Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
(the foreloop phase of r to K) characterised by slow and incremental transition.
Conversely, faster changes at the lower governance levels should be matched up
with the rapid phase of reorganisation that leads to renewal (backloop phase from
Omega to Alpha). Between these different levels, bridging organisations and net-
works are vital to maintain open lines of communication, financial and operational
support, as well as provide an arena for the accumulation and application of scientific
information.
Traditionally, there has been a weighted focus on the legislative and infrastruc-
tural frameworks that structure water resources management, that is typical of what
has traditionally been a sector dominated by mathematically minded technicians
and engineers (Huntjens et al.
2010
; Ingram
2011
; Pahl-Wostl
2007
) . Engineers,
mathematicians and economists stereotypically conform to the worldview that
problems can conform to neat mathematical models. In other words, they tend to
treat clouds as if they were clocks (Pearce
2002a
). Complex systems however, tend
to defy neat stereotypes, which is a partial explanation for the on-going challenge of
meeting related challenges with paradigms and panaceas (Ingram
2011
; Meinzen-
Dick
2007
; Ostrom
2007
). It may be more useful to combine more nuanced indica-
tors with a multi-scale framework that focuses not only on the rule based elements
of the SES but also on the way in which information and knowledge is developed,
shared and applied aims to embrace the complexities implied in developing and
mobilising adaptive capacity, rather than ignore or constrict them. For more discus-
sion of this latter issues, please refer to Chap.
15
on coping with and communicating
uncertainties.
14.4
Conclusion
Emergent themes through the course of analysis presented in Part III revealed the
tension in generating different forms of responses to different speeds or scales of
change and across different spatial scales. The structural challenge of mobilising
flexible fast responses in periods of drought or flooding was seen in juxtaposition
with the corresponding need for a more predictable structure to guide longer term
adaptation planning. These emergent contradictions in adaptive capacity were
matched with concepts of proactive and reactive adaptive capacity to set out a means
of navigating the structural tensions inherent in adaptive capacity. Analysis has
shown that proactive adaptive capacity could be associated with predictability and
guidance at higher levels, while reactive capacity could be enabled through flexibility
and autonomy at lower governance levels. In turn, transformational responses are
related to building longer term resilience in the SES, and are linked to proactive and
preparatory adaptation. Persistent Adaptive actions provide smaller scale processes
of change for quick and flexible reactions to events as and when they occur, to main-
tain the resilience of the system in the face of surprise.
Furthermore, this tension is influenced by different levels of governance and
scales of change. A framework was presented in Table
14.1
as a means of navigating
Search WWH ::
Custom Search