The resilience of social and ecological systems: taking account of uncertainty for development
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.19182/agritrop/00003Mots-clés
socio-ecosystem, ComMod, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, decision support, Sustainable Development Goals, civil society, regional planning, participatory method, change, natural resource management, companion modelling, path dependenceRésumé
Version française de l'article
The development and humanitarian community has established its own school of thought on resilience in order to link its emergency actions with its medium- and long-term development strategies. Intervention contexts are becoming increasingly uncertain and complex, raising new challenges that need to be addressed. The school of thought on social and ecological system resilience can provide complementary approaches to help understand the intervention context and the multiple dimensions of challenges, as well as to develop and assess adaptation pathways. These approaches enable accounting of ecological dynamics and interactions among social groups, provide a diversity of knowledge and potential development pathways and, ultimately, support societal transformation. Collaboration between these two schools of thought would provide valuable opportunities.
Références
Authors' publications
Barnaud C., Promburom T., Trébuil G., Bousquet F., 2007. An evolving simulation/gaming process to facilitate adaptive watershed management in northern mountainous Thailand. Simulation and Gaming 38 (3): 398-420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878107300670
Bousquet F., Botta A., Alinovi L., Barreteau O., Bossio D., Brown K., Caron P., Cury P., D’Errico M., DeClerck F., Dessard H., Enfors Kautsky E., Fabricius C., Folke C., Fortmann L., Hubert B., Magda D., Mathevet R., Norgaard R.B., Quinlan A., Staver C., 2016. Resilience and development: mobilizing for transformation. Ecology and Society 21 (3): 40. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08754-210340
Mathevet R., Bousquet F., 2014. Résilience et environnement : penser les changements socio-écologiques. Paris, Buchet/Chastel, 176 p. ISBN 978-2-283-02736-3.
Rives F., Antona M., Aubert S., 2012. Social-ecological functions and vulnerability framework to analyze forest policy reforms. Ecology and Society 17 (4): 21. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05182-170421
Vonthron S., Dury S., Fallot A., Alpha A., Bousquet F., 2016. L’intégration des concepts de résilience dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire : regards croisés. Cahiers Agricultures 25 (6): 64001. https://doi.org/10.1051/cagri/2016039
Other references
Béné C., Headey D., Haddad L., von Grebmer K., 2016. Is resilience a useful concept in the context of food security and nutrition programmes? Some conceptual and practical considerations. Food security 8 (1): 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0526-x
ComMod, The Companion Modelling approach. https://www.commod.org/en
Endfield G.H., 2012. The resilience and adaptive capacity of social-environmental systems in colonial Mexico. PNAS 109 (10): 3676-3681. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114831109
European Commission. Resilience. https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/resilience_en
Global Alliance for Resilience (AGIR) Sahel and West Africa. http://www.food-security.net/en/
Lallau B., 2011. La résilience, moyen et fin d’un développement durable ? Éthique et économique/Ethics and Economics 8 (1): 168-185. http://hdl.handle.net/1866/4589
Resilience Alliance. https://www.resalliance.org/
Téléchargements
-
Résumé837
-
PDF 28
Publié
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Chaque numéro est mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 : Attribution - 4.0 International 
