Master’s Programme: Social-Ecological Resilience for...

1

Master’s Programme: Social-Ecological Resilience for Sustainable Development

Course 3: Governance and management of social-ecological systems (15hp)

Course leader: Miriam Huitric

Updated: 12th December 2012

Brief Description

This course will explore alternative approaches for analysing how people make choices, use

rules, and learn to manage and govern social-ecological systems. The course will combine

economic approaches to uncertainty, approaches to ecological management that enable

learning, how institutional choices shape environmental management, and how governance

can be designed to adapt to social-ecological change. Students will learn how to apply cost-

benefit analysis, decision analysis under uncertainty, and game theory to the analysis of

environmental issues. They will explore successful cases of environmental management, and

how governance systems have been successfully transformed. Strategies for effecting positive

change in environmental management, and barriers impeding such change will be examined.

Students will be introduced to theoretical concepts, methods for analysis, and conduct group

and individual research projects that utilize these concepts and methods.

Course Learning Outcomes

It is expected that the student, after taking the course, will be able to:

1. Apply cost-benefit analysis and decision analysis in simple real world situations.

2. Be familiar with institutional aspects of social-ecological management that can lead to

successful and unsuccessful management.

3. Use game theory to analyse the creation of ecological problems.

4. Analyse the ability of different aspects of ecological management to support or

impede learning.

5. Explain the challenges and opportunities of adaptive governance.

Course Modules** The course consists of the following three modules, which are detailed in the following pages:

Module 7: Challenges of Environmental Decision-making (4 hp),

Module 8: Adaptive Management (4 hp),

Module 9: Drama of the Commons (3 hp),

Module 10: Adaptive Governance (4 hp)

**NOTE: This year the order of the Modules will be: 7, 9, 10, 8!

2

Module 7: Challenges of Environmental Decision-making (4 hp)

Module leaders: Anne-Sophie Crépin, Therese Lindahl, Gustav Engström

Instructors: Anne-Sophie Crépin, Therese Lindahl, Gustav Engström, Thomas Hahn, Henrik Scharin

Brief description

The objective of this module is to help the students understand the whole width of challenges

associated with decisions making coupled to environmental issues. The module will explore

alternative approaches for analysing how people make choices individually and collectively to

manage social-ecological systems and what consequences these choices have. Students will

learn how to apply decision analysis to study social ecological systems. They will learn

techniques of cost benefit analysis and optimal policy choice. Students will be introduced to

theoretical concepts, methods for analysis, and critically discuss these concepts and methods.

Students will learn how to solve problems using multiple approaches.

Module content

Concepts Methods Applications

Section 1: Economic dynamics

Markets, Market failures, Incentives

Market analysis using diagrams or functions, optimization, maximization

Multidisciplinary case studies, e.g. coral reefs, climate change, Arctic Ocean

Section 2: How to make environmental decisions – normative framework

Pareto efficiency Economic equilibrium Polluter pays principle Coase theorem Trade-offs, Policy instruments

Environmental decision- making, Individual and collective decision-making, economic appraisal and cost benefit analysis, valuation

Multidisciplinary case studies

Section 3: Decision analysis framework for SES

Risk, Knightian uncertainty, heterogeneity, complexity

Multidisciplinary approaches to solving problems, optimization, maximization, environmental decision- making, Individual and collective decision-making

Multidisciplinary case studies

3

Schedule - All lectures are in room 251 unless otherwise noted

Lectures Class exercises Home work

Week 1:

JANUARY Mon 21 10:00-12:00 13:00-15:00

AM: Course Intro (MH, ½ hr) AM: Module Intro (ASC, ½ hr) AM/PM: Markets, market failures and normative framework for environmental decision making I (TL, 2½ hr)

PM: Group Discussions: What is the goal, who gets to decide, what restrictions must be considered? I (TL, ½ hr)

Reading

Tues 22 9.00-12.00

AM: Markets, market failures and normative framework for environmental decision making II (TL, 2½ hr)

AM: Group Discussions: What is the goal, who gets to decide, what restrictions must be considered? II (TL, ½ hr)

Individual assignment distributed to students PM: Work on assignment

Wed 23 READING DAY Work on assignment

Thurs 24 9:00-12:00

AM: Policy instruments, and tools for decision making (GE, 3 hr)

Work on assignment PM: Individual assignment due 17:00.

