This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
The Anacostia watershed traverses the urban-suburban areas around Washington, D.C., and Maryland. Historically, the Anacostia River basin has transitioned from a biologically rich natural ecology prior to European settlement through three periods of ecosystem degradation due to agriculture and navigation, industrialization, and urbanization. The current regime is dominated by restoration and green-infrastructure activities yet is still influenced by previous regimes’ legacy effects and continued urban-development pressures. The major drivers of regime shifts from presettlement to the present are (1) societal treatment of the basin’s waters, lands, vegetation, and wildlife as exploitable goods and services for short-term economic benefit (even in the current regime in which improved water quality and restored lands are public goods and services); (2) shifts from weak to strong environmentalist values and activism; (3) changing ways that humans psychologically relate to the basin and its functions; (4) patterns of structural inequality, oppression, discrimination, and movements to seek social and environmental justice; and (5) changes in governance institutions, including laws, to support and facilitate the dominant social values and policies of the time. Institutions have played strong and pervasive roles in both the watershed’s declining ecological resilience and potential for improving social-ecological resilience. The greatest opportunities for a more resilient, climate-adaptive Anacostia River watershed require continued and improved changes in watershed governance, restoration and green-infrastructure initiatives, land-use regulation, public engagement, integration of social justice into watershed decision-making, and monitoring and feedback loops.
Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Olivia Odom Green; Daniel DeCaro; Alexandra Chase; Jennifer-Grace Ewa. Resilience of the Anacostia River Basin: Institutional, Social, and Ecological Dynamics. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 33 -46.
AMA StyleCraig Anthony (Tony) Arnold, Olivia Odom Green, Daniel DeCaro, Alexandra Chase, Jennifer-Grace Ewa. Resilience of the Anacostia River Basin: Institutional, Social, and Ecological Dynamics. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():33-46.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Olivia Odom Green; Daniel DeCaro; Alexandra Chase; Jennifer-Grace Ewa. 2018. "Resilience of the Anacostia River Basin: Institutional, Social, and Ecological Dynamics." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 33-46.
Several frameworks have been developed to assess the resilience of social-ecological systems, but most are time consuming and require substantial time and technical expertise. Stakeholders and practitioners often lack the resources for such intensive efforts. Furthermore, most resilience assessments end with problem framing and fail to explicitly address trade-offs and uncertainty inherent in any assessment of resilience. This chapter reports on a rapid assessment of survey responses to compare the relative resilience across four North American social-ecological watershed systems with respect to a number of proposed resilience properties. Responses were compared among four stakeholder categories: (1) government (policy, regulation, management), (2) end users (farmers, ranchers, landowners, industry), (3) agency/public science (research, university, extension), and (4) nongovernmental organizations (environmental, citizen, social justice) in each of the watersheds. Conceptually, social-ecological systems are comprised of components ranging from strictly human to strictly ecological, but that relate directly or indirectly to one another in complex ways. They have soft boundaries and several important dimensions or axes that together describe the nature of social-ecological interactions (e.g., variability, diversity, modularity, slow variables, feedbacks, capital, innovation, redundancy, and ecosystem services). There is no absolute measure of resilience, so our design takes advantage of comparisons across watersheds and therefore focuses on relative resilience. Our approach quantifies and compares the relative resilience across watershed systems and the potential trade-offs among different aspects of the social-ecological system (e.g., among social, economic, and ecological contributions). This approach permits explicit assessment of several types of uncertainty (e.g., self-assigned uncertainty for stakeholders; uncertainty across respondents, watersheds, and subsystems) and subjectivity in perceptions of resilience among key actors and decision-makers and provides an efficient way to develop the mental models that inform stakeholders and stakeholder categories.
Craig R. Allen; Hannah Birgé; David G. Angeler; Craig Anthony Arnold; Brian C. Chaffin; Daniel DeCaro; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Lance H. Gunderson. Uncertainty and Trade-Offs in Resilience Assessments. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 243 -268.
AMA StyleCraig R. Allen, Hannah Birgé, David G. Angeler, Craig Anthony Arnold, Brian C. Chaffin, Daniel DeCaro, Ahjond S. Garmestani, Lance H. Gunderson. Uncertainty and Trade-Offs in Resilience Assessments. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():243-268.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraig R. Allen; Hannah Birgé; David G. Angeler; Craig Anthony Arnold; Brian C. Chaffin; Daniel DeCaro; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Lance H. Gunderson. 2018. "Uncertainty and Trade-Offs in Resilience Assessments." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 243-268.
Environmental governance systems must adapt to address increased uncertainty and new social-ecological conditions posed by stressors like climate change. This chapter presents several principles of social cognition and decision-making that influence adaptive governance. The principles are illustrated with examples from six US river basins. Future research opportunities are also outlined.
Daniel A. DeCaro; Craig Anthony Arnold; Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah; Ahjond S. Garmestani. Theory and Research to Study Principles of Social Cognition and Decision-Making in Adaptive Environmental Governance. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 289 -309.
AMA StyleDaniel A. DeCaro, Craig Anthony Arnold, Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah, Ahjond S. Garmestani. Theory and Research to Study Principles of Social Cognition and Decision-Making in Adaptive Environmental Governance. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():289-309.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDaniel A. DeCaro; Craig Anthony Arnold; Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah; Ahjond S. Garmestani. 2018. "Theory and Research to Study Principles of Social Cognition and Decision-Making in Adaptive Environmental Governance." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 289-309.
One of the goals of adaptive governance is to increase management flexibility in the face of a changing social-ecological system. In contrast, one of the key functions of governance systems is to provide stability, predictability, and security for the people subject to that system. This chapter explores this adaptive governance paradox, focusing on the Klamath and Everglades case studies presented earlier in this volume—although the paradox arises in all of the case study river basins and indeed in most adaptive governance projects. It concludes that while the Everglades system has detrimentally privileged stability at the expense of flexibility and adaptability, the Klamath Basin system is showing signs that it may be able to appropriately balance stability and flexibility in its governance institutions to better address changing climatic, legal, and political realities.
Robin Kundis Craig; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Craig R. Allen; Craig Anthony Arnold; Hannah Birgé; Daniel DeCaro; Hannah Gosnell. Stability and Flexibility in the Emergence of Adaptive Water Governance. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 167 -181.
AMA StyleRobin Kundis Craig, Ahjond S. Garmestani, Craig R. Allen, Craig Anthony Arnold, Hannah Birgé, Daniel DeCaro, Hannah Gosnell. Stability and Flexibility in the Emergence of Adaptive Water Governance. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():167-181.
Chicago/Turabian StyleRobin Kundis Craig; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Craig R. Allen; Craig Anthony Arnold; Hannah Birgé; Daniel DeCaro; Hannah Gosnell. 2018. "Stability and Flexibility in the Emergence of Adaptive Water Governance." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 167-181.
Law dictates the structure, boundaries, rules, and processes within which governmental action takes place and in doing so becomes one of the focal points for analysis of governmental barriers to adaptation as the effects of climate change are felt. Governance encompasses both governmental and nongovernmental participation in collective choice and action. Adaptive governance contemplates a level of flexibility and evolution in governmental action beyond that currently found in the heavily administrative governments in the United States and Australia. Nevertheless, over time, law itself has proven highly adaptive in democracies, evolving to address and even facilitate the emergence of new social norms (such as the rights of women and minorities) or to provide remedies for emerging problems (such as pollution). Thus, law can adapt, evolve, and be reformed to facilitate adaptive governance. In doing so, not only may barriers be removed, but law may be adjusted to facilitate adaptive governance and to aid in institutionalizing new and emerging approaches to governance. The key is to do so in a way that also enhances legitimacy, accountability, and justice (i.e., good governance), or such reforms will never be adopted by democratic societies or, if adopted, will destabilize those very societies. By identifying those aspects of adaptive governance relevant to the legal system, this chapter presents guidelines for evaluating the role of law in environmental governance and demonstrates their use by applying them to the basin studies presented in Part I of this volume.
Barbara Cosens; Robin Kundis Craig; Shana Hirsch; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Melinda Harm Benson; Daniel DeCaro; Ahjond Garmestani; Hannah Gosnell; J.B. Ruhl; Edella Schlager. Legal Pathways to Adaptive Governance in Water Basins in North America and Australia. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 151 -165.
AMA StyleBarbara Cosens, Robin Kundis Craig, Shana Hirsch, Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold, Melinda Harm Benson, Daniel DeCaro, Ahjond Garmestani, Hannah Gosnell, J.B. Ruhl, Edella Schlager. Legal Pathways to Adaptive Governance in Water Basins in North America and Australia. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():151-165.
Chicago/Turabian StyleBarbara Cosens; Robin Kundis Craig; Shana Hirsch; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Melinda Harm Benson; Daniel DeCaro; Ahjond Garmestani; Hannah Gosnell; J.B. Ruhl; Edella Schlager. 2018. "Legal Pathways to Adaptive Governance in Water Basins in North America and Australia." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 151-165.
Features of adaptive governance and drivers of systemic change were derived using qualitative textual analysis of six North American basin resilience assessments. This meta-analysis sought new knowledge that transcends each study concerning two categories of variables: (1) drivers of change in complex social-ecological-institutional water systems that affect systemic resilience and (2) features of adaptive governance. Pervasive themes, concepts, and variables from these six interdisciplinary texts were identified through inductive textual analysis and then analyzed for cross-basin patterns. Synthesis frameworks, as well as comprehensive lists of the variables that these studies uniformly or nearly uniformly addressed, are presented. These results are cross-interdisciplinary in that they identify patterns and knowledge that transcend several diverse interdisciplinary studies. The relevant and potentially generalizable insights into complex system change and adaptive governance, as well as a set of methods for synthesizing diverse interdisciplinary studies, form a foundation for future research on the dynamics of complex social-ecological-institutional systems and how they could be governed adaptively for resilience.
