CONTEXT: As the concept of social-ecological resilience gains increasing policy attention, there is growing demand for approaches that operationalise it. Amongst these demands is the need to empirically assess absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacities that underpin resilience to better understand the ways in which social-ecological systems can navigate change and uncertainty.

OBJECTIVE: We explore the application of a capitals approach for assessing resilience capacities, using an example of deciduous fruit farming operations in the Western Cape region of South Africa.

METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, thematically coded, and analysed using causal loop diagrams and co-occurrence analyses to identify changes experienced by farming operations, their responses to these changes, and the effects of both on capital resources. We then apply the criteria developed for the classification of resilience capacities.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A variety of changes affect farming operations at multiple points across the value chain, and have effects across capital resources. Most significant to farmers are changes which impact the amount of water available and the cashflow they require to sustain their operations. The most common responses employed by farmers consisted of activities which either increase the availability of an affected resource, or decrease its demand in order to maintain the same functions (adaptive capacity). In fewer cases, farming operations were able to absorb the depletion of their capital resources due to pre-emptive management (absorptive capacity). In similarly few cases, the potential or realised resource deficiencies caused by changes were either corrected or decoupled from the farming operation through structural reorganisation towards a different or additional function and types of output being delivered (transformative capacity). Evidence of changes being anticipated prior to their onset were also identified, leading to responses which are used in conjunction with the preceding three capacities.

SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings suggest that the criteria we developed for classifying resilience capacities offer a useful means of operationalising resilience. In particular, the approach we pilot in this paper enables the application of a systems perspective to identify interactions between changes and responses, which broadens the options for identifying management strategies and interventions. The approach we propose can be used to identify key leverage points to strengthen the capacities of vulnerable farmers. Further work is required to integrate consideration of cross-scale effects of farm-scale resilience strategies on the broader social-ecological system.

Sub-Saharan Africa is under-represented in global biodiversity datasets, particularly regarding the impact of land use on species' population abundances. Drawing on recent advances in expert elicitation to ensure data consistency, 200 experts were convened using a modified-Delphi process to estimate 'intactness scores': the remaining proportion of an 'intact' reference population of a species group in a particular land use, on a scale from 0 (no remaining individuals) to 1 (same abundance as the reference) and, in rare cases, to 2 (populations that thrive in human-modified landscapes). The resulting bii4africa dataset contains intactness scores representing terrestrial vertebrates (tetrapods: ±5,400 amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals) and vascular plants (±45,000 forbs, graminoids, trees, shrubs) in sub-Saharan Africa across the region's major land uses (urban, cropland, rangeland, plantation, protected, etc.) and intensities (e.g., large-scale vs smallholder cropland). This dataset was co-produced as part of the Biodiversity Intactness Index for Africa Project. Additional uses include assessing ecosystem condition; rectifying geographic/taxonomic biases in global biodiversity indicators and maps; and informing the Red List of Ecosystems.

Social-ecological systems (SES) research has gained substantial momentum, as witnessed by the growth in SES publications, theories, and frameworks, and the traction these concepts have gained in development and policy arenas. However, the growth and development of the SES field has only been partially examined, which limits our ability to make sense of and support the future development of the field and its ability to inform pressing sustainability challenges. The aim of this study is to understand how SES research has grown and changed over time as a field of study using bibliometric methods, co-authorship and co-citation network analysis. Our study is informed by broader bodies of work that have sought to understand the development of scientific fields, concepts, and research agendas. We highlight key trends that have influenced the organization of the field as well as how key thematic areas of SES research have evolved over time. Our results indicate that the research on SES is (i) mainly carried out by authors located in North America and Europe, (ii) characterized by changes in the terminology employed, as identified through our search terms, (iii) linked to the emergence of major conferences and centers dedicated to SES research, as well as its growth over time, (iv) characterized by a highly interconnected structure, with almost 80% of scholars being connected to each other, and (v) characterized by a shift in citation patterns, with newcomers in the network carving out their niche and replacing the founding figures as the central focus. We discuss the implications of these findings, including the nature of SES research as an epistemic network, the highly collaborative nature of SES research, and the role played by open -access journals in the growth of SES research in the digital era. We further suggest that the SES research field is at a critical transition point, with contending visions of its future following a more disciplinary path or remaining as a more open interdisciplinary space. We conclude with the questions this raises for future SES research regarding the implications of this duality on the nature, production, and validation of knowledge and its evolution.

Agricultural systems are important for the livelihoods and food security of millions of people. These systems are increasingly interconnected across scales and face challenges in responding to multiple, and coalescing types of environmental, social, and economic change. Most studies on how actors respond to change have focused on farmers and farming communities. In this study, we investigate the connectivity of farming systems to markets, to understand how social relationships across the supply chain influence how actors respond to multiple types of changes. We used a participatory network mapping method to interview actors across a fruit supply chain in the Western Cape, South Africa, that is connected to both global and national markets. We identified droughts, climatic variations, changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and other social shifts as the most important changes affecting the production and trade of fruit in this region. We also identified three types of responses to these changes: i) responses concerning the dynamics of trade relationships (e.g., changing or maintaining trade relationships); ii) responses based on changes at the individual level (e.g., changes in farm management); and iii) responses based on social relationships (categorized into four types, namely collaboration, knowledge transfer, financial assistance, and marketing coordination). Within these four types, we found that different types of social networks, that include actors operating at different scales and within and outside of supply chains, mediate responses to change. We also found that networks of collaboration, knowledge exchange and financial assistance show a positive correlation, where actors with an export orientation engage in multiple social relationships that enable responding to changes. However, we found limited participation of local market actors in most of these networks. Further investigating these social networks, and the actors participating in them, is essential to better understand and anticipate how and why agricultural systems respond to multiple types of changes, ultimately influencing their trajectory in an increasingly changing world.

