光有复原力是不够的:建立更有意义的牧场适应科学

IF 2.4 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Hailey Wilmer , Daniel B. Ferguson , Maude Dinan , Eric Thacker , Peter B. Adler , Kathryn Bills Walsh , John B. Bradford , Mark Brunson , Justin D. Derner , Emile Elias , Andrew Felton , Curtis A. Gray , Christina Greene , Mitchel P. McClaran , Robert K. Shriver , Mitch Stephenson , Katharine Nash Suding
{"title":"光有复原力是不够的:建立更有意义的牧场适应科学","authors":"Hailey Wilmer ,&nbsp;Daniel B. Ferguson ,&nbsp;Maude Dinan ,&nbsp;Eric Thacker ,&nbsp;Peter B. Adler ,&nbsp;Kathryn Bills Walsh ,&nbsp;John B. Bradford ,&nbsp;Mark Brunson ,&nbsp;Justin D. Derner ,&nbsp;Emile Elias ,&nbsp;Andrew Felton ,&nbsp;Curtis A. Gray ,&nbsp;Christina Greene ,&nbsp;Mitchel P. McClaran ,&nbsp;Robert K. Shriver ,&nbsp;Mitch Stephenson ,&nbsp;Katharine Nash Suding","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Rangeland ecosystems, and their managers, face the growing urgency of climate change impacts. Researchers are therefore seeking integrative social-ecological frameworks that can enhance adaptation by managers to these climate change dynamics through tighter linkages among multiple scientific disciplines and manager contexts. Social-ecological framings, including resilience and vulnerability, are popular in such efforts, but their potential to inform meaningful rangeland adaptation science is limited by traditional disciplinary silos. Here, we provide reflective lessons learned from a multidisciplinary Rangelands, Ranching, and Resilience (R3) project on U.S. western rangelands that addressed 1) biophysical science projections of forage production under future climate scenarios, 2) ranchers’ views of resilience using social science methods, and 3) outreach efforts coordinated through extension professionals. Despite the project's initial intentions, human dimensions and ecological researchers largely worked in parallel sub-teams during the project, rather than weaving their expertise together with managers. The R3 project was multidisciplinary, but it provides a case study on lessons learned to suggest how social and ecological researchers can move towards approaches that transcend individual disciplines. Transdisciplinary science and management in rangelands requires more than just conceptual social-ecological frameworks. Additional methodological concepts need to include: 1) relationship building; 2) shared meaning making; and 3) a commitment to continual conversations and learning, or staying with the trouble, following Haraway (2016). If the goal is to address meaningful rangeland adaptation science rather than just produce academic products, researchers, outreach professionals, and rangeland-based communities should address a series of critical troubling questions. In the process of addressing these, deeper engagement among and beyond disciplines will occur as relationship building, shared meaning, and continual conversations and learning facilitate staying with the trouble.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"95 ","pages":"Pages 56-67"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resilience Is Not Enough: Toward a More Meaningful Rangeland Adaptation Science\",\"authors\":\"Hailey Wilmer ,&nbsp;Daniel B. Ferguson ,&nbsp;Maude Dinan ,&nbsp;Eric Thacker ,&nbsp;Peter B. Adler ,&nbsp;Kathryn Bills Walsh ,&nbsp;John B. Bradford ,&nbsp;Mark Brunson ,&nbsp;Justin D. Derner ,&nbsp;Emile Elias ,&nbsp;Andrew Felton ,&nbsp;Curtis A. Gray ,&nbsp;Christina Greene ,&nbsp;Mitchel P. McClaran ,&nbsp;Robert K. Shriver ,&nbsp;Mitch Stephenson ,&nbsp;Katharine Nash Suding\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rama.2024.04.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Rangeland ecosystems, and their managers, face the growing urgency of climate change impacts. Researchers are therefore seeking integrative social-ecological frameworks that can enhance adaptation by managers to these climate change dynamics through tighter linkages among multiple scientific disciplines and manager contexts. Social-ecological framings, including resilience and vulnerability, are popular in such efforts, but their potential to inform meaningful rangeland adaptation science is limited by traditional disciplinary silos. Here, we provide reflective lessons learned from a multidisciplinary Rangelands, Ranching, and Resilience (R3) project on U.S. western rangelands that addressed 1) biophysical science projections of forage production under future climate scenarios, 2) ranchers’ views of resilience using social science methods, and 3) outreach efforts coordinated through extension professionals. Despite the project's initial intentions, human dimensions and ecological researchers largely worked in parallel sub-teams during the project, rather than weaving their expertise together with managers. The R3 project was multidisciplinary, but it provides a case study on lessons learned to suggest how social and ecological researchers can move towards approaches that transcend individual disciplines. Transdisciplinary science and management in rangelands requires more than just conceptual social-ecological frameworks. Additional methodological concepts need to include: 1) relationship building; 2) shared meaning making; and 3) a commitment to continual conversations and learning, or staying with the trouble, following Haraway (2016). If the goal is to address meaningful rangeland adaptation science rather than just produce academic products, researchers, outreach professionals, and rangeland-based communities should address a series of critical troubling questions. In the process of addressing these, deeper engagement among and beyond disciplines will occur as relationship building, shared meaning, and continual conversations and learning facilitate staying with the trouble.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"volume\":\"95 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 56-67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000551\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