Fri 25 9.00-10.00 10.00-12.00

AM: Cost benefit analysis and valuation. (GE, 1 hr) Case study Baltic Stern (HS, 1 hr)

PM: Reading

Week 2:

Mon 28 10.00-12.00 13.00-15.00

AM: Green economy: global implementation. (TH, 2 hr) PM: TEEB. (TH, 1 hr)

PM: Global implementation and exercise. (TH, 1 hr)

Tues 29 9.00-12.00

AM: Decision making for complex SES I. (ASC, 2 hr)

AM: Group Discussions: What kind of complexity should we account for, how do we deal with it? I (ASC, 1 hr)

Individual assignment distributed to students

Wed 30 READING DAY Work on assignment

Thurs 31 9:00-12:00

AM: Decision making for complex SES II. (ASC, 2 hr)

AM: Group Discussions: What kind of complexity should we account for, how do we deal with it? II (ASC, 1hr)

PM: Work on assignment Individual assignment due 17:00.

FEBRUARY Fri 1 13:00-16:00

PM: Advice session. Feedback on assignments. Possibility to ask questions in preparation for the exam. (ASC, 3 hr)

Prepare for exam

Week 3:

Mon 4 Prepare for exam

Tues 5 9.00-12.00 13.00-13.30

PM: Course Evaluation (ASC, ½ hr)

AM: Examination: Individual written exam in class. Book allowed. (tentavakt 3 hr)

Learning outcomes

It is expected that the student, after taking the module, will be able to:

1. Apply decision analysis and economic appraisal in simple real world situations

2. Be familiar with economic and institutional aspects of social-ecological management

that can lead to successful and unsuccessful management

3. Grasp the challenges of decision making for social ecological systems

4. Discuss relevant issues.

5. Be familiar with Cost benefit analysis and valuation techniques.

4

Assessment and Grading

Examination will be conducted through one final individual classroom exam (Book allowed)

and two individual home assignments. The home assignments are not compulsory but can

give 5 extra points each (pass gives 5 points, fail gives 0 points). There are no re-takes for the

individual assignments. The exam can give at most 100 points. So you can have in total 110

points. The exam will consist of three parts: 30 points technical questions, 30 points multiple

choice questions and 40 points essay question. Technical questions and multiple choice

questions can be either right or wrong. The number of points you can get for each question

will be specified in the exam. For the essay question, the grading will be as following:

40 requires excellent insight and deep understanding of how the module concepts are related to research social-ecological systems. Excellence in analysis, assessment and synthesis

Above 35 requires very good insight and deep of how the module concepts are related to research social-ecological systems. Shows skills in analysis, assessment and synthesis

Above 30 requires good insight into the module concepts and how they are interrelated, as well as independent sound judgements and analytical skills in discussing them

Above 25 requires additional skills in discussing and explaining the module concepts

Above 20 is issued to participants who can recapitulate the contents of the course and define the basic concepts discussed in the different module components.

Below 20 is issued to participants who cannot recapitulate all necessary contents of the course and define the basic concepts discussed in the different module components to answer the question. The grade is issued in proportion to the extent of the content they are able to present.

Component Weighting (%) Learning Outcomes

Assignments 9% 1-5

Final exam 91% 1-5

Attendance in class and discussion Compulsory 1-5

Module Review Compulsory

100%

Attendance of lectures is compulsory. Attendance means active participation. The student

should be prepared for and take an active role in class discussions. The individual course

evaluation at the end of the course is compulsory. Criteria for assessment

The participant must achieve passing grades for all compulsory parts of the course in order to

pass the course as a whole. The maximum grade for re-examinations is a C.

The following grades are issued, the lower limits for each grade is expressed as the total

number points that must be obtained to reach that grade:

A above 95 Excellent

B above 85 Very good

C above 75 Good

D above 65 Satisfactory

E above 60 Sufficient (pass)

Fx above 50 Insufficient (fail)

F Below 50 Poor or insufficient conduct (fail)

5

Reading list (module book in bold) – readings, etc. should be done prior to lectures when possible!

COURSE BOOK: Anderson, D.A., 2010, Environmental Economics and Natural Resource Management,

third edition, Routledge.

Crépin, A.-S., Biggs, R., Polasky, S., Troell, M and de Zeeuw, A., 2012 Regime shifts and

management, Ecological Economics 84:15-22.

Hahn, T., 2012, manuscript. Green economy, economic growth and sustainable development

– conceptual clarity for policy change. Book-chapter in: Beyond Fossil, Pernilla

Glaser, Henrietta Palmer & Frida Eriksson (editors)

Levin, S. , Xepapadeas, A. , Crépin, A.-S., Norberg, J, de Zeeuw, A., Folke, C., Hughes, T. ,

Arrow, K. , Barrett, S., Daily, G. , Ehrlich, P., Kautsky, N. , Mäler, K.-G-, Polasky, S,

Troell, M., Vincent, J.R. and B. Walker. 2012. Social-ecological systems as complex

adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications, Environment and Development

Economics.

