163
Conclusions
Regime shifts are abrupt changes that can happen in complex
systems worldwide at different temporal and spatial scales,
depending on the resilience of the systems (Scheffer et al.
2001; deYoung et al. 2008). It is extremely important to
study and understand these mechanisms since many regime
shifts have led to catastrophic changes including ecological,
social and economic losses worldwide (Mumby 2009;
Steneck and Wahle 2013; Blenckner et al. 2015b). Despite
the fact that many studies and methods have focused on the
detection of regime shifts, there is still a lot to be done to
achieve marine ecosystem management integrating resilience and regime shifts (Travis et al. 2014; Selkoe et al.
2015; Angeler et al. 2016). New tools, such as early warning
signals or new ways to assess the resilience of different systems, combined with an in-depth study of the mechanisms
and stressors affecting natural systems are a good start to
incorporate resilience and regime shift into policy-maker
decisions (Carpenter and Brock 2006; Scheffer et al. 2009;
Dakos et al. 2012, 2017; Ling et al. 2015; Vasilakopoulos
and Marshall 2015). Since regime shifts often affect many
components of an ecosystem in different ways, ecosystembased management (EBM) is necessary to include effectively
regime shifts into management considerations (Blenckner
et al. 2015a; Levin and Möllmann 2015; Long et al. 2015;
Rocha et al. 2015). To make this holistic approach effective
and to preserve the natural environment and ecosystems in a
more integrative way, there is a real need to translate regime
shift and resilience concepts from theory to applications
(Punt et al. 2012; Travis et al. 2014; Selkoe et al. 2015).
Recently, the operationalization of social-ecological systems
(SES) conceptual models have shown promising improvements in this sense (Leslie et al. 2015; DePiper et al. 2017).
Due to the different spatial and temporal scales at which
regime shifts can act, i.e., from extremely local to global, and
the high degree of associated uncertainties, innovative and
flexible management options need to be developed at different levels of governance. For instance, Rockström et al.
(2009) suggested a management at the planetary boundaries.
Such management would require, in addition to adaptive
management and polycentric governance, a societal shift in
order to achieve a fair use of global resources, and a transformed economy (Hughes et al. 2013; Lade et al. 2013;
O’Brien et al. 2014). Finally, we can expect that the increasing awareness of the implications of regime shifts and associated concepts for human well-being worldwide will likely
lead to more precautionary management approaches, while
new tools and technics will be developed to achieve an integrative and efficient management of our natural resources.
Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the MARmaED project (CS) and marEEshift project (XC)
without which this study could not have been conducted. The
MARmaED project has received funding from the European Union’s
Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie
Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 675997. The results of this
study reflect only the author’s view and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. The
marEEshift - marine ecological economic systems in the Western Baltic
Sea and beyond: shifting the baseline to a regime of sustainability -
project has received funding by German Ministry for Education and
Research.
We thank Christian Möllmann for his suggestions on the first draft
of this manuscript. Finally, we are indebted to the thoughtful comments
of three anonymous referees, who helped to improve the initial
manuscript.
Appendix
This article is related to the YOUMARES 8 conference session no. 5: “Ecosystems Dynamics in a Changing World:
Regime Shifts and Resilience in Marine Communities”. The
original Call for Abstracts the abstracts of the presentations,
and the report of the session can be found in the appendix
“Conference
Sessions
and
Abstracts”,
chapter
“10 Ecosystems Dynamics in a Changing World: Regime
Shifts and Resilience in Marine Communities”.
References
Angeler DG, Allen CR, Johnson RK (2013) Measuring the relative
resilience of subarctic lakes to global change: redundancies of functions within and across temporal scales. J Appl Ecol 50:572–584.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12092
Angeler DG, Allen CR, Barichievy C et al (2016) Management applications of discontinuity theory. J Appl Ecol 53:688–698. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1365-2664.12494
Auber A, Travers-Trolet M, Villanueva MC et al (2015) Regime shift
in an exploited fish community related to natural climate oscillations. PLoS One 10:e0129883. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0129883
Baumgärtner S, Faber M, Schiller J (2006) Joint production and responsibility in ecological economics – on the foundations of environmental policy, advances. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Beaugrand G (2004) The North Sea regime shift: evidence, causes,
mechanisms and consequences. Prog Oceanogr 60:245–262. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2004.02.018
Beaugrand G, Brander KM, Alistair Lindley J et al (2003) Plankton
effect on cod recruitment in the North Sea. Nature 426:661–664.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02164
Beaugrand G, Conversi A, Chiba S et al (2015) Synchronous marine
pelagic regime shifts in the Northern Hemisphere. Philos Trans R
Soc B 370:20130272. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0272
Beisner BE, Haydon DT, Cuddington K (2003) Alternative stable
states in ecology. Front Ecol Environ 1:376–382. https://doi.
org/10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0376:ASSIE]2.0.CO;2
Regime Shifts – A Global Challenge for the Sustainable Use of Our Marine Resources
Conclusions
Regime shifts are abrupt changes that can happen in complex
systems worldwide at different temporal and spatial scales,
depending on the resilience of the systems (Scheffer et al.
