Explore the vast range of titles available.

Urban ecosystem services are crucial for human well-being and the livability of cities. A central challenge for sustaining ecosystem services lies in addressing scale mismatches between ecological processes on one hand, and social processes of governance on the other. This article synthesizes a set of case studies from urban green areas in Stockholm, Sweden—allotment gardens, urban parks, cemeteries and protected areas—and discusses how governmental agencies and civil society groups engaged in urban green area management can be linked through social networks so as to better match spatial scales of ecosystem processes. The article develops a framework that combines ecological scales with social network structure, with the latter being taken as the patterns of interaction between actor groups. Based on this framework, the article (1) assesses current ecosystem governance, and (2) develops a theoretical understanding of how social network structure influences ecosystem governance and how certain actors can work as agents to promote beneficial network structures. The main results show that the mesoscale of what is conceptualized as city scale green networks (i.e., functionally interconnected local green areas) is not addressed by any actor in Stockholm, and that the management practices of civil society groups engaged in local ecosystem management play a crucial but neglected role in upholding ecosystem services. The article proposes an alternative network structure and discusses the role of midscale managers (for improving ecological functioning) and scale-crossing brokers (engaged in practices to connect actors across ecological scales). Dilemmas, strategies, and practices for establishing this governance system are discussed.

Scale mismatches in social–ecological systems constrain conservation by obscuring signals of environmental change, which could otherwise feed back to inform adaptive responses and solutions. We argue that engaging indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) in place-based environmental management could generate the fine-resolution information and workforce needed to alleviate scale mismatches. We illustrate our argument using a case study initiated by Māori in Aotearoa/New Zealand and demonstrate that the current broad scales of hunting regulation and assessment in black swan (kakī anau, Cygnus atratus) management could obscure local ecological drivers of populations. Many IPLC can facilitate adaptive place-based management by continually monitoring ecological feedbacks (e.g., population numbers, habitat conditions) at fine resolutions through customary resource use and observations. However, disregard for IPLC rights, scepticism of traditional ecological knowledge, restricted opportunity to connect with resources, compartmentalization of resource management, and insufficient funding limit IPLC engagement and must be overcome to alleviate scale mismatches.

Scale is a concept that transcends disciplinary boundaries. In ecology and geography, scale is usually defined in terms of spatial and temporal dimensions. Sociological scale also incorporates space and time, but adds ideas about representation and organization. Although spatial and temporal location determine the context for social and ecological dynamics, social-ecological interactions can create dynamic feedback loops in which humans both influence and are influenced by ecosystem processes. We hypothesize that many of the problems encountered by societies in managing natural resources arise because of a mismatch between the scale of management and the scale(s) of the ecological processes being managed. We use examples from southern Africa and the southern United States to address four main questions: (1) What is a “scale mismatch?” (2) How are scale mismatches generated? (3) What are the consequences of scale mismatches? (4) How can scale mismatches be resolved? Scale mismatches occur when the scale of environmental variation and the scale of social organization in which the responsibility for management resides are aligned in such a way that one or more functions of the social-ecological system are disrupted, inefficiencies occur, and/or important components of the system are lost. They are generated by a wide range of social, ecological, and linked social-ecological processes. Mismatches between the scales of ecological processes and the institutions that are responsible for managing them can contribute to a decrease in social-ecological resilience, including the mismanagement of natural resources and a decrease in human well-being. Solutions to scale mismatches usually require institutional changes at more than one hierarchical level. Long-term solutions to scale mismatch problems will depend on social learning and the development of flexible institutions that can adjust and reorganize in response to changes in ecosystems. Further research is needed to improve our ability to diagnose, understand, and resolve scale mismatches in linked social-ecological systems.

The problem of institutional fit in social-ecological systems has been empirically documented and conceptually discussed for decades, yet there is a shortage of approaches to systematically and quantitatively examine the level of fit. We address this gap, focusing on spatial fit in an urban and peri-urban regional landscape. Such landscapes typically exhibit significant fragmentation of remnant habitats, which can limit critical species dispersal. This may have detrimental effects on species persistence and ecosystem functioning if land use is planned without consideration of the spatial patterns of fragmentation. Managing habitat fragmentation is particularly challenging when the scale of fragmentation reaches beyond the control of single managers, thereby requiring different actors to coordinate their activities to address the problem at the appropriate scale. We present a research approach that maps patterns of collaborations between actors who manage different parts of a landscape, and then relates these patterns to structures of ecological connectivity. We applied our approach to evaluate the fit between a collaborative wetland management network comprising all 26 municipalities in the Stockholm County in Sweden and an ecologically defined network of dispersed but ecologically interconnected wetlands. Many wetlands in this landscape are either intersected by the boundary between two or more municipalities, or are located close to such boundaries, which implies a degree of ecological interconnectedness and a need for intermunicipal coordination related to wetland management across boundaries. We first estimated the level of ecological connectivity between wetlands in neighboring municipalities, and then used this estimate to elaborate the level of social-ecological fit vis-à-vis intermunicipal collaboration. We found that the level of fit was generally weak. Also, we identified critical misalignments of ecological connectivity and intermunicipal collaboration, respectively, as well as collaborations that represented an adequate alignment. These findings inform on where to most effectively allocate limited resources of collaborative capacity to enhance the level of social-ecological fit. Our approach and results are illustrated using maps, which facilitates the potential application of this method in land use planning practice.

