Politics and the resilience of ecosystem services
Politics and the resilience of ecosystem services
复制标题
政治与生态系统服务的复原力
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Biggs
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Michael L. Schoon;Martin D. Robards;K. Brown;N. Engle;C. Meek;R. Biggs
社会不同部门通常重视、需要和要求不同的生态系统服务组合。与此同时，不同服务的生产之间存在着重要的权衡，不可能同时提高所有生态系统服务的复原力。因此，关于在特定社会生态系统中维持哪些服务的决定需要进行内在政治性的权衡。政治可以被描述为“对社会价值的权威性分配”（伊斯顿，1965）。使问题进一步复杂化的是，所期望的服务组合将随着社会价值观和偏好的变化而变化，而生态系统服务的复原力只是社会生态系统的许多期望成果（例如平等、人权、民主）之一。解决这些权衡需要解决集体行动困境和群体间冲突，这一过程充满了权力不平等、资源基础不对称和结果不平等。本章讨论了决定哪些生态系统服务应成为建立生态系统倡议的重点的一些不对称性和权力动态;本书的其余部分假设已经做出了这些选择，并重点讨论了如何增强某些商定的生态系统服务组合的弹性。在这里，我们特别关注生态系统服务之间的权衡的社会后果;生态系统服务的分布不对称;我们简要讨论了如何通过更广泛的审议过程来解决这些问题的广泛文献。我们发现，与生态系统服务的分配相关的问题是很好地融入到弹性文献，并建议，更好地了解分配权衡可能会导致更多的应用研究，利用生态系统服务，整合社会科学的观点，人们如何以及为什么作出决定，生态系统服务。引言随着环境变化率的不断上升，复原力思维是一个新兴的应用领域，它明确地试图为管理者和政策制定者提供社会生态系统（SES）及其产生的生态系统服务的治理方面的信息（Berkes et al . 2000;步行者和Salt 2006）。
SUMMARY Different sectors of society typically value, need and demand different bundles of ecosystem services. At the same time, important trade-offs exist between the production of different services, and it is not possible to increase the resilience of all ecosystem services simultaneously. Decisions about which services to sustain in a particular social–ecological system therefore require trade-offs that are inherently political. Politics can be described as ‘the authoritative allocation of values for a society’ (Easton 1965). To further complicate matters, the desired mix of services will evolve with changing societal values and preferences, and the resilience of ecosystem services is only one among many desired outcomes (e.g. equality, human rights, democracy) of social–ecological systems. Resolving these trade-offs requires resolution of collective-action dilemmas and intergroup conflicts, a process that comes replete with power inequalities, asymmetric resource bases and unequal outcomes. This chapter discusses some of the asymmetries and power dynamics that underlie decisions of which ecosystem services should form the focus for resilience-building initiatives; the remainder of the book assumes these choices have been made and focuses on how the resilience of some agreed-on mix of ecosystem services may be enhanced. Here, we focus specifically on the social consequences of trade-offs between ecosystem services; asymmetries in the distribution of ecosystem services; and we briefly discuss the broad literature of how these may be addressed through wider deliberative processes. We find that issues associated with the allocation of ecosystem services are poorly integrated into the resilience literature, and suggest that an improved understanding of allocation trade-offs could result from more applied research on use of ecosystem services that integrates perspectives from the social sciences about how and why people make and respond to decisions concerning ecosystem services. INTRODUCTION Prompted by escalating rates of environmental change, resilience thinking is one emerging applied field that explicitly seeks to inform managers and policy-makers in the governance of social–ecological systems (SES) and the ecosystem services they produce (Berkes et al . 2000; Walker and Salt 2006).