Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience
Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience
复制标题
DOI：
10.1029/2018ef000926
复制
发表时间：
2018-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
8.2
通讯作者：
Chang, Heejun
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Markolf, Samuel A.;Chester, Mikhail, V;Chang, Heejun
传统基础设施对极端天气事件（以及现在的气候变化）的适应通常以技术为中心，并高度基于稳健性——即通过一种强调控制、加固和强化（例如，提高堤坝高度）的基于风险的方法来预防或尽量减少干扰的能力。然而，基础设施面临的气候和非气候挑战并非纯粹是技术性的。生态和社会系统也值得考虑，以处理过度自信、缺乏灵活性、相互依存和资源利用等问题。因此，以技术为中心的适应策略可能会导致不必要的权衡、意想不到的后果以及未得到充分解决的脆弱性。将当今的基础设施系统锁定在未来易受影响的设计、管理和监管实践中的以技术为中心的策略可能尤其成问题，因为它会加剧而不是缓解这些生态和社会问题。鉴于这些挑战，我们开发了一个概念模型和基础设施适应案例研究，以论证以下几点：（1）基础设施系统不仅仅是技术性的，而应被理解为复杂且相互关联的社会、生态和技术系统（SETS）；（2）像锁定这样的基础设施挑战源于SETS相互作用，而这些相互作用往往被忽视且未得到充分重视；（3）从SETS视角构建基础设施有助于识别和预防像锁定这样的适应不良问题；（4）SETS视角还可以凸显传统上可能未被考虑的有效基础设施适应策略。最终，我们发现将基础设施视为SETS通过强调锁定和脆弱性如何演变以及如何通过拓宽适应选项来部署多学科策略以应对这些挑战，为提高基础设施系统的适应能力带来了希望。
Traditional infrastructure adaptation to extreme weather events (and now climate change) has typically been techno-centric and heavily grounded in robustness-the capacity to prevent or minimize disruptions via a risk-based approach that emphasizes control, armoring, and strengthening (e.g., raising the height of levees). However, climate and nonclimate challenges facing infrastructure are not purely technological. Ecological and social systems also warrant consideration to manage issues of overconfidence, inflexibility, interdependence, and resource utilization-among others. As a result, techno-centric adaptation strategies can result in unwanted tradeoffs, unintended consequences, and underaddressed vulnerabilities. Techno-centric strategies that lock-in today's infrastructure systems to vulnerable future design, management, and regulatory practices may be particularly problematic by exacerbating these ecological and social issues rather than ameliorating them. Given these challenges, we develop a conceptual model and infrastructure adaptation case studies to argue the following: (1) infrastructure systems are not simply technological and should be understood as complex and interconnected social, ecological, and technological systems (SETSs); (2) infrastructure challenges, like lock-in, stem from SETS interactions that are often overlooked and underappreciated; (3) framing infrastructure with a SETS lens can help identify and prevent maladaptive issues like lock-in; and (4) a SETS lens can also highlight effective infrastructure adaptation strategies that may not traditionally be considered. Ultimately, we find that treating infrastructure as SETS shows promise for increasing the adaptive capacity of infrastructure systems by highlighting how lock-in and vulnerabilities evolve and how multidisciplinary strategies can be deployed to address these challenges by broadening the options for adaptation.