HSD: Collaborative Research: Social Complexity and the Management of the Commons

合作建议爱荷华州大学SES-0624141保罗·罗宾斯亚利桑那州大学SES-0624292大卫·麦金尼斯蒙大拿州州立大学比林斯SES-0624066凯瑟琳·克林·爱荷华州立大学这项研究将研究基于地点的决策导致通常持有的生态系统服务管理发生变化的机制。“公地”的广义定义是指在景观尺度上生产的、价值超出个人土地空间界限的服务。2003年，《科学》杂志出版了一期特刊，专门介绍1968年加雷特·哈丁的一篇发人深省的文章《公地的悲剧》。贡献作者的结论是，社会可以，而且经常这样做，通过社会和制度组织避免哈丁关于资源过度开采的最可怕的预测。人类将妥协、合作和和解制度化，以产生理想和可持续的结果，并将渔业、灌溉和空气污染等问题的管理越来越多地理解为服从集体行动。当社区对环境有共同的目标和观点时，最容易达成妥协、合作和和解。随着新的利益攸关方对传统上由完全不同的社区和选民管理的资源提出要求，流动性和富裕程度的提高导致了一个对生态系统服务的文化和经济需求(例如，食物、清洁水、野生动物、娱乐机会和风景)处于深刻转变状态的时代。根本的问题不是人类能否将解决当地和全球公有资源问题的方法制度化，而是什么推动了公有资源的价值、使用和管理方式的变化，以及这些变化对一个地区的社会、经济和生物物理特征产生了什么影响。这项研究将考虑推动这些决策过程的内生和外生变化因素(例如，社会人口、经济、气候)，从而更好地理解不同和政治分裂的社会经济选民如何决定新的权力配置和制定新的共同财产管理机构。人们最感兴趣的是人类通过联盟和建立共识来组织起来的过程，以增加他们的政治权力，并扩大他们在资源分配决策中的发言权。通过调查和访谈，这项研究解决了以下基本问题：1)社会和经济群体对通过景观管理产生的经济和非经济服务的评价方式的差异；2)影响这些价值观的内生和外生变化因素；3)个人、联盟和公共决策者之间的权力关系。将根据调查和访谈产生的数据开发统计模型和基于代理人的模型，以评估将人民的意愿转化为改变土地利用做法的效果，从而评估生态系统服务的生产(即生产反映需求的程度)的效果。关于基于地点的决策和生态系统服务生产之间的关系的四个工作假说(最优、滞后、间歇性和突发性)将被探索。大黄石生态系统(GYE)提供了对公共泳池生态系统服务的调查背景，但其结果将适用于其他基于群体的决策，在这些决策中，个人试图通过合作和妥协最大化自己的利益。广泛影响本研究试图了解不同的和政治上分裂的社会经济选民如何确定新的权力配置，并制定新的共同财产管理机构。这样的理解将为整个美国西部和其他地方正在发生的重要转型过程提供宝贵的洞察，这些地方正在从传统农业用途中涌现出高价值的宜人环境。更实际的是，这项研究产生的数据和模型可以用来评估当前自然资源管理做法的可持续性和有效性，并确定妥协和建立共识的机会。最后，这项研究提供了一个极好的机会来教育新一代科学家关于挑战和可观的回报

Collaborative ProposalsSES-0624297David BennettUniversity of IowaSES-0624141Paul RobbinsUniversity of ArizonaSES-0624292David McGinnisMontana State University-BillingsSES-0624066Catherine KlingIowa State UniversityThis research will study the mechanisms by which place-based decision-making leads to changes in the management of commonly held ecosystem services. The "commons" is broadly defined to mean services produced at landscape-scales and valued beyond the spatial bounds of an individual's parcel of land. In 2003 a special issue of Science was published devoted to Garret Hardin's thought provoking 1968 article "The Tragedy of the Commons." The contributing authors concluded that society can, and often does, avoid Hardin's most dire predictions of resource overexploitation through social and institutional organization. Humans institutionalize compromise, cooperation, and accommodation to produce desirable and sustainable outcomes and the management of problems as far ranging as fisheries, irrigation, and air pollution are increasingly understood as amenable to collective action. Compromise, cooperation, and accommodation are most easily produced when communities share common objectives and views about the environment. Increased mobility and affluence has led to an era when cultural and economic demands for ecosystem services (e.g., food, clean water, wildlife, recreational opportunities and scenic beauty) are in a state of profound transition as new stakeholders make claims on resources traditionally managed by totally differing communities and constituencies. The fundamental question becomes not whether humans can institutionalize solutions to problems in their local and global commons, but what drives changes in the way common pool resources are valued, used and managed and what impact these changes have on the social, economic, and biophysical character of a region. This research will consider endogenous and exogenous agents of change (e.g., socio-demographic, economic, climatic) that drive these decision-making processes and, thus, develop a better understanding of the ways diverse and politically divided socio-economic constituencies come to settle on new power configurations and craft new common property management institutions. Of central interest are the processes by which humans organize through coalition and consensus building to increase their political power and amplify their own voice in resource allocation decisions. Through surveys and interviews this study addresses fundamental questions about: 1) Differences in the way social and economic groups value economic and non-economic services produced through the management of landscapes; 2) Endogenous and exogenous agents of change that affect these values; and 3) Power relationships among, individuals, coalitions, and public decision-makers. Statistical and agent-based models based on the data produced through surveys and interview, will be developed to evaluate the efficacy with which the will of the people is transformed into changing land use practices and, thus, the production of ecosystem services (i.e., how well production reflects demand). Four working hypotheses about the relation between place-based decision making and the production of ecosystem services will be explored (optimal, lagged, episodic, and emergent). The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) provides the setting for this investigation into common pool ecosystem services but the results of will be generalizable to other group-based decision-making where individuals attempt to maximize their own benefit through collaboration and compromise.Broader ImpactsThis study seeks to understand the way diverse and politically divided socio-economic constituencies settle on new configurations of power and craft new common property management institutions. Such an understanding will provide valuable insight into important transformational processes that are occurring throughout the U.S. West and other places where high-value amenity-based environments are emerging from traditional agricultural uses. More practically, the data and models produced by this research can be used to evaluate the sustainability and efficacy of current natural resources management practices and identify opportunities for compromise and consensus building. Finally, this research provides an excellent opportunity to educate a new generation of scientists on the challenges and considerable rewards