The control versus resilience rationale for managing systems under uncertainty

Arjen Y. Hoekstra (Corresponding Author), Rianne Bijlsma, Martinus S. Krol

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

    17 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    We compare two rationales for the management of social-ecological systems under uncertainty: control and resilience. The first focuses at system performance, the second at system capacity to cope with change. The two schools of thought promote their own legitimacy, but undertake little effort to transcend their own perspective. Though, different scholars have pointed at the necessity of combining control and resilience for managing a system. We review the literature on control and resilience, synthesize the work in these fields into one coherent conceptual framework and reflect on the question whether control and resilience strategies can be reconciled or whether inevitable trade-offs are to be made. Based on a literature review, we develop a framework contrasting both rationales through their preferred (contrary) system attributes. Next, we discuss the operationalization of these system properties for policy development. Policies will generally reflect elements of both control and resilience. There will be trade-offs between preferred system attributes, where development of resilience restricts the development of possible control (and vice versa). The conceptual framework introduced provides a 'language' for contrasting and possibly (partly) reconciling the control and resilience rationales. Such a language is crucial for a meaningful policy discourse between actors, because it helps in understanding the implications of different rationales and in comparing alternative policies in terms of control and resilience.
    Original languageEnglish
    Article number103002
    JournalEnvironmental research letters
    Volume13
    Issue number10
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 27 Sep 2018

    Fingerprint

    Uncertainty
    conceptual framework
    Language
    Illegitimacy
    Policy Making
    policy development
    literature review
    Ecosystem
    policy
    attribute
    Transcend
    school

    Cite this

    @article{0dfa185f70504f5db0e7f9bf01415ded,
    title = "The control versus resilience rationale for managing systems under uncertainty",
    abstract = "We compare two rationales for the management of social-ecological systems under uncertainty: control and resilience. The first focuses at system performance, the second at system capacity to cope with change. The two schools of thought promote their own legitimacy, but undertake little effort to transcend their own perspective. Though, different scholars have pointed at the necessity of combining control and resilience for managing a system. We review the literature on control and resilience, synthesize the work in these fields into one coherent conceptual framework and reflect on the question whether control and resilience strategies can be reconciled or whether inevitable trade-offs are to be made. Based on a literature review, we develop a framework contrasting both rationales through their preferred (contrary) system attributes. Next, we discuss the operationalization of these system properties for policy development. Policies will generally reflect elements of both control and resilience. There will be trade-offs between preferred system attributes, where development of resilience restricts the development of possible control (and vice versa). The conceptual framework introduced provides a 'language' for contrasting and possibly (partly) reconciling the control and resilience rationales. Such a language is crucial for a meaningful policy discourse between actors, because it helps in understanding the implications of different rationales and in comparing alternative policies in terms of control and resilience.",
    author = "Hoekstra, {Arjen Y.} and Rianne Bijlsma and Krol, {Martinus S.}",
    year = "2018",
    month = "9",
    day = "27",
    doi = "10.1088/1748-9326/aadf95",
    language = "English",
    volume = "13",
    journal = "Environmental research letters",
    issn = "1748-9318",
    publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",
    number = "10",

    }

    The control versus resilience rationale for managing systems under uncertainty. / Hoekstra, Arjen Y. (Corresponding Author); Bijlsma, Rianne; Krol, Martinus S.

    In: Environmental research letters, Vol. 13, No. 10, 103002, 27.09.2018.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The control versus resilience rationale for managing systems under uncertainty

    AU - Hoekstra, Arjen Y.

    AU - Bijlsma, Rianne

    AU - Krol, Martinus S.

    PY - 2018/9/27

    Y1 - 2018/9/27

    N2 - We compare two rationales for the management of social-ecological systems under uncertainty: control and resilience. The first focuses at system performance, the second at system capacity to cope with change. The two schools of thought promote their own legitimacy, but undertake little effort to transcend their own perspective. Though, different scholars have pointed at the necessity of combining control and resilience for managing a system. We review the literature on control and resilience, synthesize the work in these fields into one coherent conceptual framework and reflect on the question whether control and resilience strategies can be reconciled or whether inevitable trade-offs are to be made. Based on a literature review, we develop a framework contrasting both rationales through their preferred (contrary) system attributes. Next, we discuss the operationalization of these system properties for policy development. Policies will generally reflect elements of both control and resilience. There will be trade-offs between preferred system attributes, where development of resilience restricts the development of possible control (and vice versa). The conceptual framework introduced provides a 'language' for contrasting and possibly (partly) reconciling the control and resilience rationales. Such a language is crucial for a meaningful policy discourse between actors, because it helps in understanding the implications of different rationales and in comparing alternative policies in terms of control and resilience.

    AB - We compare two rationales for the management of social-ecological systems under uncertainty: control and resilience. The first focuses at system performance, the second at system capacity to cope with change. The two schools of thought promote their own legitimacy, but undertake little effort to transcend their own perspective. Though, different scholars have pointed at the necessity of combining control and resilience for managing a system. We review the literature on control and resilience, synthesize the work in these fields into one coherent conceptual framework and reflect on the question whether control and resilience strategies can be reconciled or whether inevitable trade-offs are to be made. Based on a literature review, we develop a framework contrasting both rationales through their preferred (contrary) system attributes. Next, we discuss the operationalization of these system properties for policy development. Policies will generally reflect elements of both control and resilience. There will be trade-offs between preferred system attributes, where development of resilience restricts the development of possible control (and vice versa). The conceptual framework introduced provides a 'language' for contrasting and possibly (partly) reconciling the control and resilience rationales. Such a language is crucial for a meaningful policy discourse between actors, because it helps in understanding the implications of different rationales and in comparing alternative policies in terms of control and resilience.

    U2 - 10.1088/1748-9326/aadf95

    DO - 10.1088/1748-9326/aadf95

    M3 - Review article

    VL - 13

    JO - Environmental research letters

    JF - Environmental research letters

    SN - 1748-9318

    IS - 10

    M1 - 103002

    ER -