IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v23y2021i1d10.1007_s10668-020-00590-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using social–ecological inventory and group model building for resilience assessment to climate change in a network governance setting: a case study from Ikel watershed in Moldova

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Ciobanu

    (Boğaziçi University)

  • Ali Kerem Saysel

    (Boğaziçi University)

Abstract

Climate change risks threaten social–ecological systems (SESs) across the globe. Efforts are increasingly focusing on reducing vulnerabilities of SES to climate change. Scientists and practitioners of resilience assessment have been developing frameworks to conduct integrated analyses of social–ecological systems. Such frameworks would ideally lead to a stronger commitment of various groups of stakeholders to act toward building the resilience of the system in focus. In this context, we explore and present in this paper how two sequential processes: social–ecological inventory (SEI) and group model building (GMB) have been employed to assess the resilience to climate change of Ikel watershed in the Republic of Moldova. The two processes come from two related fields: resilience and system dynamics. They have many things in common, but have not been combined much in the literature thus far. The methodology is being applied in two stages: for identifying vulnerabilities and for building the conceptual model. We find that SEI and GMB can be used together smoothly, adding value to both system dynamicists and resilience practitioners. We conclude that SEI is a valuable addition to GMB by enhancing stakeholder engagement for resilience building in a network governance setting. Similarly, employment of the GMB practice and vocabulary added value to resilience assessment by providing a conceptual dynamic feedback model. This conceptual model can be further built upon to develop a computer simulation model for testing of various policy options. The paper offers resilience practitioners an approach for participatory resilience assessment and the system dynamicists an approach for GMB practice in network governance settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Ciobanu & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2021. "Using social–ecological inventory and group model building for resilience assessment to climate change in a network governance setting: a case study from Ikel watershed in Moldova," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1065-1085, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:23:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-020-00590-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-020-00590-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-020-00590-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-020-00590-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gordon, L. J. & Enfors, E. I., 2008. "Land degradation, ecosystem services and resilience of smallholder farmers in Makanya Catchment, Tanzania," IWMI Books, Reports H041592, International Water Management Institute.
    2. Barnett, Jon, 2001. "Adapting to Climate Change in Pacific Island Countries: The Problem of Uncertainty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 977-993, June.
    3. Fidrmuc, Jan, 2003. "Economic reform, democracy and growth during post-communist transition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 583-604, September.
    4. Jouni Korhonen & Thomas P. Seager, 2008. "Beyond eco‐efficiency: a resilience perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(7), pages 411-419, November.
    5. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & Hugo Herrera, 2017. "From Metaphor to Practice: Operationalizing the Analysis of Resilience Using System Dynamics Modelling," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 444-462, July.
    6. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    7. Fabrice Renaud & Jörn Birkmann & Marion Damm & Gilberto Gallopín, 2010. "Understanding multiple thresholds of coupled social–ecological systems exposed to natural hazards as external shocks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 55(3), pages 749-763, December.
    8. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    9. Scott, Rodney James, 2019. "Explaining how group model building supports enduring agreement," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(6), pages 783-806, November.
    10. Sterman, John., 1994. "Learning in and about complex systems," Working papers 3660-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marleen H. F. McCardle‐Keurentjes & Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette & Jac A. M. Vennix & Eric Jacobs, 2018. "Potential benefits of model use in group model building: insights from an experimental investigation," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 354-384, January.
    2. Shankar Aswani & Ingrid Putten & Sara Miñarro, 2017. "Environmental and social recovery asymmetries to large-scale disturbances in small island communities," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 86(1), pages 241-262, March.
    3. Paulo Gonçalves & Paolo Ferrari & Luca Crivelli & Emiliano Albanese, 2023. "Model‐informed health system reorganization during emergencies," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(5), pages 1323-1344, May.
    4. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James C.R. & Ware, Dan & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    5. Lu, Jinfeng & Dimov, Dimo, 2023. "A system dynamics modelling of entrepreneurship and growth within firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3).
    6. Eloi Laurent & Jean Jouzel, 2018. "The Well-being Transition: Measuring what counts to protect what matters," Sciences Po publications 35, Sciences Po.
    7. Rode, Martin & Gwartney, James D., 2012. "Does democratization facilitate economic liberalization?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 607-619.
    8. Moeliono, Moira & Brockhaus, Maria & Gallemore, Caleb & Dwisatrio, Bimo & Maharani, Cynthia D. & Muharrom, Efrian & Pham, Thuy Thu, 2020. "REDD+ in Indonesia: A new mode of governance or just another project?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Olza Donazar, Luis & Montero Eseverri, Eduardo & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "The challenges of coordinating forest owners for joint management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 100-109.
    10. Tapio Riepponen & Mikko Moilanen & Jaakko Simonen, 2023. "Themes of resilience in the economics literature: A topic modeling approach," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 326-356, April.
    11. Busby, Joshua & Smith, Todd G. & Krishnan, Nisha & Wight, Charles & Vallejo-Gutierrez, Santiago, 2018. "In harm's way: Climate security vulnerability in Asia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 88-118.
    12. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Martin G. Kocher & Fangfang Tan & Jing Yu, 2018. "Providing Global Public Goods: Electoral Delegation And Cooperation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 381-397, January.
    14. Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Amadou Sidibé, 2023. "Observations from a system dynamics modeling field school in Mali," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(1), pages 80-94, January.
    15. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Jorge M. Streb & Gustavo Torrens, 2011. "Meaningful talk," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 443, Universidad del CEMA, revised May 2017.
    17. Day Yang Liu & Wen Chun Tsai & Pei Leen Liu & Chung Yi Fang, 2021. "Determinants of sales revenue in innovation diffusion effects of Taiwan sports lottery during the FIFA World Cup 2018," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(4), pages 43-58, June.
    18. Pauline Grosjean & Claudia Senik, 2011. "Democracy, Market Liberalization, and Political Preferences," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(1), pages 365-381, February.
    19. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    20. Jan Babecky & Tomas Havranek, 2013. "Structural Reforms and Growth in Transition: A Meta-Analysis," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1057, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:23:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-020-00590-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.