Lecture notes to be handed out by teacher.

Lecture 1 (Mon 21): Chapters 1, 2, Appendix and 16 in Andersson 2010

Lecture 2 (Tue 22): Chapters 3 and 5 in Andersson 2010

Lecture 3 (Thu 24): Chapter 4 and 12 in Andersson 2010

Lecture 4 (Fri 25): Chapters 2 and 10 in Andersson 2010

Lecture 5 (Mon 28): Hahn Manuscript

Lecture 6 (Tue 29): Chapter 13 in Andersson 2010; Lecture notes

Lecture 7 (Thu 31): Crépin et al, 2012; Levin et al 2013; Lecture notes

Supplementary reading: Brown, G. M., 2000, Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use without Markets.

Journal of Economic Literature, 38(4) (Dec., 2000): 875-914.

Cropper, M. and W. Oates, 1992, Environmental Economics: A Survey, Journal of Economic

Literature, 30:679-690.

Starrett, D. 2000, Shadow Pricing in Economics, Ecosystems 3:16-20.

Yohe, G. et al, 2005, Recognizing Uncertainties in Evaluating Responses, Chapter 4 in

Millenium Ecosystem Assessement, Policy responses, Island Press. Available online on

http://maweb.org/documents/document.309.aspx.pdf.

6

Module 9: Drama of the Commons (3 hp) Module Leader: Miriam Huitric

Instructors: Miriam Huitric, Therese Lindahl, Beatrice Crona

Brief description

During this module you will be introduced to different theoretical and applied approaches

related to understanding and analysing the nature and use of common property/ common pool

resources in the context of social-ecological systems. This will include: game theory,

institutions, institutional analysis, and social networks. We explore this field using exercises,

lab work and case studies – both to illustrate and apply course’s theoretical content.

Module content


Week 1: Tragedy of the Commons & Lab Experiments

Tragedy of the Commons Prisoner’s Dilemma Common Pool Resources

Lab experiments Understanding and predicting human behaviour

Week 2: Drama of the Commons & Institutions and Networks

Institutions – norms, rules and rights Property rights Social networks

Lab experiments (continued) Field work Institutional Analysis Network Analysis

Understanding human behaviour Case study Roles of organisation of stakeholders and institutions in managing the commons.

Schedule


Week 1: Tragedy of the Commons & Lab Experiments

February Wed 6

READING DAY Readings for Week 1 & In an example of your choice: list the factors causing the Tragedy of the Commons.

Thurs 7 10:00-12:00 13.00-14.30

AM: Module Intro [MH,½hr] PM: Tragedy of the Commons [MH, 1.5hrs]

AM: Presentation and Discussion of Homework [MH, 1.5 hrs]

Readings

Fri 8 9.00-12.30

9-10:00: Experiments & CPR [TL, 1hr]

10:15-11:15: Experiment [TL, 1hr]

11:30-12:30: Experiment [TL, 1hr]

PM: Work on Assignment 1

Week 2: Drama of the Commons & Institutions and Networks

Mon 11 Work on Assignment 1 Hand in Assignment 1 by 17:00. Email Therese

Tues 12 10:00-12:00

AM: Discussion of Assignment 1. [TL, 2 hrs]

Readings

Wed 13 10:00-12:00

AM: Drama of the Commons – role of and challenges for institutions in managing the commons. [MH, 2 hrs]

PM: Assignment 2.

Thurs 14

AM/PM: Assignment 2. Hand in 17.00 – email to Miriam

Fri 15 10.00-12.00 13.00-14.00

AM: Networks in local resource management. [BC, 2 hrs]

PM: Discussion of Assignment 2 [MH, 1 hr]

Work on Final Assignment

Week 3: Final Assignment & Module Evaluation

Mon 18 15.30-16.30

PM: Reflections on CPRs & Module Evaluation [MH]

AM/PM: Work on Final Assignment. Hand-in 15.00. Email to Miriam

7

Learning outcomes

After completing the course, course participants are expected to:

1. Be able to define and describe key concepts including: common pool resources,

common property, institutions, norms and rules, collective action, prisoner’s dilemma,

tragedy of the commons and social networks.

2. Understand and apply game theory to the governing the commons.

3. Have insights into institutional and a network analyses.

4. Understand the differences and similarities of the roles of institutions and social

networks in governing the commons.


Component Weighting (%) Learning Outcomes

Assignment 1 15% 1,2

Assignment 2 15% 1,3

Participation: in class, exercises, discussions, group work pass/fail 1,2,4

Final Assignment 70% 1-4

Module Evaluation Compulsory

100%

Attendance of lectures and participation in all seminars is compulsory. Participation does not

only mean attendance, the participant must have prepared for and take an active role in the

seminar. The individual course evaluation at the end of the course is compulsory. Criteria for assessment

The participant must achieve passing grades for all parts of the course in order to pass the

course as a whole. Failure to submit on time will result in a maximum grade C. The maximum

grade for re-examinations is a C.

