Examining resilience and vulnerability as concepts conditional upon human values: a review

Whilst there has been progress in understanding the role that values play in determinations of vulnerability and resilience, I suggest some key points continue to be overlooked. I offer three propositions to describe how values underpin such concepts, summarised as ‘no fixed characterization’, ‘no fixed relationships’ and ‘no fixed trends’. These propositions are not new and have been made in other contexts. Based on a literature review of vulnerability and resilience in the global environmental change area, I elaborate on how these propositions are not adequately accommodated, in particular in relation to ideas of biophysical and social vulnerability, specified versus general resilience, and assignments of desired trend direction (increasing resilience or decreasing vulnerability). I conclude that irrespective of the concept label, characterisations and assessments of ecosystems and their attendant change are inescapably dependent on values.Environmental Economics and Policy,

A systems approach to liveability and sustainability: Defining terms and mapping relationships to link desires with ecological opportunities and constraints

I offer a protocol for assessing the sustainability of liveability. This protocol draws on a framework developed to assess vulnerability, and offers two key pertinent features. These are (a) a capacity to incorporate multiple and shifting stakeholder values, and (b) a means of moving from expressions of liveability to underlying ecological attributes that deliver or constrain system change. The applicability of these features to both assessing the sustainability of liveability, and a reappraisal given system change are illustrated using data from a study site in the French Alps. The central place of values intrudes into liveability and sustainability so as to complicate the situation. Even so, the protocol presented here is able to ground the abstractions and equivocation in a transparent and explicit set of announcements. Laying the steps out in the open allows for consistency in comparison and replication without artificially removing the labile flexibility embedded in liveability and sustainability

Examining resilience and vulnerability as concepts conditional upon human values: a review

Whilst there has been progress in understanding the role that values play in determinations of vulnerability and resilience, I suggest some key points continue to be overlooked. I offer three propositions to describe how values underpin such concepts, summarised as ‘no fixed characterization’, ‘no fixed relationships’ and ‘no fixed trends’. These propositions are not new and have been made in other contexts. Based on a literature review of vulnerability and resilience in the global environmental change area, I elaborate on how these propositions are not adequately accommodated, in particular in relation to ideas of biophysical and social vulnerability, specified versus general resilience, and assignments of desired trend direction (increasing resilience or decreasing vulnerability). I conclude that irrespective of the concept label, characterisations and assessments of ecosystems and their attendant change are inescapably dependent on values

Examining resilience and vulnerability as concepts conditional upon human values: a review

Whilst there has been progress in understanding the role that values play in determinations of vulnerability and resilience, I suggest some key points continue to be overlooked. I offer three propositions to describe how values underpin such concepts, summarised as ‘no fixed characterization’, ‘no fixed relationships’ and ‘no fixed trends’. These propositions are not new and have been made in other contexts. Based on a literature review of vulnerability and resilience in the global environmental change area, I elaborate on how these propositions are not adequately accommodated, in particular in relation to ideas of biophysical and social vulnerability, specified versus general resilience, and assignments of desired trend direction (increasing resilience or decreasing vulnerability). I conclude that irrespective of the concept label, characterisations and assessments of ecosystems and their attendant change are inescapably dependent on values.

A systems approach to livability and sustainability: defining terms and mapping relationships to link desires with ecological opportunities and constraints.

I offer a protocol for assessing the sustainability of livability. This protocol draws on a framework developed to assess vulnerability, and offers two key pertinent features.  These are (a) a capacity to incorporate multiple and shifting stakeholder values, and (b) a means of moving from expressions of livability to underlying ecological attributes that deliver or constrain system change. The applicability of these features to both assessing the sustainability of livability, and a reappraisal given system change are illustrated using data from a study site in the French Alps. The central place of values intrudes into livability and sustainability so as to complicate the situation. Even so, the protocol presented here is able to ground the abstractions and equivocation in a transparent and explicit set of announcements. Laying the steps out in the open allows for consistency in comparison and replication without artificially removing the labile flexibility embedded in livability and sustainability.

Land-use and climate change within assessments of biodiversity change: A review

Projected changes in biodiversity are likely inadequately estimated when climate and land-use change effects are examined in isolation. A review of studies of the effects of these drivers singly and in combination highlights little discussed complexities in revising these estimates. In addition to considering interactions, different characterisations of climate change, land-use change and biodiversity greatly influence estimates. Habitat loss leading to decreased species richness is the most common land-use change and biodiversity relationship considered with less attention being given to other land-use changes (e.g. other conversions, fragmentation, different management intensities) and biodiversity characterisations and responses (e.g. selected groups of species, increased species richness). Characterisations of more complex relationships between climate change, land-use change and biodiversity however are currently limited by a lack of process understanding, data availability and inherent scenarios uncertainties. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved