain resilience. They pointed out that to achieve active adaptive management the managing institution should be open and flexible governance bodies that can "learn, generate knowledge and cope with change".
In real life scenarios, the problem with active adaptive management is what should the decision makers and stakeholders learn from the experiments and what kind of institution is really "adaptive".
[A new article](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.06.001) appearing in Global Environmental Change is another attempt to tackle these questions. The author argues that often policies are not adaptive in that they are just trying to adjust actions according to the effect, without further questioning the underlying constraints and contexts of the action. To be adaptive and help build resilience, the governing regime should adopt multiple levels of learning, starting from refinement of actions, to questioning the frame of reference and underlying assumptions, to transform the structure of context and established values and norms. If the institution is only limited to the first loop of learning, it may finally encounter some restraints that limit its adaptive capacity. As a result, in the face of larger environmental or socioeconomic changes the institution will fail to maintain the resilience of the complex system.
The author further points out that a government-dominated institution would not be flexible enough to adopt the second- or third-loop learning, which requires the change of the whole actor network, regulations and the structure of the institution. As a complement of the "formal" institution, the "informal" institution featuring stakeholder participation, more flexible regulation, and local knowledge should be introduced. It is noted that such kind of informal institutions often lack a voice or ability to take actions in large-scale projects, thus a hybrid institution combining the executive power of formal institutions and the flexibility of informal institutions is called for.
The trend of more active informal network, or "shadow network", may see the hierarchy in environmental management more diminished. How to guarantee the voice of the informal institutions heard may not be a major problem in industrialised countries, but will be one for minority groups and marginalised communities in developing countries. To establish a context around their point of view will be an interdisciplinary challenge.
Claudia Pahl-Wostl (2009). A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes Global Environmental Change, 19 (3), 354-365
Carl Folke, Steve Carpenter, Thomas Elmqvist, Lance Gunderson, C S Holling, & Brian Walker (2002). Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations Ambio, 31 (5), 437-440
没有评论:
发表评论