scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Fridolin S. Brand

Bio: Fridolin S. Brand is an academic researcher from Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library. The author has contributed to research in topics: Resilience (network) & Sustainable development. The author has an hindex of 13, co-authored 22 publications receiving 2142 citations. Previous affiliations of Fridolin S. Brand include École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne & ETH Zurich.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper reviewed the variety of definitions of resilience within sustainability science and suggested a typology according to the specific degree of normativity of the concept of resilience, and argued that a clearly specified, descriptive concept is critical in providing a counterbalance to the use of resilience as a vague boundary object.
Abstract: This article reviews the variety of definitions proposed for "resilience" within sustainability science and suggests a typology according to the specific degree of normativity. There is a tension between the original descriptive concept of resilience first defined in ecological science and a more recent, vague, and malleable notion of resilience used as an approach or boundary object by different scientific disciplines. Even though increased conceptual vagueness can be valuable to foster communication across disciplines and between science and practice, both conceptual clarity and practical relevance of the concept of resilience are critically in danger. The fundamental question is what conceptual structure we want resilience to have. This article argues that a clearly specified, descriptive concept of resilience is critical in providing a counterbalance to the use of resilience as a vague boundary object. A clear descriptive concept provides the basis for operationalization and application of resilience within ecological science.

1,150 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the theory and promise of sustainability science through a comparative appraisal of five empirical sustainability science projects is explored. But, the evaluation of these projects is based on an evaluative framework, and the results indicate accomplishments regarding problem focus and basic transformational research methodology, but also highlight deficits regarding stakeholder participation, actionable results and larger impacts.
Abstract: Sustainability science is being developed in constructive tension between a descriptive–analytical and a transformational mode. The first is concerned with analyzing problems in coupled human–environment systems, whereas the second conducts research on practical solutions to those problems. Transformational sustainability research is confronted with the challenges of generating actionable knowledge, incorporating knowledge from outside academia, and dealing with different values and political interests. This study approaches the theory and promise of sustainability science through a comparative appraisal of five empirical sustainability science projects. We exemplarily appraise in how far sustainability science succeeds and fails in yielding solution options for sustainability problems based on an evaluative framework (that accounts for the particularities of sustainability science). The selected sustainability projects cover a range of topics (water, bioenergy, land use, solar energy, urban development), regions (from coastal to mountainous, from rural to urban areas, in several countries in Africa, Europe, and South and North America), spatial levels (from village to country levels), and research approaches. The comparative results indicate accomplishments regarding problem focus and basic transformational research methodology, but also highlight deficits regarding stakeholder participation, actionable results, and larger impacts. We conclude with suggestions on how to fully realize the potential of sustainability science as a solution-oriented endeavor, including advanced collaborative research settings, advances in transformational research methodologies, cross-case generalization, as well as reducing institutional barriers.

356 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors revisited the concept of critical natural capital and examined its relation to ecological resilience, and suggested that the degree of ecological resilience is inversely related to the level of threat ecosystems are prone to.

268 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The approach presented here allows us to precisely relate different types of risk, vulnerability, robustness and resilience, and considers all concepts together as part of adaptive risk management.
Abstract: Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience are terms that are being used increasingly frequently in a large range of sciences. This paper shows how these terms can be consistently defined based on a decision-theoretic, verbal, and formal definition. Risk is conceived as an evaluation of an uncertain loss potential. The paper starts from a formal decision-theoretic definition of risk, which distinguishes between the risk situation (i.e. the risk analyst’s model of the situation in which someone perceives or assesses risk) and the risk function (i.e. the risk analyst’s model about how someone is perceiving and assessing risk). The approach allows scholars to link together different historical approaches to risk, such as the toxicological risk concept and the action-based approach to risk. The paper then elaborates how risk, vulnerability, and resilience are all linked to one another. In general, the vulnerability concept, such as the definition of vulnerability by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate...

