Resilient Regions: Clarity of Concepts and Challenges to Systemic Measurement

Dealing with perturbations such as economic crises, pandemics and climate change requires an understanding of the resilience and vulnerability of regions. However, in the literature the concepts of a region and regional resilience lack clarity and are understood differently by different people. The approaches to resilience measurement also differ, with many of them addressing only part or certain aspects of a region. This paper reviews these concepts in an attempt to provide clarity of meaning and to contribute to a shared understanding of the concepts among both researchers and practitioners. The paper emphasises systems approaches to regional resilience and highlights related measurement challenges.resilience, regions, resilience measurement, regional resilience, vulnerability

Challenges, solutions and research priorities for sustainable rangelands

Australia’s rangeland communities, industries, and environment are under increasing pressures from anthropogenic activities and global changes more broadly. We conducted a horizon scan to identify and prioritise key challenges facing Australian rangelands and their communities, and outline possible avenues to address these challenges, with a particular focus on research priorities. We surveyed participants of the Australian Rangeland Society 20th Biennial Conference, held in Canberra in September 2019, before the conference and in interactive workshops during the conference, in order to identify key challenges, potential solutions, and research priorities. The feedback was broadly grouped into six themes associated with supporting local communities, managing natural capital, climate variability and change, traditional knowledge, governance, and research and development. Each theme had several sub-themes and potential solutions to ensure positive, long-term outcomes for the rangelands. The survey responses made it clear that supporting ‘resilient and sustainable rangelands that provide cultural, societal, environmental and economic outcomes simultaneously’ is of great value to stakeholders. The synthesis of survey responses combined with expert knowledge highlighted that sustaining local communities in the long term will require that the inherent social, cultural and natural capital of rangelands are managed sustainably, particularly in light of current and projected variability in climate. Establishment of guidelines and approaches to address these challenges will benefit from: (i) an increased recognition of the value and contributions of traditional knowledge and practices; (ii) development of better governance that is guided by and benefits local stakeholders; and (iii) more funding to conduct and implement strong research and development activities, with research focused on addressing critical knowledge gaps as identified by the local stakeholders. This requires strong governance with legislation and policies that work for the rangelands. We provide a framework that indicates the key knowledge gaps and how innovations may be implemented and scaled out, up and deep to achieve the resilience of Australia’s rangelands. The same principles could be adapted to address challenges in rangelands on other continents, with similar beneficial outcomes

Taking 'participatory' in participatory modelling seriously

Over the last three decades participatory research processes have informed much international development and conservation work in developing countries. Public participation is also a growing legislative requirement in natural resource and environmental management in developed countries. So far, multiple participatory approaches have been formulated and applied in different contexts, including so-called participatory modelling methods. The latter have developed alongside a growing unease and fundamental critique of the participatory approaches and their theoretical underpinnings. One of the central themes running through the critique is the naïveté with which complexities of power relations are assumed to be understood and addressed in participatory approaches. The critique also highlights the danger that participatory approaches become legitimising instruments that simply maintain and reinforce existing power relations. In this paper we engage with the critical literature in the hope of drawing lessons and requirements for participatory modelling. We also empirically evaluate participatory modelling case studies with regard to the fundamental critique. While we do not agree with some demands from the critique that imply abandoning the whole participatory enterprise, we suggest that claims to participatory modelling be taken seriously and that each claim be accompanied by critical reflection. Based on a review of the literature we suggest initial set of questions towards developing a framework for critical reflection.The evaluation research of 18 participatory modelling case-studies was part of the Agriculture et Développement Durable – Modélisation d’Accompagnement (ADD-ComMod) project, funded by the Agence Nationale de Recherche (ANR, France)

A Synthesis of Current Approaches to Traps Is Useful But Needs Rethinking for Indigenous Disadvantage and Poverty Research

Indigenous disadvantage and poverty have persisted and are set to continue into the future. Although a large amount of work describes the extent and nature of indigenous disadvantage and poverty, there is little evidence-based systems understanding of the mechanisms that keep many indigenous people in their current dire state. In such a vacuum, policy makers are left to make assumptions about the causal mechanisms. The persistence of inequality and poverty suffered by indigenous people is broadly consistent with the existence of dynamical traps as described in both the resilience and development literature. We reviewed and synthesized these bodies of literature on traps and found that although they give a good lead to a systemic and parsimonious way of exploring traps, the mechanisms suggested need significant rethinking for the indigenous context. Specifically, we recommend extending the concept of traps to encompass the possibility that they are highly resilient but undesirable states, in contrast to current notions of traps as low resilience states. We also highlight the need for close scrutiny of the boundaries of indigenous systems because of the historically public nature of indigenous lives as well as the possible conjoint existence and causal linkage between poverty- and rigidity-traps in the indigenous context

Learning from Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) programs in Sub-Saharan Africa

Food security: a global problem deeper in SSA. Globally 870 million people still chronically undernourished in 2010–12. The vast majority live in developing countries. In most countries of Sub Saharan Africa, the prevalence of undernourishment ranges from moderately high to very high. Food Security Propositions | Rodriguez et al.