The following grades are issued; the lower limit for each grade is expressed as a percentage of

the maximum points available:

A 95% Excellent

B 85% Very good

C 75% Good

D 65% Satisfactory

E 60% Sufficient (pass)

Fx 50% Insufficient (fail)

F Below 50% Poor or insufficient conduct (fail)

In addition to specific grading criteria handed out with specific assignments, the following

criteria are used for grading assignments:

A requires excellent insight and deep understanding of the modules’ concepts and how they relate to

one another and to the Commons. The text clearly demonstrates independent thinking, an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course, and to make connections beyond the immediate subject area. The text has no faults with formalia.

B requires very good insight and deep understanding of the modules’ concepts. The text demonstrates a clear ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has at most minor faults with formalia.

C requires good insight into the modules’ concepts and how they are interrelated, as well as independent sound judgements and analytical skills in discussing them. The text demonstrates an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has smaller faults with

8

formalia.

D requires additional skills in discussing and explaining the modules’ concepts. The text demonstrates an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has faults with formalia. Concepts are defined and in general correctly used, and applied.

E is issued to participants who can recapitulate the contents of the module. The text indicates an ability to define and to some extent connect the key concepts presented during the course. The text has faults with formalia.

Fx Is issued where the text has serious faults with formalia. Concepts are poorly defined and used incorrectly

F Is issued where the text indicates an inability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text does not follow formalia requirements; concepts are incorrectly defined and/or misapplied.

Reading List – readings should be done prior to lectures! Week 1: Tragedy of the Commons & Lab Experiments Lecture: Tragedy of the Commons

Dietz et al. 2003. The Struggle to Govern the Commons. Science 302(5652): 1907 – 1912.

Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243-1248.

Case study of student’s choice (Homework Wed 6th

)

Lecture: Experiments & CPR Anderies et al, 2012. The challenge of understanding decisions in experimental studies of

common pool resources, Ecological Economics, 70(9): 1571-1579.

Ostrom, E., 2006. The value-added of laboratory experiments for the study of institutions and

common-pool resources, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 61: 149-163.

Shogren, J. and L.O. Taylor, 2008. On Behavioral-Environmental Economics, Review of

Environmental Economics and Policy, 2 (1): 26–44.

Week 2: Drama of the Commons & Institutions and Networks Lecture: Drama of the Commons Huitric, M. 2000: A literature study on the definition and structure of institutions and their

importance to natural resource management. Doktoranduppsats (doctoral literature review)

at Dept. of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Ostrom, E. 1993: The evolution of norms, rules, and rights. Beijer Dicussion Paper Series No.

39.

Lecture: Networks in local resource management Berkes, F. 2007. Community-based conservation in a globalized world. PNAS 104:15188-

15193.

Berkes, F. 2009. Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging

organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management 90:1692-1702.

Bodin, Ö. and B. I. Crona. 2009. The role of social networks in natural resource governance:

What relational patterns make a difference? Global Environmental Change 19:366-374.

9

Module 10: Adaptive Governance (4hp) Module leader: Victor Galaz

Instructors: Victor Galaz, Miriam Huitric, Per Olsson, Robin Teigland, Gunilla Rieschl, Henrik Österblom

Brief description

This course covers existing research on adaptive governance of social-ecological systems.

You will be introduced to different theoretical approaches related to the governance of

dynamic, non-linear social-ecological systems and resilience. In this course, we introduce and

discuss the role of institutions, social networks, bridging organizations and transnational

partnerships in dealing with uncertainty, change, “tipping points”, crises and innovation. We

explore the topic from multiple theoretical perspectives and across a diverse set of real-world

challenges, ranging from ocean governance to infectious diseases, and across levels of

societal organization. In the latter case, we will introduce and discuss the features of adaptive

modes of governance from the local to the global level.