牧场生态系统及其管理者面临着日益紧迫的气候变化影响。因此,研究人员正在寻求综合性的社会生态框架,通过加强多个科学学科和管理者之间的联系,提高管理者对这些气候变化动态的适应能力。包括恢复力和脆弱性在内的社会生态框架在此类研究中很受欢迎,但由于传统的学科孤岛,这些框架在为有意义的牧场适应科学提供信息方面的潜力受到了限制。在此,我们提供了美国西部牧场多学科牧场、放牧与恢复力(R3)项目的反思性经验教训,该项目涉及:1)未来气候情景下牧草生产的生物物理科学预测;2)牧场主使用社会科学方法对恢复力的看法;3)通过推广专业人员协调的外联工作。尽管项目的初衷是这样的,但在项目期间,人文和生态研究人员基本上是在平行的子团队中工作,而不是将他们的专业知识与管理人员结合在一起。R3 项目是一个多学科项目,但它提供了一个吸取经验教训的案例研究,建议社会和生态研究人员如何采用超越单个学科的方法。牧场的跨学科科学和管理需要的不仅仅是概念性的社会生态框架。更多的方法论概念需要包括1) 关系建设;2) 共同的意义建构;3) 致力于持续的对话和学习,或者说,按照哈拉维(Haraway,2016 年)的说法,与困难共存。如果目标是解决有意义的牧场适应科学问题,而不仅仅是生产学术产品,那么研究人员、外联专业人员和牧场社区就应该解决一系列关键的棘手问题。在解决这些问题的过程中,随着关系的建立、意义的共享以及持续的对话和学习,学科之间和学科之外的更深层次的参与将会产生,从而促进与问题保持联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resilience Is Not Enough: Toward a More Meaningful Rangeland Adaptation Science

Rangeland ecosystems, and their managers, face the growing urgency of climate change impacts. Researchers are therefore seeking integrative social-ecological frameworks that can enhance adaptation by managers to these climate change dynamics through tighter linkages among multiple scientific disciplines and manager contexts. Social-ecological framings, including resilience and vulnerability, are popular in such efforts, but their potential to inform meaningful rangeland adaptation science is limited by traditional disciplinary silos. Here, we provide reflective lessons learned from a multidisciplinary Rangelands, Ranching, and Resilience (R3) project on U.S. western rangelands that addressed 1) biophysical science projections of forage production under future climate scenarios, 2) ranchers’ views of resilience using social science methods, and 3) outreach efforts coordinated through extension professionals. Despite the project's initial intentions, human dimensions and ecological researchers largely worked in parallel sub-teams during the project, rather than weaving their expertise together with managers. The R3 project was multidisciplinary, but it provides a case study on lessons learned to suggest how social and ecological researchers can move towards approaches that transcend individual disciplines. Transdisciplinary science and management in rangelands requires more than just conceptual social-ecological frameworks. Additional methodological concepts need to include: 1) relationship building; 2) shared meaning making; and 3) a commitment to continual conversations and learning, or staying with the trouble, following Haraway (2016). If the goal is to address meaningful rangeland adaptation science rather than just produce academic products, researchers, outreach professionals, and rangeland-based communities should address a series of critical troubling questions. In the process of addressing these, deeper engagement among and beyond disciplines will occur as relationship building, shared meaning, and continual conversations and learning facilitate staying with the trouble.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rangeland Ecology & Management
Rangeland Ecology & Management 农林科学-环境科学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Rangeland Ecology & Management publishes all topics-including ecology, management, socioeconomic and policy-pertaining to global rangelands. The journal''s mission is to inform academics, ecosystem managers and policy makers of science-based information to promote sound rangeland stewardship. Author submissions are published in five manuscript categories: original research papers, high-profile forum topics, concept syntheses, as well as research and technical notes. Rangelands represent approximately 50% of the Earth''s land area and provision multiple ecosystem services for large human populations. This expansive and diverse land area functions as coupled human-ecological systems. Knowledge of both social and biophysical system components and their interactions represent the foundation for informed rangeland stewardship. Rangeland Ecology & Management uniquely integrates information from multiple system components to address current and pending challenges confronting global rangelands.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信