TY - JOUR
T1 - Resilience trinity
T2 - safeguarding ecosystem functioning and services across three different time horizons and decision contexts
AU - Weise, Hanna
AU - Auge, Harald
AU - Baessler, Cornelia
AU - Bärlund, Ilona
AU - Bennett, Elene M.
AU - Berger, Uta
AU - Bohn, Friedrich
AU - Bonn, Aletta
AU - Borchardt, Dietrich
AU - Brand, Fridolin
AU - Chatzinotas, Antonis
AU - Corstanje, Ron
AU - De Laender, Frederik
AU - Dietrich, Peter
AU - Dunker, Susanne
AU - Durka, Walter
AU - Fazey, Ioan
AU - Groeneveld, Juergen
AU - Guilbaud, Camille S. E.
AU - Harms, Hauke
AU - Harpole, Stanley
AU - Harris, Jim
AU - Jax, Kurt
AU - Jeltsch, Florian
AU - Johst, Karin
AU - Joshi, Jasmine
AU - Klotz, Stefan
AU - Kühn, Ingolf
AU - Kuhlicke, Christian
AU - Müller, Birgit
AU - Radchuk, Viktoriia
AU - Reuter, Hauke
AU - Rinke, Karsten
AU - Schmitt–Jansen, Mechtild
AU - Seppelt, R.
AU - Singer, Alexander
AU - Standish, Rachel J.
AU - Thulke, Hans H.
AU - Tietjen, Britta
AU - Weitere, Markus
AU - Wirth, Christian
AU - Wolf, Christine
AU - Grimm, Volker
N1 - Funding Information:
– HW acknowledges funding support through the German Research Foundation DFG project TI 824/2‐1 ‘Ecosystem resilience towards climate change – the role of interacting buffer mechanisms in Mediterranean‐type ecosystems and through the project Emerging Ecosystems’. We also thank UFZ's Integrated Project ‘Emerging Ecosystems’ within the research program ‘Terrestrial Environment’ of the Helmholtz Association for funding workshops to develop ideas that are presented in this manuscript. Funding
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors Oikos published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Society Oikos
PY - 2020/4/1
Y1 - 2020/4/1
N2 - Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.
AB - Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.
KW - resilience
KW - ecosystems
KW - concepts
KW - ecosystem services provisioning
KW - management
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078859757&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/oik.07213
DO - 10.1111/oik.07213
M3 - Article
SN - 0030-1299
VL - 129
SP - 445
EP - 456
JO - OIKOS
JF - OIKOS
IS - 4
ER -