96 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, an integrative approach was applied, combining methods from economics and the political and natural sciences to analyze ecosystem functioning from a holistic human-environment system perspective, which revealed that climate and socioeconomic changes are likely to increase the vulnerability of the EGS analyzed.
Abstract: Mountain regions provide essential ecosystem goods and services (EGS) for both mountain dwellers and people living outside these areas. Global change endangers the capacity of mountain ecosystems to provide key services. The Mountland project focused on three case study regions in the Swiss Alps and aimed to propose land-use practices and alternative policy solutions to ensure the provision of key EGS under climate and land-use changes. We summarized and synthesized the results of the project and provide insights into the ecological, socioeconomic, and political processes relevant for analyzing global change impacts on a European mountain region. In Mountland, an integrative approach was applied, combining methods from economics and the political and natural sciences to analyze ecosystem functioning from a holistic human-environment system perspective. In general, surveys, experiments, and model results revealed that climate and socioeconomic changes are likely to increase the vulnerability of the EGS analyzed. We regard the following key characteristics of coupled human-environment systems as central to our case study areas in mountain regions: thresholds, heterogeneity, trade-offs, and feedback. Our results suggest that the institutional framework should be strengthened in a way that better addresses these characteristics, allowing for (1) more integrative approaches, (2) a more network-oriented management and steering of political processes that integrate local stakeholders, and (3) enhanced capacity building to decrease the identified vulnerability as central elements in the policy process. Further, to maintain and support the future provision of EGS in mountain regions, policy making should also focus on project-oriented, cross-sectoral policies and spatial planning as a coordination instrument for land use in general.

93 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The capacity to transform at smaller scales draws on resilience from multiple scales, making use of crises as windows of opportunity for novelty and innovation, and recombining sources of experience and knowledge to navigate social-ecological transitions.
Abstract: Resilience thinking addresses the dynamics and development of complex social-ecological systems (SES). Three aspects are central: resilience, adaptability and transformability. These aspects interrelate across multiple scales. Resilience in this context is the capacity of a SES to continually change and adapt yet remain within critical thresholds. Adaptability is part of resilience. It represents the capacity to adjust responses to changing external drivers and internal processes and thereby allow for development along the current trajectory (stability domain). Transformability is the capacity to cross thresholds into new development trajectories. Transformational change at smaller scales enables resilience at larger scales. The capacity to transform at smaller scales draws on resilience from multiple scales, making use of crises as windows of opportunity for novelty and innovation, and recombining sources of experience and knowledge to navigate social-ecological transitions. Society must seriously consider ways to foster resilience of smaller more manageable SESs that contribute to Earth System resilience and to explore options for deliberate transformation of SESs that threaten Earth System resilience.

3,020 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a conceptual model of an ideal-typical transdisciplinary research process is synthesized and structures such a set of principles from various strands of the literature and empirical experiences, looking at challenges and coping strategies as experienced in transdisciplinary sustainability projects in Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and Asia.
Abstract: There is emerging agreement that sustainability challenges require new ways of knowledge production and decision-making. One key aspect of sustainability science, therefore, is the involvement of actors from outside academia into the research process in order to integrate the best available knowledge, reconcile values and preferences, as well as create ownership for problems and solution options. Transdisciplinary, community-based, interactive, or participatory research approaches are often suggested as appropriate means to meet both the requirements posed by real-world problems as well as the goals of sustainability science as a transformational scientific field. Dispersed literature on these approaches and a variety of empirical projects applying them make it difficult for interested researchers and practitioners to review and become familiar with key components and design principles of how to do transdisciplinary sustainability research. Starting from a conceptual model of an ideal–typical transdisciplinary research process, this article synthesizes and structures such a set of principles from various strands of the literature and empirical experiences. We then elaborate on them, looking at challenges and some coping strategies as experienced in transdisciplinary sustainability projects in Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and Asia. The article concludes with future research needed in order to further enhance the practice of transdisciplinary sustainability research.

1,927 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify six conceptual tensions fundamental to urban resilience: definition of urban resilience, understanding of system equilibrium, positive vs. neutral (or negative) conceptualizations of resilience, mechanisms for system change, adaptation versus general adaptability, and timescale of action.

1,467 citations