Theoretical frameworks for the analysis of social–ecological systems

Although the growing field of research on social–ecological systems (SESs) deals with some of the most important questions of our time, the study of SESs lacks an overarching theoretical framework. The development of such a framework is desirable because it would greatly improve our ability to generalize from individual case studies, to distinguish important from less important results, and ultimately to draw on the power of the scientific method to predict the consequence of management and policy interventions and to build greater resilience in SESs. Existing frameworks for the analysis of SESs can be grouped into five categories: (1) hypothesis-oriented frameworks; (2) assessment-oriented frameworks; (3) action-oriented frameworks; (4) problem-oriented frameworks; and (5) theory-oriented or overarching frameworks. Focusing on the fifth category, theory-oriented frameworks, seven assessment criteria are proposed that a satisfactory framework should meet: (1) it should provide a clear way of linking social and ecological systems and be strong in both disciplines; (2) it should be supported by rigorous empirical studies, key theories should meet Popper’s falsifiability criterion, and frameworks should include translation modes that allow theory to be connected to empirical observations, and vice-versa; (3) frameworks should offer insights into causality, ideally being based on first principles, and should offer clear statements of cause and effect; (4) frameworks should deal with the dynamic aspects of SESs and the nature of change through time, as well as with the spatial nature of SES and spatial variation; (5) frameworks should build on previous frameworks and, ideally, should be able explain their weaknesses and/or incorporate their strengths; (6) frameworks for SESs should be able to cope with, and offer connections between, complementary perspectives and different epistemologies; and (7) frameworks should provide direction for the study of SESs by suggesting or guiding new empirical studies that will advance our theoretical understanding of SESs. Illustrative examples are offered from eight existing frameworks that meet some of these criteria, but highlight the fact that no existing framework meets all the criteria well. The development of a stronger theoretical framework remains an important goal for SES theory

Vulnerability and adaptation of US shellfisheries to ocean acidification

Ocean acidification is a global, long-term problem whose ultimate solution requires carbon dioxide reduction at a scope and scale that will take decades to accomplish successfully. Until that is achieved, feasible and locally relevant adaptation and mitigation measures are needed. To help to prioritize societal responses to ocean acidification, we present a spatially explicit, multi-disciplinary vulnerability analysis of coastal human communities in the United States. We focus our analysis on shelled mollusc harvests, which are likely to be harmed by ocean acidification. Our results highlight US regions most vulnerable to ocean acidification (and why), important knowledge and information gaps, and opportunities to adapt through local actions. The research illustrates the benefits of integrating natural and social sciences to identify actions and other opportunities while policy, stakeholders and scientists are still in relatively early stages of developing research plans and responses to ocean acidification