What do you think?
Rate this book
Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems
Creating institutions to meet the challenge of sustainability is arguably the most important task confronting society; it is also dauntingly complex. Ecological, economic, and social elements all play a role, but despite ongoing efforts, researchers have yet to succeed in integrating the various disciplines in a way that gives adequate representation to the insights of each. Panarchy , a term devised to describe evolving hierarchical systems with multiple interrelated elements, offers an important new framework for understanding and resolving this dilemma. Panarchy is the structure in which systems, including those of nature (e.g., forests) and of humans (e.g., capitalism), as well as combined human-natural systems (e.g., institutions that govern natural resource use such as the Forest Service), are interlinked in continual adaptive cycles of growth, accumulation, restructuring, and renewal. These transformational cycles take place at scales ranging from a drop of water to the biosphere, over periods from days to geologic epochs. By understanding these cycles and their scales, researchers can identify the points at which a system is capable of accepting positive change, and can use those leverage points to foster resilience and sustainability within the system. This volume brings together leading thinkers on the subject -- including Fikret Berkes, Buz Brock, Steve Carpenter, Carl Folke, Lance Gunderson, C.S. Holling, Don Ludwig, Karl-Goran Maler, Charles Perrings, Marten Scheffer, Brian Walker, and Frances Westley -- to develop and examine the concept of panarchy and to consider how it can be applied to human, natural, and human-natural systems. Throughout, contributors seek to identify adaptive approaches to management that recognize uncertainty and encourage innovation while fostering resilience. The book is a fundamental new development in a widely acclaimed line of inquiry. It represents the first step in integrating disciplinary knowledge for the adaptive management of human-natural systems across widely divergent scales, and offers an important base of knowledge from which institutions for adaptive management can be developed. It will be an invaluable source of ideas and understanding for students, researchers, and professionals involved with ecology, conservation biology, ecological economics, environmental policy, or related fields.
536 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 2001
26 people are currently reading
423 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
March 6, 2022
This book is somewhat unique in its attempt to bridge different disciplines. It examines the connections between ecology, sociology and economics related to the concepts of resilience and sustainability. It is primarily about the explication of a particular theory - the theory of panarchy, which basically posits ideas about how connections across different scales ( both in time and space) affect resilience. While there are moments where the reading is tough if you do not have a background in all three disciplines ( the mathematical models were particularly tough for me), the book is still more than worth persevering with. For me, it was one of those rare books which totally changed the way I think about how the world works. It deepened my understanding of what makes ecosystems (and social and economic systems) resilient and exposed for me a number of misconceptions I had held all my life up to this point.
It is difficult to work in such a transdisciplinary way and occasionally the connections between the three disciplines could be tighter. This does not detract at all from the overall development of idea, however. It is also difficult to establish coherence in a book where chapters are contributed by a variety of authors. This is achieved superbly in this volume, however. It is obvious that the authors of each chapter are familiar with the content of the other chapters, and for the most part the book reads as if it were written by a single author, with the development of ideas across the various chapters being relatively seamless.
I will definitely return to this book, and having read it, I plan to go on and read other books by the researchers in the Resilience Alliance network of researchers.
It is difficult to work in such a transdisciplinary way and occasionally the connections between the three disciplines could be tighter. This does not detract at all from the overall development of idea, however. It is also difficult to establish coherence in a book where chapters are contributed by a variety of authors. This is achieved superbly in this volume, however. It is obvious that the authors of each chapter are familiar with the content of the other chapters, and for the most part the book reads as if it were written by a single author, with the development of ideas across the various chapters being relatively seamless.
I will definitely return to this book, and having read it, I plan to go on and read other books by the researchers in the Resilience Alliance network of researchers.
October 11, 2014
Panarchies and the Network of Human Settlements
Panarchy describes a cycle of a complex system where it first grows (r), then becomes conservative (K), eventually collapses (W), and reorganizes (a) to grow again in another period. During this cycle, the system’s two properties, connectedness and potential, change simultaneously as it shift from one phrase to another. This periodic process have been found in both ecological and social systems. Using the conceptual framework of panarchy (Gunderson and Holling, 2002), we can review the crystallizations and evolutions of human settlements (Mumford, 1961) from a different perspective.
Human settlements are the spatial manifestations of human connections. Settlements grow as human society seeks higher degree of connectedness. At the hunting-gathering epoch, a tribe established connections and lived together in caves. The settlements were still scattered across the geographic regions. After entering the agricultural epoch, people were connected at larger scale and started to formed villages, cities, or even kingdoms. Within a kingdom, the settlements were connected into a hierarchical structure. After industrial revolution, countries around the world started to connect together into a bipolar network. On one hand, the colonies maintain the previous hierarchical structure and only connect to their colonial master countries, exporting natural resources and labors. On the other hand, the western countries started to establish a mutually connected network that conduces more complicated industrial chains. Into the globalization epoch, colonies gained independent and received the industrial manufacturing lines, while the cities in developed countries shifted toward services-oriented economies.
