Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

Kelp Forest Ecosystems: Biodiversity, Stability, Resilience and Future

Kelp forests are phyletically diverse, structurally complex and highly productive components of cold-water rocky marine coastlines. This paper reviews the conditions in which kelp forests develop globally and where, why and at what rate they become deforested. The ecology and long archaeological history of kelp forests are examined through case studies from southern California, the Aleutian Islands and the western North Atlantic, well-studied locations that represent the widest possible range in kelp forest biodiversity. Global distribution of kelp forests is physiologically constrained by light at high latitudes and by nutrients, warm temperatures and other macrophytes at low latitudes. Within mid-latitude belts (roughly 40-60degrees latitude in both hemispheres) well-developed kelp forests are most threatened by herbivory, usually from sea urchins. Overfishing and extirpation of highly valued vertebrate apex predators often triggered herbivore population increases, leading to widespread kelp deforestation. Such deforestations have the most profound and lasting impacts on species-depauperate systems, such as those in Alaska and the western North Atlantic. Globally urchin-induced deforestation has been increasing over the past 2-3 decades. Continued fishing down of coastal food webs has resulted in shifting harvesting targets from apex predators to their invertebrate prey, including kelp-grazing herbivores. The recent global expansion of sea urchin harvesting has led to the widespread extirpation of this herbivore, and kelp forests have returned in some locations but, for the first time, these forests are devoid of vertebrate apex predators. In the western North Atlantic, large predatory crabs have recently filled this void and they have become the new apex predator in this system. Similar shifts from fish- to crab-dominance may have occurred in coastal zones of the United Kingdom and Japan, where large predatory finfish were extirpated long ago. Three North American case studies of kelp forests were examined to determine their long history with humans and project the status of future kelp forests to the year 2025. Fishing impacts on kelp forest systems have been both profound and much longer in duration than previously thought. Archaeological data suggest that coastal peoples exploited kelp forest organisms for thousands of years, occasionally resulting in localized losses of apex predators, outbreaks of sea urchin populations and probably small-scale deforestation. Over the past two centuries, commercial exploitation for export led to the extirpation of sea urchin predators, such as the sea otter in the North Pacific and predatory fishes like the cod in the North Atlantic. The largescale removal of predators for export markets increased sea urchin abundances and promoted the decline of kelp forests over vast areas. Despite southern California having one of the longest known associations with coastal kelp forests, widespread deforestation is rare. It is possible that functional redundancies among predators and herbivores make this most diverse system most stable. Such biodiverse kelp forests may also resist invasion from non-native species. In the species-depauperate western North Atlantic, introduced algal competitors carpet the benthos and threaten future kelp dominance. There, other non-native herbivores and predators have become established and dominant components of this system. Climate changes have had measurable impacts on kelp forest ecosystems and efforts to control the emission of greenhouse gasses should be a global priority. However, overfishing appears to be the greatest manageable threat to kelp forest ecosystems over the 2025 time horizon. Management should focus on minimizing fishing impacts and restoring populations of functionally important species in these systems.

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

The Relationship Among Resilience, Forgiveness, and Anger Expression in Adolescents

This study was designed to investigate and describe the relationship among resilience, forgiveness and anger expression in adolescents. The purpose of the study was to explore whether certain adolescent resiliencies significantly related to positive or negative affective, behavioral, or cognitive levels of forgiveness and certain types of anger expression in adolescents. This study also investigated whether there were certain adolescent resiliencies and types of forgiveness that can predict lower levels of negative anger expression in adolescents. This research was built on two conceptual models: Wolin and Wolin's (1993) Challenge Model and the Forgiveness Process Model (Enright & Human Development Study Group, 1991). It was based on a quantitative, single-subject correlational research design. A multiple regression analysis was also used to explore possible effects of resilience and forgiveness on anger expression in adolescents. In addition, two demographic variables, Age and Gender, were examined for possible effects on anger expression. Data were gathered from a convenience sample sample of 70 students in three Maine public high schools using three separate assessment instruments: the Adolescent Resiliency Attitudes Scale (ARAS), the Adolescent Version of the Enright Forgiveness Inventory (EFI), and the Adolescent Anger Rating Scale (AARS). Correlational analyses were done on the scales and subscales of these surveys. Significant relationships were found between several adolescent resiliencies and forms of forgiveness as well as between some adolescent resiliencies and types of anger expression. The data indicated that Total Resiliency significantly correlated with Total Forgiveness as well as Total Anger. The findings also identified particular adolescent resiliencies that significantly predicted types of anger expression, while forgiveness did not predict types of anger expression. The data revealed that Age and Gender had no significant affect on anger expression. These findings suggest that the constructs of adolescent resilience and forgiveness have commonalities that can influence how adolescents express anger, and further suggest that intervention and prevention programs expand their focus to incorporate forgiveness skills. The findings from this study can provide critical information to counselors, therapists, and other helping professionals working with adolescents, on approaches to designing and implementing therapy modalities or developmental school guidance programs for adolescents.