The theoretical underpinnings of various analyses of the social dimensions of ecosystem management are closely related to our mental models of human-nature relations. This article presents examples of eco- and anthropocentric, interdisciplinary and complex system mind maps of human-nature relations. It shows that the interpretation of the social dimension in ecosystem management in each mind map advances the study of human-nature relations in a particular way. However, the dysfunctional reductionism of eco-and anthropocentric mind maps and the weak capacity of interdisciplinary mind maps to analyse intersystem and cross-scale linkages is only overcome by complex system approaches. Different types of complex systems mind maps are found capable of comprehensively operationalising the social dimension of ecosystem management for monitoring purposes and also of linking a variety of knowledge types in integrative analyses to support resilience-oriented management. The participation of system stakeholders in transformative and adaptive transdisciplinary work is central in these endeavours.
Zitiere diese Aktivität
Glaser M. (2006) The Social Dimension in Ecosystem Management: Strengths and Weaknesses of Human-Nature Mind Maps. 13(2): 122-142.
@article{Glaser2006,
Title = {The Social Dimension in Ecosystem Management: Strengths and Weaknesses of Human-Nature Mind Maps},
Author = {Glaser, Marion},
Editor = {},
Year = {2006},
Pages = {122-142},
Volume = {13},
Abstract = {The theoretical underpinnings of various analyses of the social dimensions of ecosystem management are closely related to our mental models of human-nature relations. This article presents examples of eco- and anthropocentric, interdisciplinary and complex system mind maps of human-nature relations. It shows that the interpretation of the social dimension in ecosystem management in each mind map advances the study of human-nature relations in a particular way. However, the dysfunctional reductionism of eco-and anthropocentric mind maps and the weak capacity of interdisciplinary mind maps to analyse intersystem and cross-scale linkages is only overcome by complex system approaches. Different types of complex systems mind maps are found capable of comprehensively operationalising the social dimension of ecosystem management for monitoring purposes and also of linking a variety of knowledge types in integrative analyses to support resilience-oriented management. The participation of system stakeholders in transformative and adaptive transdisciplinary work is central in these endeavours.},
}
TY - JOUR
AU - Glaser, Marion
TI - The Social Dimension in Ecosystem Management: Strengths and Weaknesses of Human-Nature Mind Maps
PY - 2006
SP - 122-142
VL - 13
AB - The theoretical underpinnings of various analyses of the social dimensions of ecosystem management are closely related to our mental models of human-nature relations. This article presents examples of eco- and anthropocentric, interdisciplinary and complex system mind maps of human-nature relations. It shows that the interpretation of the social dimension in ecosystem management in each mind map advances the study of human-nature relations in a particular way. However, the dysfunctional reductionism of eco-and anthropocentric mind maps and the weak capacity of interdisciplinary mind maps to analyse intersystem and cross-scale linkages is only overcome by complex system approaches. Different types of complex systems mind maps are found capable of comprehensively operationalising the social dimension of ecosystem management for monitoring purposes and also of linking a variety of knowledge types in integrative analyses to support resilience-oriented management. The participation of system stakeholders in transformative and adaptive transdisciplinary work is central in these endeavours.
ER -