How to create and adjust governing institutions so that they align (fit) with complex ecosystem processes and structures across scales is an issue of increasing concern in conservation. It is argued that lack of such social‐ecological fit makes governance and conservation difficult, yet progress in explicitly defining and rigorously testing what constitutes a good fit has been limited. We used a novel modeling approach and data from case studies of fishery and forest conservation to empirically test presumed relationships between conservation outcomes and certain patterns of alignment of social‐ecological interdependences. Our approach made it possible to analyze conservation outcome on a systems level while also providing information on how individual actors are positioned in the complex web of social‐ecological interdependencies. We found that when actors who shared resources were also socially linked, conservation at the level of the whole social‐ecological system was positively affected. When the scales at which individual actors used resources and the scale at which ecological resources were interconnected to other ecological resources were aligned through tightened feedback loops, conservation outcome was better than when they were not aligned. The analysis of individual actors’ positions in the web of social‐ecological interdependencies was helpful in understanding why a system has a certain level of social‐ecological fit. Results of analysis of positions showed that different actors contributed in very different ways to achieve a certain fit and revealed some underlying difference between the actors, for example in terms of actors’ varying rights to access and use different ecological resources. El Éxito de la Conservación como Función de una Buena Alineación de Estructuras y Procesos Sociales y Ecológicos

Over the past three decades community-based natural resources management (CBNRM) has sought to address the concurrent needs of economic development and ecological protection at the local level, but there is often strong divergence between development and conservation interests and successes. In particular, CBNRM has not always led to expected socioeconomic outcomes, while information of its impact on human well-being at household level is sparse. In Botswana, most communities do not disburse benefits from CBNRM ventures to households. This leads to an inherent scale mismatch that arises because the costs of living with wildlife are felt at the household level, while the benefits are paid out at the community or village level. We use longitudinal data from two household surveys conducted 22 years apart to assess if benefits from the Botswana model of CBNRM have increased household-level adaptive capacity for those living with wildlife. We take a livelihoods capital approach to develop indicators of adaptive capacity and measure how livelihood diversity, inequality, and adaptive capacity have changed in five communities in northern Botswana between 1995 and 2017. Our analyses confirm the findings of qualitative reviews and suggest that CBNRM is under-performing in its contribution to improved household-level adaptive capacity. CBNRM cannot be said to benefit communities if the majority of community members do not experience increased well-being. We therefore recommend restructuring the governance models of CBNRM and other community conservation approaches to ensure that benefits are more directly targeted to actively participating households.

Recent literature has highlighted the growing array of scale mismatches in environmental governance and offered policy design principles for improved governance approaches. A next step is to develop our understanding of specific policy tools that can address scale mismatches. This paper reviews the range and importance of scale-related challenges and solutions in environmental governance, situating this discussion in the context of forest governance. We then tackle the matter of policy tools to address scale mismatches, by synthesizing findings from recent policy research on two contemporarily important issues in forest governance, collaborative landscape restoration and multilevel monitoring for ecological integrity, each of which presents distinct challenges related to scale matching and coordination. The research suggests that policy innovations are supporting greater scale sensitivity, through specific legal mandates that require scale considerations and promotion of partnerships and networks. Successful strategies balance requirements to work across scales and levels, with flexibility to tailor approaches to local contexts; our work demonstrates how policy tools can facilitate this in particular contexts. Future research should seek to understand the trade-offs of working at particular scales and continue to explore examples of how design principles for adaptive governance manifest in policy and practice across different contexts.

