HESS Opinions: A conceptual framework for assessing socio-hydrological resilience under change
HESS Opinions: A conceptual framework for assessing socio-hydrological resilience under change
复制标题
DOI：
10.5194/hess-21-3655-2017
复制
发表时间：
2017-07
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Feng Mao;Julian Clark;T. Karpouzoglou;A. Dewulf;W. Buytaert;D. Hannah
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Feng Mao;Julian Clark;T. Karpouzoglou;A. Dewulf;W. Buytaert;D. Hannah
抽象的。尽管人们对复原力的兴趣日益增加，但在社会水文背景下，仍有很大的空间来提高其概念的清晰度和实际相关性：具体而言，社会水文系统如何应对和科普扰动以及这些扰动如何与复原力联系起来的问题仍然没有答案。在这份意见书中，我们提出了一个新的概念框架，用于理解和评估耦合社会水文背景下的恢复力，并鼓励社会水文和恢复力之间的相互联系的辩论。从系统的角度来看，我们认为，弹性是一组系统的属性与三个方面：吸收，适应性和变革，并认为社会水文系统可以被视为各种形式的人水耦合，反映这些相互作用的不同方面。我们提出了一个由两部分组成的框架。第一部分讨论社会水文复原力的特性，回答诸如什么与什么的关系等问题。我们确定了不同类型的人水系统和子系统的三种现有弹性框架，这些框架已用于不同领域：（1）水子系统，强调对人为灾害的水文弹性;（2）人类子系统，突出对人为灾害的社会弹性;（3）耦合的人水系统，表现出社会水文弹性。我们认为，这三种系统类型和约束力提供了新的见解，澄清和评估不同的水管理挑战。前两种类型涉及水文和社会状态，而第三种类型强调受内部或外部干扰的复杂系统中人与水成分之间的反馈和相互作用。在第二部分中，我们专注于弹性管理和发展的概念的弹性画布，一种新的启发式设备，以确定可能的途径，并促进定制的战略，以提高社会水文环境中的弹性设计。弹性画布是通过将吸收能力和适应能力作为两个轴来构建的。在由此产生的二维空间的四个角落是四个象限，我们将其概念化为代表弹性，脆弱，敏感和抵抗系统状态。为了解决预计的变化引起的不确定性，我们建议现在的努力重点是将社会水文系统从抵抗状态转变为复原状态。总之，本文提出的新框架澄清了社会水文弹性中固有的模糊性，并为进一步的理论和实践发展提供了可行的基础。
Abstract. Despite growing interest in resilience, there is still significant scope for increasing its conceptual clarity and practical relevance in socio-hydrological contexts: specifically, questions of how socio-hydrological systems respond to and cope with perturbations and how these connect to resilience remain unanswered. In this opinion paper, we propose a novel conceptual framework for understanding and assessing resilience in coupled socio-hydrological contexts, and encourage debate on the inter-connections between socio-hydrology and resilience. Taking a systems perspective, we argue that resilience is a set of systematic properties with three dimensions: absorptive, adaptive, and transformative, and contend that socio-hydrological systems can be viewed as various forms of human–water couplings, reflecting different aspects of these interactions. We propose a framework consisting of two parts. The first part addresses the identity of socio-hydrological resilience, answering questions such as resilience of what in relation to what . We identify three existing framings of resilience for different types of human–water systems and subsystems, which have been used in different fields: (1) the water subsystem, highlighting hydrological resilience to anthropogenic hazards; (2) the human subsystem, foregrounding social resilience to hydrological hazards; and (3) the coupled human–water system, exhibiting socio-hydrological resilience. We argue that these three system types and resiliences afford new insights into the clarification and evaluation of different water management challenges. The first two types address hydrological and social states, while the third type emphasises the feedbacks and interactions between human and water components within complex systems subject to internal or external disturbances. In the second part, we focus on resilience management and develop the notion of the resilience canvas , a novel heuristic device to identify possible pathways and to facilitate the design of bespoke strategies for enhancing resilience in the socio-hydrological context. The resilience canvas is constructed by combining absorptive and adaptive capacities as two axes. At the corners of the resulting two-dimensional space are four quadrants which we conceptualise as representing resilient, vulnerable, susceptible, and resistant system states. To address projected change-induced uncertainties, we recommend that efforts now be focused on shifting socio-hydrological systems from resistant towards resilient status. In sum, the novel framework proposed here clarifies the ambiguity inherent in socio-hydrological resilience, and provides a viable basis for further theoretical and practical development.