The Socio-ecological Fit of Human Responses to Environmental Degradation: An Integrated Assessment Methodology

Abstract

The scientific and policy interest in the human responses to environmental degradation usually focuses on responses sensu stricto and ‘best practices’ that potentially abate degradation in affected areas. The transfer of individual, discrete instruments and ‘best practices’ to different contexts is challenging, however, because socio-ecological systems are complex and environmental degradation is contextual and contingent. To sensibly assess the effectiveness of formal and informal interventions to combat environmental degradation, the paper proposes an integrative, non-reductionist analytic, the ‘response assemblage’, for the study of ‘responses-in-context,’ i.e., products of human decisions to utilize environmental resources to satisfy human needs in socio-ecological systems. Response assemblages are defined as geographically and historically unique, provisional, open, territorial wholes, complex compositions emerging from processes of assembling biophysical and human components, including responses sensu stricto, from affected focal and other socio-ecological systems, to serve human goals, one of which may be combatting environmental degradation. The degree of match among the components, called the socio-ecological fit of the response assemblage, indicates how effectively their contextual and contingent interactions maintain the socio-ecological resilience, promote sustainable development, and secure the continuous provision of ecosystem services in a focal socio-ecological system. The paper presents a conceptual approach to the analysis of the socio-ecological fit of response assemblages and details an integrated assessment methodology synthesizing the resilience, assemblage, and ‘problem of fit’ literature. Lastly, it summarizes the novelty, value, and policy relevance of conceptualizing human responses as response assemblages and of the integrated assessment methodology, reconsiders ‘best practices’ and suggests selected future research directions.

Appendix: Illustrative Case Study

Response Assemblages in a Mountainous, Pastoral Socio-ecological System

Stage 1 General Description

The SES, located in a dry-sub-humid, mountainous region in southern Crete, Greece, 50–90 km away from a main urban center, was studied over the 1950–2010 period. Soil and water resources are limited. Animal husbandry (sheep and goats) is the main economic activity together with subsistence agriculture. Pastures form the dominant land use. Population decline, relatively low education, strong socio-cultural capital (closed, informal family/kin networks), state-centered governance, post-1980 EU agricultural subsidies and international immigration mark the period. Soil erosion and land degradation/desertification, the principal environmental problems, owe to adverse climatic conditions and gradual intensification of grazing, since the 1970s.

The 1950–2010 basin of attraction of the SES was generally narrow (L) due to limiting natural conditions and low economic production and deep (R) due to strong socio-cultural capital while wise resource management kept the SES away from critical thresholds (P) (soil, water, financial resources). Post-mid-1970s externally induced changes (subsidies, roads, tourism, trade) (Pa) and grazing intensification broadened and flattened the basin bringing the SES closer to thresholds (soil, water, population). Two state periods, separated by a brief transition period, are distinguished: the Mediterranean semi-arid husbandry state (1950-mid-1980s) and the post-mid-1980s subsidized husbandry state.

Stage 2 Evolution of the SES; Detailed Description of Phases

The typical RA of the first period (1950-mid-1980s) is briefly analyzed below.

Main RA components and their ranges: rugged relief, shallow soils, limited water resources, high evapotranspiration, sclerophyllous vegetation, animals, villagers, local environmental knowledge (LEK), traditional technology, (low/no) cash, strong culture, poor road infrastructure, transhumance places, and external actors.

Main response to land degradation/desertification: traditional (sustainable) grazing. In late 1960s, low productivity cereal fields were converted to forage cultivation to increase animal numbers.

Processes of assembly (a) territorialization: traditional animal husbandry (transhumance) and production practices linking the SES to the neighboring plain and other SESs, household pluri-activity, socio-cultural practices, local and regional trade; (b) deterritorialization: technology change, road improvements, urbanization and tourism development in the broader region, outmigration, towards the end of the period.

Characteristic relationships among components: low production adapted to available, limited natural, financial and human resources (except surplus labor); vegetation well adapted to environmental conditions and suitable/sufficient for grazing limited numbers of animals; impacts of grazing on local resources became important late in the period when flock sizes increased (feed imports ensued favored by infrastructure improvement); flock size and social status strongly linked.

The agency and strong identity of the emergent RA, manifested in husbandry and related routine practices, values, social practices, etc. which all inhabitants observed and reproduced, kept it relatively stable for most of the period, inside the narrow and deep basin of attraction, securing its self-sufficiency and integral critical functions. Hence, Resilience was moderate to high; no shocks occurred. Towards the end of the period, several components changed (population aging, land conversion), new were added (technology, state interventions), and the links among them slowly changed under external and internal pressures leading to a different RA that emerged later in the phase (1970-mid-1980s).