During each epoch, as a society becomes more connected, the cost to maintain its complexity goes up, until it eventually exceeds the benefits from higher connectedness and leads to a collapse (Tainter, 1990). After collapse, resources in the society becomes available again for it to reorganize and regrow into another panarchy cycle. This cycle is common is every epoch: tribes fight each other for space and resources; rebellions overthrow kingdoms; colonies fight for independence and western countries start wold-wars, and so on. However, if new technologies or new social organizations become available, it is possible for societies to jump out of this cycle, and establish a new paradigm of connection at a larger scale. With higher degree of connectedness at larger scale, resources can be traded and costs can be outsourced, in order to avoid collapse at the smaller scale. Each settlement can depend on wider range of resources, and thus become more resilience (Adger, 2000). For instance, after tribes evolve into villages or cities, and then connect into a kingdom, the central regime can coordinate the flows of resources among different regions, helping them to survive resource depletions or extreme climatic conditions. After western countries industrialize and establish oversea colonies and industrial chains, they can rely on not only domestic resources but also foreign ones. As can be seen from different epochs, connections at larger scale can enhance the resilience of each region at smaller scale, and thus enables the connectedness and complexity to rise to a higher level.
Nowadays, the process of globalization is pushing our global society toward a fully connected network. Based on the logic discussed above, every region of the globe should be more resilient than before. However, there are several concerns or questions about this new paradigm:
1. The costs of maintaining a global complex network also increase. If the costs exceed the benefits at the global scale, it will lead to a global collapse. At this time, there is no another higher level of connectedness for us to evolve to, after another collapse.
2. Some costs and ecological services are nontransferable. Those costs include air pollution from congested traffic and lack of space due to over-crowded population.
3. Exchange of resources are mainly based on short-term market values, rather than long-term ecological values. The increased resilience from higher connectedness is based on the transfers of resources from more ecologically sensitive regions to those less sensitive ones. However, if these transfers are driven by economic incentives rather than aiming to reduce ecological costs, the redistribution of resources in the global network cannot increase resilience. Adaptive governance at different scales, both regional and global, are required, in order to adjust the transfers of resources.
4. Extreme events under climate change may undermine the infrastructures for transferring costs. The regional scale of transfer depends on roads and railways, while the global scale of transfer heavily rely on shipping (90% of world trade is carried by international shipping industry). Climate change increases crisis in coastal regions and undermine transfer at global level.
References:
Gunderson, Lance H. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island press, 2001.
Mumford, Lewis. The City in history. Its origins, its transformation, and its prospects. 1961.
Tainter, Joseph. The collapse of complex societies. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Adger, W. Neil. "Social and ecological resilience: are they related?." Progress in human geography 24.3 (2000): 347-364.
Panarchy describes a cycle of a complex system where it first grows (r), then becomes conservative (K), eventually collapses (W), and reorganizes (a) to grow again in another period. During this cycle, the system’s two properties, connectedness and potential, change simultaneously as it shift from one phrase to another. This periodic process have been found in both ecological and social systems. Using the conceptual framework of panarchy (Gunderson and Holling, 2002), we can review the crystallizations and evolutions of human settlements (Mumford, 1961) from a different perspective.
Human settlements are the spatial manifestations of human connections. Settlements grow as human society seeks higher degree of connectedness. At the hunting-gathering epoch, a tribe established connections and lived together in caves. The settlements were still scattered across the geographic regions. After entering the agricultural epoch, people were connected at larger scale and started to formed villages, cities, or even kingdoms. Within a kingdom, the settlements were connected into a hierarchical structure. After industrial revolution, countries around the world started to connect together into a bipolar network. On one hand, the colonies maintain the previous hierarchical structure and only connect to their colonial master countries, exporting natural resources and labors. On the other hand, the western countries started to establish a mutually connected network that conduces more complicated industrial chains. Into the globalization epoch, colonies gained independent and received the industrial manufacturing lines, while the cities in developed countries shifted toward services-oriented economies.
During each epoch, as a society becomes more connected, the cost to maintain its complexity goes up, until it eventually exceeds the benefits from higher connectedness and leads to a collapse (Tainter, 1990). After collapse, resources in the society becomes available again for it to reorganize and regrow into another panarchy cycle. This cycle is common is every epoch: tribes fight each other for space and resources; rebellions overthrow kingdoms; colonies fight for independence and western countries start wold-wars, and so on. However, if new technologies or new social organizations become available, it is possible for societies to jump out of this cycle, and establish a new paradigm of connection at a larger scale. With higher degree of connectedness at larger scale, resources can be traded and costs can be outsourced, in order to avoid collapse at the smaller scale. Each settlement can depend on wider range of resources, and thus become more resilience (Adger, 2000). For instance, after tribes evolve into villages or cities, and then connect into a kingdom, the central regime can coordinate the flows of resources among different regions, helping them to survive resource depletions or extreme climatic conditions. After western countries industrialize and establish oversea colonies and industrial chains, they can rely on not only domestic resources but also foreign ones. As can be seen from different epochs, connections at larger scale can enhance the resilience of each region at smaller scale, and thus enables the connectedness and complexity to rise to a higher level.