Module content


Week 1: From institutions to governance

Governance Adaptive governance Institutions International institutions

Case Analysis To mini-case studies

Week 2: Innovation and Transformation

Innovations Transitions Transformations Learning Social capital

Mini Review

Week 3: Global Governance

Global networks and institutions Planetary Boundaries

Schedule- All lectures are in room 251 unless otherwise noted


Week 1:

FEBRUARY Tues 19 10:00-12.00

AM: From institutions to governance – what is the difference? [VG] Intro to Adaptive Governance [VG]

PM: Readings and blogpost

Wed 20 9:00-11.00

AM: Bridging Organizations [TH, 2hrs]

PM: Blogposts and readings

Thurs 21 9:00-15:00 Room 248

9:00 Hand-out of task for the day [VG] 9:10-11:00: Read Innovation and

15:00-17:00 Blogposts and readings

10

transformations 11:00-12:00: Group task 1 13:00-14:00: Group task 2 14:00-15:00: Group discussions [VG]

Fri 22 10:00-12:00 13:00-15:00

AM: Transformations and transitions in social-ecological systems [PO, 2 hrs] PM: Innovation in Networks [Robin Teigland, 2 hrs]

PM: Readings and blogposts

Week 2:

Mon 25 9:00-12:00

9:00-11:00: Global environmental governance. International regimes, international institutions [Gunilla Rieschl, 2hrs]

11:15-12.00: Hand out of case analysis [VG]

PM: Work on Case Analysis

Tues 26 Work on Case Analysis

Wed 27

12:00 (sharp): E-mail case analysis to Victor, Miriam and your seminar group.

AM: Work on Case Analysis PM: Read other case analyses and prepare for presentation tomorrow

Thurs 28 9:00-12:00 13:00-16:00 Room: Stallet/Library

AM or PM: Presentation of case analysis. Discussion of concepts social learning, social capital, bridging organisations, adaptive governance, as it applies to cases. [VG and MH]

AM or PM: Readings and blogposts, time depending on which group you are in.

MARCH Fri 1 9:00-11:00

AM: Global networks, governance and global change [VG, 2hrs]

PM: Readings and blogposts

Week 3:

Mon 4 10:00-12:00 13:00-14:30

AM: Global networks and illegal fisheries. [HÖ, 2hrs] PM: Summary of lectures: “Connecting the dots”. [VG, 1.5hrs]

14.30: Hand out of exam questions [VG]. Clarifications.

Tues 5 Work on Final Exam

Wed 6

Work on Final Exam Hand-in of exam: 18.00 via email to Victor Module evaluation by web-survey!

11

Learning outcomes

After completing the course, course participants are expected to be able to:

1. Define and describe key concepts related to adaptive governance, such as

adaptive co-management, social learning, social networks, bridging

organization, and polycentric governance.

2. Define and describe the role of innovation and transformations in adaptive

governance.

3. Describe how these concepts are related to each other in the context of

governance of dynamic social-ecological systems.

4. Apply concepts related to adaptive governance at multiple levels, on a real-

world case.


Component Weighting (%)

Learning Outcomes

Blog Contributions Pass/ Fail 1-4

Case Analysis (pass/fail) 15% 1,3,4

Mini-review & Seminar (pass/ fail) 20% 1-3

Final Exam (A-F) 65% 1-4

Module Evaluation Compulsory

100%

Lectures are a very important part of the course and we expect you - and have put aside time

for - to read the assigned literature before the lecture. All lectures will provide an overview of

an existing research field, and explore how they relate to the governance of dynamic social-

ecological systems.

The case analysis will give you an opportunity to elaborate how these concepts can be used to

analyze real-world challenges. We expect you work in small groups, gather relevant

information, synthesize insights into a brief group report, and present it to a larger group.

Instructions to this exercise will be handed out during the course.

The discussion seminars in smaller groups, will give you an opportunity to discuss how

different concepts presented in the lectures relate to each other. Participation in this seminar is

mandatory, and we expect you to read the assigned course literature in advance.

The mini-review gives you an opportunity to analyze a couple of key concepts and papers

closer, identify, and discuss similarities and differences compared to other related fields.

The blog is a joint resource that builds on your active contribution. Each one of you is

expected to contribute with a short summary and reflection of one lecture, e.g. key points and

messages, and add a short comment to another blogpost. The comment can be a reflection, or

something you found unclear in the lecture or the literature. Blogposts and comments will be

passed on to the lecturer and course coordinators for feedback.

Criteria for assessment




12

The following grades are issued; the lower limit for each grade is expressed as a percentage of

the maximum points available:

A 95% Excellent

B 85% Very good

C 75% Good

D 65% Satisfactory



F Below 50% Poor or insufficient conduct (fail)

In addition to specific grading criteria handed out with specific assignments, the following

criteria are used for grading the final exam:

A The text clearly demonstrates independent thinking, an ability to connect key concepts presented

during the course, and to make connections beyond the immediate subject area. The text has no faults with formalia. Concepts are well-defined, correctly applied and integrated in a clear way to illustrate theoretical challenges, and real-world problems or opportunities in managing the commons, at multiple levels of social organization.

B The text demonstrates a clear ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has minor faults with formalia. Concepts are defined and correctly used, and applied in a way that illustrates theoretical challenges, or real-world problems or opportunities in managing the commons, at multiple levels of social organization.

C The text demonstrates an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has smaller faults with formalia. Concepts are defined and correctly used, and applied to illustrate both theoretical challenges, or real-world problems and opportunities in the context of adaptive governance, at multiple levels of social organization.

D The text demonstrates an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has faults with formalia. Concepts are defined and in general correctly used, and applied to illustrate both theoretical challenges, or real-world problems and opportunities in the context of governing the commons.

E The text indicates an ability to connect key concepts presented during the course. The text has faults with formalia. Concepts are defined and in general correctly used, and loosely applied to illustrate theoretical challenges, or real-world problems and opportunities in the context of governing the commons.

Reading List – readings should be done prior to lectures! * = Required reading Lecture: From institutions to governance (Victor Galaz) *Folke, C., T. Hahn, P. Olsson and J. Norberg (2005). “Adaptive Governance of Social-

Ecological Systems”, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2005. 30:441–73. *Galaz, V., P. Olsson, T. Hahn, C. Folke and U. Svedin (2008). "The Problem of Fit among

Biophysical Systems, Environmental and Resource Regimes, and Broader Governance Systems: Insights and Emerging Challenges", in Oran R. Young, Leslie A. King and Heike Schröder (eds.). Institutions and Environmental Change - Principal Findings, Applications, and Research Frontiers. The MIT Press, Cambridge. pp. 147-182.

Stoker, G. (1998). “Governance as Theory: Five Propositions”, International Social Science Journal, pp.17-28.

Lecture: Bridging organizations (Thomas Hahn) *Brown, L.D. (1991). “Bridging organizations and sustainable development”, Human

Relations 44, 807–831. *Berkes, F. (2009). “Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging

organizations and social learning”. Journal of Environmental Management, 90:1692-1702.

13

Lecture: Global Environmental Governance (Gunilla Rieschl) **NOTE: THESE READINGS WILL BE REVISED** *Andonova, L. B. and R. Mitchell, 2010. The Rescaling of Global Environmental Politics.

Annual Review of Environment and Resources 35, 255-282. *Andonova, L., M. Betsill, and H. Bulkeley, 2009. Transnational climate governance. Global

Environmental Politics. 9: 2, pp 52-73. Biermann, F. 2007. Reforming global environmental governance: From UNEP towards a

World Environment Organization. In: Lydia Swart and Estelle Perry (eds) Global Environmental Governance: Perspectives on the Current Debate. Center for UN Reform Education, May 2007, pp 103-123.

Dimitrov, R. 2010. Inside Copenhagen: the state of climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 10:2, pp 18-24.

Lecture: Innovation and learning in networks (Robin Teigland) *Wasko, MM, R Teigland, S Faraj (2009). “The provision of online public goods: examining

social structure in an electronic network of practice”, Decision Support Systems, 47: 254-265.

*Hoppe, B. and C Reinelt (2010). “Social network analysis and the evaluation of leadership networks”, The Leadership Quarterly, 21: 600-619.

Dahlander, L. and MG Magnusson (2005). “Relationships between open source software companies and communities: Observations from Nordic firms”, Research Policy 34: 481-493.

Helms et al (2010). “A Design Research Approach to Developing User Innovation Workshops in Second Life”, Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 3(1): 3-36.

Assignment: Transition, transformations and innovation systems & Lecture: by Per Olsson *Kemp, R et al (1998). Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation:

the approach of strategic niche management, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 10 (2), pp. 175-198.

*Olsson, P., L. H. Gunderson, S. R. Carpenter, P. Ryan, L. Lebel, C. Folke, and C. S. Holling. 2006. Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1): 18. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art18/

Global Networks, Governance and Global Change (Victor Galaz and Henrik Österblom) *Österblom, H., Sumaila, U.R., (2011). “Toothfish crises, actor diversity and the emergence

of compliance mechanisms in the Southern Ocean”, Global Environmental Change 21, 972–982 doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.04.013.

*Galaz, V., B. Crona, H. Österblom, P. Olsson, C. Folke (2011). “Polycentric Systems and Interacting Planetary Boundaries: Emerging Governance of Climate Change – Ocean Acidification – Marine Biodiversity”, Ecological Economics (e-View pre-print). doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.012

*Galaz, V., H. Österblom, Ö Bodin, B Crona (in prep). “Global Networks and Global change Tipping Points” (manuscript)

Galaz, V., F. Biermann, B. Crona, C. Folke et. al. (2012). “Planetary Boundaries – Exploring the Challenges for Earth System Governance”, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4:1-8.