Stage 3 Analysis of SER and SEFRA

• Step 1: The assessment of the LLPs is shown in Tables 4 and 5.

• Step 2: Assessment of system-level properties—Resilience, Adaptability, Transformability.

Resilience

• (a) Independent assessment: moderate to high (see Stage 2).

• (b) RAM set up (Table 4).

• (c) The high to moderate Resilience of the RA is associated with a generally limited potential available for change of all components which are, however, robust: ecologically because the dominant vegetation is well adapted to grazing and drought, economically because the SES is largely closed and self-sufficient and socio-culturally because deeply embedded values related to pastoral livelihoods and availability of LEK ensure the longevity of the production system. Redundancy is limited to demographic capital and LEK. As the area gradually opens to external influences, Resilience is eroded.

Adaptability

• (a) Independent assessment: low adaptability because of limited population, human and economic resources, strong social values and weak external influences (L, R, P and Pa).

• (b) AAM set up (Table 5).

• (c) The low Adaptability of the RA is associated with the low diversity of the socio-economic system, already limited by natural constraints, and the low (external) connectedness and openness of the RA; sheep and goat husbandry could not be challenged or substituted by any other economic activity during this period. The weakly modular social organization (closed and rival networks following identical practices) could not provide for renewal or insurance against perturbations.

Transformability: not assessed; no transformation occurred in the study period.

Step 3: Assessment of socio-ecological resilience (SER) of the SES/RA

• (a) Independent assessment of SER: moderate to high based on the narrow (L) but deep (R) basin due to limited resources and strong social capital and LEK that made change to another RA difficult. Precariousness (P) did not become critical because economic activity was carefully adapted to available resources. External changes (Pa) were smooth and reached the area belatedly producing gradual changes in the RA (intensification of animal husbandry) and land degradation (soil is a slow variable). The system drew closer to the boundaries of the basin, but without breaching ecological thresholds, and the value of SER dropped.

• (b) SERAM set up (Table 6).

• (c) The high to moderate SER of the RA is associated with the robust, closed, isolated RA with redundant labor and LEK, high socio-cultural but limited natural and financial potential and low diversity and modularity. Late in the period, however, the capacities of the RA critical components to help the SES develop sustainably (maintain SER) were tested by changing ways of life and external economic opportunities. Locals either out-migrated or stayed (young, full-time farmers) and exploited the new external conditions to improve their income by increasing animal numbers. This adaptation succeeded in economic terms but the SES became more precarious in environmental terms.

Step 4: Assessment of the socio-ecological fit of the RA (SEFRA).

Judged against the biophysical and socio-economic conditions of the time, the evaluation of the entries of SERAM produces an identical SEFRAM. SEFRA was moderate to high because the traditional grazing RA preserved the critical ecological and human functions of the SES, thus maintaining its SER.

Broader economic, socio-cultural, and institutional changes (panarchy), however, challenged the style of structuration of the current RA and its ability to respond to the 1970s modernization imperative (intensification of production), i.e., offer higher levels of income, employment, livelihood options, etc. Table 7 contains the results of the evaluation of the entries of SERAM under this scenario. The biophysical system entries remain low or lower because of the limited capacities of the natural resources to preserve critical functions and adapt to intensive use, i.e., critical biophysical components and the respective LLPs were negatively impacted. The economic and social system entries lower because they are judged insufficient to support the new resource use model, leading to adverse social and economic impacts (outmigration, resource use intensification, discontent with traditional grazing). Thus, SEFRA is judged poor, mainly owing to poor biophysical and human potential, robust cultural values (slow variable), poor connectedness and openness, low diversity of the economy and poor institutional potential (state neglect).

Step 5: Explanation of the transition between phases and of associated changes in human responses

Under the modernization pressures, that affected the neighboring and the larger SESs also, the style of structuration of the current RA had to change to improve SEFRA. Certain components of the traditional grazing RA changed/vanished (outmigration), some others were added (technology, infrastructure). The relationships among all components changed (intensification of resource use and production), giving rise to a different RA with different LLPs, R, A, T, SER, and SEFRA late in the period.

Stage 4: Design of Optimal Response Assemblages (ORA) and Guidance Not applicable.