Nowadays, the process of globalization is pushing our global society toward a fully connected network. Based on the logic discussed above, every region of the globe should be more resilient than before. However, there are several concerns or questions about this new paradigm:
1. The costs of maintaining a global complex network also increase. If the costs exceed the benefits at the global scale, it will lead to a global collapse. At this time, there is no another higher level of connectedness for us to evolve to, after another collapse.
2. Some costs and ecological services are nontransferable. Those costs include air pollution from congested traffic and lack of space due to over-crowded population.
3. Exchange of resources are mainly based on short-term market values, rather than long-term ecological values. The increased resilience from higher connectedness is based on the transfers of resources from more ecologically sensitive regions to those less sensitive ones. However, if these transfers are driven by economic incentives rather than aiming to reduce ecological costs, the redistribution of resources in the global network cannot increase resilience. Adaptive governance at different scales, both regional and global, are required, in order to adjust the transfers of resources.
4. Extreme events under climate change may undermine the infrastructures for transferring costs. The regional scale of transfer depends on roads and railways, while the global scale of transfer heavily rely on shipping (90% of world trade is carried by international shipping industry). Climate change increases crisis in coastal regions and undermine transfer at global level.
References:
Gunderson, Lance H. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island press, 2001.
Mumford, Lewis. The City in history. Its origins, its transformation, and its prospects. 1961.
Tainter, Joseph. The collapse of complex societies. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Adger, W. Neil. "Social and ecological resilience: are they related?." Progress in human geography 24.3 (2000): 347-364.
June 21, 2008
I heard co-author Gunderson speak at the Quivira Coalition meeting in Albuquerque and I was sold on this concept of panarchy and dynamic systems theory. Not a quick read, but a deep one, and the insights apply everywhere.
December 23, 2025
One of the most difficult books I’ve ever read, but it gave me language for concepts I would have otherwise struggled to illustrate.
October 22, 2015
3.5 stars: The premise of panarchy, that a nested set of adaptive cycles (that aggregate resources and periodically restructure systems in response to change) are arranged as a dynamic hierarchy in space and time, for social, economic, political, and environmental systems is presented. The book attempts to integrate the novel theories of complexity, emergence, and chaos with more practical disciplines (ecology, social science, economics) in an attempt to shift the dominant paradigm from single stable state to adaptive management. This is a rather revolutionary concept: that complex systems are inherently dynamic; social, political, and environmental management systems that attempt to constrain that dynamism to achieve a certain end sow the seeds of their own destruction as they tend to decrease resiliency. My main problem was with the execution. The authors beat this concept to death, rehashing the concept from scratch for different types of systems. What could have been a fascinating read became tedious. I must also note that although I found the beginning particularly interesting, those who lack a background in complex systems theory may find it a bit overwhelming. That's not to say that it is unclear or impenetrable for the nonexpert, but the authors do offer some concepts as givens without fully providing background or explanation, jumping directly to the implication for the theory of panarchy.
January 30, 2008
This is one of the pre-eminent books in my academic library, one of the highest quality both within ecology and countless other fields. Each chapters is presented by different authors, meaning that there is a bit of variablity in terms of tone and skill in writing. The basic framework of adaptive cycles is presented, with a few chapters devoted to pointing out the limitations of the theory. This is followed by case studies which illustrate the potential uses of the theory in economics, ecology and sociology. The connections between the disciplines are made clear and useful definitions are given. Past that are a variety of scenarios of global trends related to resiliance/adaptive cycle theories. There is even a chapter explaining the career and works of a specific individual resource manager, providing analysis of the success and the failures of his past works in the real world.
I can hardly recommend this enough for anyone interested in ecology, systems, economics, sociology or general environmental issues. There is a website full of related information at http://www.resalliance.org
I can hardly recommend this enough for anyone interested in ecology, systems, economics, sociology or general environmental issues. There is a website full of related information at http://www.resalliance.org
March 8, 2009
Every time I start reading this book, I get angry and put it down. My advisor is a huge fan of Panarchy Theory, and for the life of me, I cannot figure out why. I could be wrong on this, but it seems to me that Robert May's statement, "Too often, an 'emergent phenomenon' means little more than 'I've no clue what is going on, but it looks kind of interesting'", describes the foundation of Panarchy Theory rather well. Even my lab-mates shudder at the mention of Panarchy.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews