Talk:Complex socio-ecological systems/Critique of Resilience
Add topicCritique of Social-Ecological Resilience.
Comments.
Both papers bring me again the idea of how wrong I am in bring my focus to resilience, and not to the framework of complex systems. Resilience per se revels one of the characteristics of the system, capacity to resist a changes. But complex systems theory brings us a whole new world of opportunities to study how to survive the ruptures/ thresholds/ trends in the actual system. Davidson paper shows it well decoupling ecological from social analytical perspectives. For her point of view the conception of resilience, and complex system also, need to be reinterpreted over social perspective, mainly because human have important characteristics that differentiate from others ecological structures (power, individual behaviors, agencies). As consequence, the idea of use the same ecological framework for social is “nagging”. I like the contraction example of the use of characteristic of system complexity to explain resilience in both study fields. But I also like her proposition that complex system theory could, and should be applied to social science. Just to cite one in my comments, I like the idea of look at how the hierarchical cycles of panarchy works to social systems. The feedback effects of fast and small hierarchical system over the slow and large cycle. I would like to use this framework in my governance study of climate change. Ricmel
Start a discussion about Complex socio-ecological systems/Critique of Resilience
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikiversity the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve Complex socio-ecological systems/Critique of Resilience.