Motivation: Foresight methods are increasingly recognized as essential for decision-making in complex environments, particularly within development and research settings. As foresight methods continue to gain prominence for decision-making, their application in these settings grows. Funders and policy-makers can benefit from the experience of transformative foresight practitioners and researchers who are skilled in designing novel ways to envision alternative and diverse development futures. Purpose: The Seeds of Good Anthropocenes (SoGA) initiative has experimented with transformative foresight since its inception in 2016. We position SoGA within the framework of Minkkinen et al. (2019); we present its transformative capacity through participatory visioning; and we explore how foresight methods can shape strategic development options. Approach and methods: We draw lessons from how SoGA, used extensively in various contexts around the world, has introduced experimental transformative foresight to deal with diversity and complexity. We describe the transformative foresight processes in detail. Findings: SoGA exemplifies how transformative foresight can support policy and change initiatives by providing participants, planners, and decision-makers with opportunities to reinforce the collaborative and transformative objectives of their policy and convening practices. Such engagement not only deepens the strategic impact of policies, it also encourages a more inclusive and participatory approach to policy development, aligning with broader goals for sustainable and impactful change.

We explore the social processes supporting transformation towards collaborative water governance in the uMngeni catchment, South Africa. Using Holling's adaptive cycle as a heuristic of phases (conservation, release, reorganisation and exploitation) present during transformation of social-ecological systems, we consider the role of learning, power, agency and structure during each phase of the evolution of the uMngeni Ecological Infrastructure Partnership (UEIP). The UEIP is a partnership between government, research institutions, and civil society groups that facilitates broader and more collaborative participation in water management. During the conservation phase, strong control power and institutional structure (denoted by a hierarchical governance mode embodying control and regulation by the State) limited the introduction of new ideas and reinforced single-loop learning. The release phase was triggered by a shock which weakened control power and permitted the introduction of new ideas thereby enabling double-loop learning. The changing conditions gave rise to protean power (defined as results of practices of agile actors coping with uncertainty) which enhanced the agency of key actors who began to mobilise others in a rapid phase of re-organisation. Triple-loop learning was evident in the exploitation phase as new collaborative institutions, that were better able to accommodate innovative ideas, began to emerge. We found the adaptive cycle helpful for delineating phases of change, while the four multi-faceted processes of learning, power, agency and structure proved useful in illuminating dynamics of change. This understanding may help to inform actions to steer transformations towards more sustainable and collaborative water governance in South Africa and elsewhere.

Conserving biodiversity while meeting the food, feed, and fuel needs of a growing human population with changing dietary preference is one of our society’s grand challenges. Expansion and intensification that have accelerated since the 1960s has doubled crop production in many areas, but unfortunately, has come at a cost to the environment. This article summarizes the scope of agriculture, its effect on biodiversity, and strategies for feeding the world while maintaining biodiversity.

Invasive alien species (IAS) pose a key threat to biodiversity, the economy and human well-being, and continue to increase in abundance and impact worldwide. Legislation and policy currently dominate the global agenda for IAS, although translation to localised success may be limited. This calls for a wider range of responses to transform IAS management. An under-appreciated strategy to achieve success may come from bottom-up, experimental innovations (so-called “seeds”), which offer alternative visions of what may be possible for IAS management in the future. We present an application of a participatory process that builds on such innovations to create alternative visions of the future, with actionable pathways to guide change. Through a series of workshops with practitioners and academics, we used this process to explore alternative positive futures for IAS management in South Africa. We then identified a set of domains of change, that could enable these visions to be actioned by appropriate stakeholders. The domains of change highlight the social–ecological nature of the IAS sector, with interconnected actions needed in financial, cultural, social, technological and governance spheres. Key domains identified were the need to shift mindsets and values of society regarding IAS, as well as the need for appropriate and functional financing. This participatory futuring process offers a way to interrogate and scale bottom-up innovations, thereby creating optimism and allowing stakeholders to engage constructively with the future. This represents an important step in fostering the potential of bottom-up innovations to transform IAS management. 

Science today defines resilience as the capacity to live and develop with change and uncertainty, which is well beyond just the ability to ‘bounce back’ to the status quo. It involves the capacity to absorb shocks, avoid tipping points, navigate surprise and keep options alive, and the ability to innovate and transform in the face of crises and traps. Five attributes underlie this capacity: diversity, redundancy, connectivity, inclusivity and equity, and adaptive learning. There is a mismatch between the talk of resilience recovery after COVID-19 and the latest science, which calls for major efforts to align resilience thinking with sustainable development action.

The extensive human impact on Earth is characterized by deeply intertwined social and ecological changes. Biodiversity is a foundational part of social-ecological systems, with humans interacting with biodiversity in constantly evolving ways. We describe the key characteristics of social-ecological systems, using protected areas as an example. We highlight the connections between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being; the potential for social-ecological regime shifts; the cross-scale nature of local to global social-ecological interactions; and the role of scenarios in imagining just and sustainable futures for both nature and people. The implications of social-ecological thinking for biodiversity governance and research are outlined.