14

Case analysis Literature Changing agricultural landscapes Bali Lansing, JS and JH Miller. 2005. Cooperation, games, and ecological feedback: Some

insights from Bali. Current Anthropology 46(2): 328-334. Lorenzen, S and RP Lorenzen. 2008: Institutionalizing the informal: Irrigation and

government intervention in Bali. Development 51(1): 77-82. Scarborough, VL; Schoenfelder JW and Lansing SJ, 2000: Early statecraft on Bali: The water

temple complex and the decentralization of the political economy. Research in Economic Anthropology 20: 299- 330.

Schmuki, A. 2009: The role of a global organization in triggering social learning: Insights from a Case Study of a World Heritage Cultural Landscape Nomination in Bali. Master’s Thesis in Ecosystems, Governance and Globalization, presented at the Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden in August 2009.

Deforestation and forest fires Amazon Boyd, E (2008) “Navigating Amazonia under Uncertainty: past present and future

environmental governance”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 27 May 2008 vol. 363 no. 1498 1911-1916.

Brondizio, ES, Ostrom, E., O. Young (2009) “Connectivity and the Governance of Multilevel Social-Ecological Systems: The Role of Social Capital”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 34: 253-278.

Foster Brown, I. (2006) “Monitoring Fires in Southwestern Amazonia Rain Forests”, Eos, Vol. 87, No. 26, 27 June 2006: 253-264.

The Economist (2010). “The worlds lungs”, http://www.economist.com/node/17093495 The Economist (2010). “Seeing the wood”, http://www.economist.com/node/17062713 Lambin, E. et al (2003). “Dynamics of Land-use and Land-cover change in tropical regions”,

Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2003. 28:205–41. Trypanosomiasis (“sleeping sickness”) Africa Berrang-Ford, L et al (2005). “Sleeping sickness in Southeastern Uguanda: a systems

approach”, Ecohealth, 2, 183-194. Smith, DH et al (1998). “Human African trypanosomiasis: an emerging public health crisis”,

British Medical Bulletin; 54 (2): 341-355. Patz J.A. et al (2004). “Unhealthy Landscapes: Policy Recommendations on land use

change and Infectious Disease Emergence”, Environmental Health Perspectives, 112(10): 1092-1098.

WHO webpage on trypanosomiasis: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs259/en/ Yamey, G. (2002). “The World’s most neglected diseases”, BMJ 2002; 325 : 176 doi:

10.1136/bmj.325.7357.176 (Published 27 July 2002): [online] http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7357/176.full

Widdus, R. (2001). “Public–private partnerships for health: their main targets, their diversity, and their future directions”, Bull. World Health Organ. vol.79 no.8 [online]: http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S0042-96862001000800006&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en

http://www.economist.com/node/17093495

http://www.economist.com/node/17062713

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs259/en/

http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7357/176.full

15

Module 8: Adaptive Management (4 hp)

Module leaders: Magnus Nyström and Henrik Österblom

Instructors: Magnus Nyström, Henrik Österblom, Thorsten Blenckner, Per Olsson, Andrew Merrie, Miriam Huitric

Brief description

The use and abuse of natural resources have resulted in a decline of ecosystem health. Despite

significant efforts, management has failed at regional and global scales. Consequently,

innovative approaches to improve ecosystem health are needed. Understanding of the social,

political, legal and economic aspects of resource management, coupled with a deep

understanding of ecology, has been advocated as being imperative for successful out-comes.

This is “Adaptive Management”.

This course will introduce students to theory, methods, case studies and practical

implementation of adaptive management. Scenarios are useful for bringing future

considerations into present decisions when prediction is not possible. Scenarios also provide

an effective tool to capture divergent and/or shared visions among multiple stakeholders of

“what” to manage, “how” and for ”whom”. It also presents an instrument that can help to

highlight obstacles and possibilities for management of social-ecological systems under great

uncertainty and in situations where the cost for management mistakes is large. Role-plays

offer one type of scenario planning.

During this course students will be actively engaged through participation in a role-play that

will be running throughout the whole course. Participants will assume the role and perspective

of different stakeholders tasked to participate in adaptive management of natural resources.

Students will also practically experience the challenges and opportunities of conducting

research during this exercise. The experiences gained through the role-play will be

continuously developed, discussed and reflected on, using case studies of adaptive

management with different degrees of social and ecological complexity. Throughout the role-

play and in the case studies presented, students will become acquainted with qualitative

interview techniques, text analysis, interpretation of data, social network analysis and the

process of leading participatory stakeholder dialogues.

In lectures, students will be exposed to a variety of case studies, presented by experts.

Students will actively participate in a role-play that will run throughout the course. Student

will independently search for literature and interpret data. Discussion seminars will be

provided throughout the course.