Craig Anthony Arnold; Hannah Gosnell; Melinda Harm Benson; Robin Kundis Craig. Cross-Basin Patterns of Systemic-Change Drivers and Adaptive Governance Features. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance 2018, 205 -227.
AMA StyleCraig Anthony Arnold, Hannah Gosnell, Melinda Harm Benson, Robin Kundis Craig. Cross-Basin Patterns of Systemic-Change Drivers and Adaptive Governance Features. Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance. 2018; ():205-227.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraig Anthony Arnold; Hannah Gosnell; Melinda Harm Benson; Robin Kundis Craig. 2018. "Cross-Basin Patterns of Systemic-Change Drivers and Adaptive Governance Features." Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance , no. : 205-227.
Craig R. Allen; Hannah E. Birge; David G. Angeler; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Brian C. Chaffin; Daniel A. DeCaro; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Lance Gunderson. Quantifying uncertainty and trade-offs in resilience assessments. Ecology and Society 2018, 23, 1 .
AMA StyleCraig R. Allen, Hannah E. Birge, David G. Angeler, Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold, Brian C. Chaffin, Daniel A. DeCaro, Ahjond S. Garmestani, Lance Gunderson. Quantifying uncertainty and trade-offs in resilience assessments. Ecology and Society. 2018; 23 (1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraig R. Allen; Hannah E. Birge; David G. Angeler; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Brian C. Chaffin; Daniel A. DeCaro; Ahjond S. Garmestani; Lance Gunderson. 2018. "Quantifying uncertainty and trade-offs in resilience assessments." Ecology and Society 23, no. 1: 1.
Gosnell, H., B. C. Chaffin, J. B. Ruhl, C. A. (T.) Arnold, R. K. Craig, M. H. Benson, and A. Devenish. 2017. Transforming (perceived) rigidity in environmental law through adaptive governance: a case of Endangered Species Act implementation. Ecology and Society 22(4):42. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09887-220442
Hannah Gosnell; Brian C. Chaffin; J. B. Ruhl; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Robin K. Craig; Melinda H. Benson; Alan Devenish. Transforming (perceived) rigidity in environmental law through adaptive governance: a case of Endangered Species Act implementation. Ecology and Society 2017, 22, 1 .
AMA StyleHannah Gosnell, Brian C. Chaffin, J. B. Ruhl, Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold, Robin K. Craig, Melinda H. Benson, Alan Devenish. Transforming (perceived) rigidity in environmental law through adaptive governance: a case of Endangered Species Act implementation. Ecology and Society. 2017; 22 (4):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleHannah Gosnell; Brian C. Chaffin; J. B. Ruhl; Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold; Robin K. Craig; Melinda H. Benson; Alan Devenish. 2017. "Transforming (perceived) rigidity in environmental law through adaptive governance: a case of Endangered Species Act implementation." Ecology and Society 22, no. 4: 1.
Law's ideas of nature appear in different doctrinal and institutional settings, historical periods, and political dialogues. Nature underlies every behavior, contract, or form of wealth, and in this broad sense influences every instance of market transaction or governmental intervention. Recognizing that law has embedded discrete constructions of nature helps in understanding how humans value their relationship with nature. This book offers a scholarly examination of the manner in which nature is constructed through law, both in the 'hard' sense of directly regulating human activities that impact nature, and in the 'soft' manner in which law's ideas of nature influence and are influenced by behaviors, values, and priorities. Traditional accounts of the intersection between law and nature generally focus on environmental laws that protect wilderness. This book will build on the constructivist observation that when considered as a culturally contingent concept, 'nature' is a self-perpetuating and self-reinforcing social creation.
Craig Anthony Arnold; Irus Braverman; Michael Burger; Robin Kundis Craig; Catherine Iorns Magallanes; Katrina Fischer Kuh; Stephen R. Miller; Jessica Owley; Shannon M. Roesler; Jonathan Rosenbloom; Rik Scarce; A. Dan Tarlock; Sandra Zellmer; Patricia E. Salkin. Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature. Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature 2014, 1 .
AMA StyleCraig Anthony Arnold, Irus Braverman, Michael Burger, Robin Kundis Craig, Catherine Iorns Magallanes, Katrina Fischer Kuh, Stephen R. Miller, Jessica Owley, Shannon M. Roesler, Jonathan Rosenbloom, Rik Scarce, A. Dan Tarlock, Sandra Zellmer, Patricia E. Salkin. Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature. Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature. 2014; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraig Anthony Arnold; Irus Braverman; Michael Burger; Robin Kundis Craig; Catherine Iorns Magallanes; Katrina Fischer Kuh; Stephen R. Miller; Jessica Owley; Shannon M. Roesler; Jonathan Rosenbloom; Rik Scarce; A. Dan Tarlock; Sandra Zellmer; Patricia E. Salkin. 2014. "Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature." Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature , no. : 1.