Social conflict over rangeland-use priorities, especially near protected areas, has long pitted environmental and biodiversity conservation interests against livestock livelihoods. Social–ecological conflict limits management adaptation and creativity while reinforcing social and disciplinary divisions. It can also reduce rancher access to land and negatively affect wildlife conservation. Communities increasingly expect research organizations to address complex social dynamics to improve opportunities for multiple ecosystem service delivery on rangelands. In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), an area of the western US, long-standing disagreements among actors who argue for the use of the land for livestock and those who prioritize wildlife are limiting conservation and ranching livelihoods. Researchers at the USDA-ARS US Sheep Experiment Station (USSES) along with University and societal partners are responding to these challenges using a collaborative adaptive management (CAM) methodology. The USSES Rangeland Collaboratory is a living laboratory project leveraging the resources of a federal range sheep research ranch operating across sagebrush steppe ecosystems in Clark County, Idaho, and montane/subalpine landscapes in Beaverhead County, Montana. The project places stakeholders, including ranchers, conservation groups, and government land managers, in the decision-making seat for a participatory case study. This involves adaptive management planning related to grazing and livestock–wildlife management decisions for two ranch-scale rangeland management scenarios, one modeled after a traditional range sheep operation and the second, a more intensified operation with no use of summer ranges. We discuss the extent to which the CAM approach creates opportunities for multi-directional learning among participants and evaluate trade-offs among preferred management systems through participatory ranch-scale grazing research. In a complex system where the needs and goals of various actors are misaligned across spatiotemporal, disciplinary, and social–ecological scales, CAM creates a structure and methods to focus on social learning and land management knowledge creation.

Hydropower is the leading source of low-carbon energy and is considered integral for decarbonizing energy sectors worldwide. Hydropower development is booming in many regions, resulting in notable increases in total installed capacity. However, installed capacity does not guarantee corresponding electricity generation. Using country-level data, we calculated the ’capacity factor’ of hydropower, determining how much energy is generated relative to installed capacity. The median capacity factor (n=85) was 45% for 2024. To better understand the dynamics underlying the gap in capacity versus generation, we conducted a qualitative case study of Nepal’s hydropower landscape. Nepal is emblematic of a country experiencing rapid growth in installed hydropower capacity while lacking a corresponding amount of electricity generation. We collected empirical data and conducted semi-structured interviews (n=86). We review how (a) water availability and natural hazards; (b) policies and regulations; (c) technical designs and energy transmission; and (d) hydropower-community relations shape the magnitude and dynamics of Nepal’s gap in hydropower capacity versus generation. Given the ubiquitous nature and scale of Nepal and other countries’ installed capacity and electricity generation gaps, installed capacity, as a metric, is limited in its ability to accurately reflect electricity generation and related emissions reductions. Instead, hydropower reporting needs to accurately capture generation so countries can better align energy development strategies with both demand and decarbonization goals. Given greater geophysical and anthropogenic risks threatening hydroelectric generation, especially in mountain regions, it is crucial to rethink the potential of hydropower and critically examine the role of hydropower in renewable energy transitions.