Module content


Week 1:

What is a role-play? Interviews Empirical data collection for social-ecological systems studies

Week 2:

What is adaptive management? Participatory observations, theories for studying social-ecological systems, text analysis and interviews

Science-policy dialogues, empirical data collection for social-ecological systems studies

Week 3:

16

How does adaptive management work in practice

Role play Designing research program on social-ecological system

Schedule - All lectures are in room 251 unless otherwise noted


Week 1: Adaptive management: introduction and preparation for role-play

MARCH Thurs 7 9:30-12:00

AM: Module introduction (MN & HÖ, 2.5 hrs)

PM: Independent literature search and analysis for role-play

Collection and interpretation of literature/data for the role-play. Reading of literature

Fri 8 9:30-12:00

AM: Interview methodology (MH, 2.5hrs)

PM: Preparation for role play



Week 2: Case studies and role play

Mon 11 9:30-12:00 13:00-15:30

AM: Role-play year 1 (session 1)

(Obligatory)

PM: Role-play year 1 (session 2)

(Obligatory)


Tues 12 9:30-12:00 13:00-15:30

AM: Adaptive management introduction and case study 1: the Great Barrier Reef. (PO, 2.5 hrs)

PM: Adaptive management case study 2: the Baltic Sea and 3: European Fisheries (HÖ, 2.5 hrs)


Wed 13

READING DAY

Collection and interpretation of literature/data for role-play. Reading of literature

Thur 14 9:30-12:00 13:00-15:30


(Obligatory)


(Obligatory)


Fri 15 9:30-12:00

AM: Adaptive management and stakeholder conflicts. Case study 4: Fisheries in Antarctica (HÖ, 2.5 hrs)



Week 3: Independent work on essay

Mon 18 9:30-12:00 13:00-15:30


(Obligatory)


(Obligatory)

Tue 19 10:00-12:00

AM: Debriefing Summary of impressions from Role-play.

17

Learning outcomes

Following the course the participants are expected to be able to:

1. Understand basic aspects of adaptive management

2. Have an empirical understanding of case studies of adaptive management

3. Understand how to apply basic methods for studying adaptive management processes

(interviews, social network analysis, text analysis)

4. Have a basic understanding of how social, political, economic and ecological contexts

influence adaptive management outcomes

5. Know how to engage in role-play and understand basic aspects of how to develop a

strategy for adaptive management within any given social-ecological context.

6. Understand basic aspects related to how to conduct scenario planning and stakeholder

dialogues.


Component Weighting (%)

Learning Outcomes

Individual report 100% 1-6

Participation in class discussions, exercises and role-play Compulsory 1-6

Module Review Compulsory

100%

Attendance of lectures and participation in all seminars is compulsory. Participation does not

only mean attendance, the participant must have prepared for and take an active role in the

seminar. The individual course evaluation at the end of the course is compulsory. Criteria for assessment




The following grades are issued, the lower limits for each grade is expressed as a percentage

of the maximum points available:

A 95% Excellent

B 85% Very good

C 75% Good

D 65% Satisfactory

Discussion of experiences, improvements for next year’s role- play. (HÖ, MN) AM: Handing out examination.

Wed 20 AM-PM Work on individual essay

Thurs 21 AM-PM Work on individual essay

Fri 22 PM: Hand in written assignment by 15.00 hrs PM: Complete module evaluation survey

18



F Below 50% Poor or insufficient conduct (fail) A Outstanding insights and understanding of the concepts and theories used within the course.

Outstanding skills in written analysis and synthesis.

B Very good insights and understanding of the concepts and theories used within the course. Very good skills in written analysis and synthesis.

C Good insights and understanding of the concepts and theories used within the course. Good skills in written analysis and synthesis.

D Show some understanding but requires further insights in concepts and theories.

E Able to refer and define concepts and theories but lack understanding.

Reading List

Week 1: Hughes et al. (2005) Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef and the Grand Canyon

World Heritage Areas. Ambio, 36, 586-592.

Week 2: Case study 1: Olsson P, Folke C., Hughes TP. (2008) Navigating the transition to ecosystem-

based management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. PNAS, 105, 9489-9494.

Case study 2: Österblom et al. (2010) Making the ecosystem approach operational - Can

regime shifts in ecological- and governance systems facilitate the transition? Marine Policy,

34, 1290-1299.

Case study 3: Österblom et al. (2011) Incentives, social–ecological feedbacks and European

fisheries. Marine Policy, 35, 568-574.

Case study 4: Österblom H, Sumalia UR. (2011) Toothfish crises, actor diversity and the

emergence of compliance mechanisms in the Southern Ocean. Global Environmental Change,

21, 972-982.

Master’s Programme: Social-Ecological Resilience for...

Documents

Transcript of Master’s Programme: Social-Ecological Resilience for...