Context There is a limited understanding of how land-use intensity influences the relationship between plant diversity and the ecosystem function of aboveground biomass production in semi-natural grasslands at the field and farm scale. However, these spatial scales are critical to be addressed since management practices are applied at larger spatial scales than biophysical characteristics are measured. Objectives We aim to (1) examine the direct and indirect effects of land-use intensity on the spatial variability of biomass production, focusing on the role of plant species richness and its spatial variability at the field scale. We further aim to (2) compare the strength of the biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) relationship across spatial scales under different land-use intensities. Methods Going beyond the plot scale, we investigate the field and farm scale in two German regions for the years 2020 and 2021. Statistical analyses are based on prediction maps for species richness, biomass and land-use intensity, upscaled using Sentinel-2 satellite imagery, as well as on spectral dissimilarity (Rao’s Q) to account for environmental heterogeneity. Results High land-use intensity directly reduced species richness and its spatial variability, which acted as mediators, however, not as buffers for the spatial variability of biomass production at the field scale. Both tested BEF relationships slightly strengthened with spatial scale, irrespective of the effect of land-use intensity. Conclusions Our study provides new insights into how land-use intensity shapes the BEF relationship at spatial scales relevant for management, addressing spatial mismatches in complex social-ecological systems.

The question of how to govern the multiscale problems in today’s network society is an important topic in the fields of public administration, political sciences, and environmental sciences. How scales are defined, studied, and dealt with varies substantially within and across these fields. This paper aims to reduce the existing conceptual confusion regarding scales by disentangling three representative approaches that address both governance and scaling: monocentric governance, multilevel governance, and adaptive governance. It does so by analyzing the differences in (1) underlying views on governing, (2) assumptions about scales, (3) dominant problem definitions regarding scales, and (4) preferred responses for dealing with multiple scales. Finally, this paper identifies research opportunities within and across these approaches.

Many of the challenges conservation professionals face can be framed as scale mismatches. The problem of scale mismatch occurs when the planning for and implementation of conservation actions is at a scale that does not reflect the scale of the conservation problem. The challenges in conservation planning related to scale mismatch include ecosystem or ecological process transcendence of governance boundaries; limited availability of fine-resolution data; lack of operational capacity for implementation; lack of understanding of social-ecological system components; threats to ecological diversity that operate at diverse spatial and temporal scales; mismatch between funding and the long-term nature of ecological processes; rate of action implementation that does not reflect the rate of change of the ecological system; lack of appropriate indicators for monitoring activities; and occurrence of ecological change at scales smaller or larger than the scale of implementation or monitoring. Not recognizing and accounting for these challenges when planning for conservation can result in actions that do not address the multiscale nature of conservation problems and that do not achieve conservation objectives. Social networks link organizations and individuals across space and time and determine the scale of conservation actions; thus, an understanding of the social networks associated with conservation planning will help determine the potential for implementing conservation actions at the required scales. Social-network analyses can be used to explore whether these networks constrain or enable key social processes and how multiple scales of action are linked. Results of network analyses can be used to mitigate scale mismatches in assessing, planning, implementing, and monitoring conservation projects. Muchos de los retos que enfrentan los profesionales de la conservación pueden ser catalogados como discordancia de escalas. El problema de discordancia de escalas ocurre cuando la planificación e implementación de acciones de conservación se llevan a cabo en una escala que no refleja la escala del problema de conservación. Los retos de la planificación de la conservación relacionados con la discordancia de escala incluyen el rebase de límites de gobernanza por los procesos ecológicos; la disponibilidad limitada de datos de resolución fina; la carencia de capacidad operativa para la implementación; la falta de entendimiento de los componentes socio-ecológicos del sistema; amenazas a la diversidad ecológica que operan en escalas espaciales y temporales diversas; discordancia entre el financiamiento y la naturaleza a largo plazo de los procesos ecológicos; tasa de implementación de acciones que no refleja la tasa de cambio del sistema ecológico; ausencia de indicadores apropiados de las actividades de monitoreo y ocurrencia de cambio ecológico en escalas menores o mayores que la escala de implementación o monitoreo. El no reconocimiento y consideración de estos retos al planificar la conservación puede resultar en acciones que no abordan la naturaleza multiescala de los problemas de conservación y que no se alcancen los objetivos de conservación. Las redes sociales enlazan organizaciones e individuos en el tiempo y espacio y determinan la escala de las acciones de conservación; por lo tanto, el entendimiento de las redes sociales asociadas con la planificación de la conservación ayudará a determinar el potencial para la implementación de acciones de conservación en las escalas requeridas. El análisis de redes sociales puede ser utilizado para explorar si esas redes constriñen o facilitan procesos sociales claves y como se relacionan las múltiples escalas de acción. Los resultados del análisis de redes pueden ser utilizados para mitigar la discordancia de escalas en la evaluación, planificación, implementación y monitoreo de proyectos de conservación.