2001; deYoung et al. 2008). It is extremely important to
study and understand these mechanisms since many regime
shifts have led to catastrophic changes including ecological,
social and economic losses worldwide (Mumby 2009;
Steneck and Wahle 2013; Blenckner et al. 2015b). Despite
the fact that many studies and methods have focused on the
detection of regime shifts, there is still a lot to be done to
achieve marine ecosystem management integrating resilience and regime shifts (Travis et al. 2014; Selkoe et al.
2015; Angeler et al. 2016). New tools, such as early warning
signals or new ways to assess the resilience of different systems, combined with an in-depth study of the mechanisms
and stressors affecting natural systems are a good start to
incorporate resilience and regime shift into policy-maker
decisions (Carpenter and Brock 2006; Scheffer et al. 2009;
Dakos et al. 2012, 2017; Ling et al. 2015; Vasilakopoulos
and Marshall 2015). Since regime shifts often affect many
components of an ecosystem in different ways, ecosystembased management (EBM) is necessary to include effectively
regime shifts into management considerations (Blenckner
et al. 2015a; Levin and Möllmann 2015; Long et al. 2015;
Rocha et al. 2015). To make this holistic approach effective
and to preserve the natural environment and ecosystems in a
more integrative way, there is a real need to translate regime
shift and resilience concepts from theory to applications
(Punt et al. 2012; Travis et al. 2014; Selkoe et al. 2015).
Recently, the operationalization of social-ecological systems
(SES) conceptual models have shown promising improvements in this sense (Leslie et al. 2015; DePiper et al. 2017).
Due to the different spatial and temporal scales at which
regime shifts can act, i.e., from extremely local to global, and
the high degree of associated uncertainties, innovative and
flexible management options need to be developed at different levels of governance. For instance, Rockström et al.
(2009) suggested a management at the planetary boundaries.
Such management would require, in addition to adaptive
management and polycentric governance, a societal shift in
order to achieve a fair use of global resources, and a transformed economy (Hughes et al. 2013; Lade et al. 2013;
O’Brien et al. 2014). Finally, we can expect that the increasing awareness of the implications of regime shifts and associated concepts for human well-being worldwide will likely
lead to more precautionary management approaches, while
new tools and technics will be developed to achieve an integrative and efficient management of our natural resources.
Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the MARmaED project (CS) and marEEshift project (XC)
without which this study could not have been conducted. The
MARmaED project has received funding from the European Union’s
Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie
Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 675997. The results of this
study reflect only the author’s view and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. The
marEEshift - marine ecological economic systems in the Western Baltic
Sea and beyond: shifting the baseline to a regime of sustainability -
project has received funding by German Ministry for Education and
Research.
We thank Christian Möllmann for his suggestions on the first draft
of this manuscript. Finally, we are indebted to the thoughtful comments
of three anonymous referees, who helped to improve the initial
manuscript.
Appendix
This article is related to the YOUMARES 8 conference session no. 5: “Ecosystems Dynamics in a Changing World:
Regime Shifts and Resilience in Marine Communities”. The
original Call for Abstracts the abstracts of the presentations,
and the report of the session can be found in the appendix
“Conference
Sessions
and
Abstracts”,
chapter
“10 Ecosystems Dynamics in a Changing World: Regime
Shifts and Resilience in Marine Communities”.
References
Angeler DG, Allen CR, Johnson RK (2013) Measuring the relative
resilience of subarctic lakes to global change: redundancies of functions within and across temporal scales. J Appl Ecol 50:572–584.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12092
Angeler DG, Allen CR, Barichievy C et al (2016) Management applications of discontinuity theory. J Appl Ecol 53:688–698. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1365-2664.12494
Auber A, Travers-Trolet M, Villanueva MC et al (2015) Regime shift
in an exploited fish community related to natural climate oscillations. PLoS One 10:e0129883. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0129883
Baumgärtner S, Faber M, Schiller J (2006) Joint production and responsibility in ecological economics – on the foundations of environmental policy, advances. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Beaugrand G (2004) The North Sea regime shift: evidence, causes,
mechanisms and consequences. Prog Oceanogr 60:245–262. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2004.02.018
Beaugrand G, Brander KM, Alistair Lindley J et al (2003) Plankton
effect on cod recruitment in the North Sea. Nature 426:661–664.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02164
Beaugrand G, Conversi A, Chiba S et al (2015) Synchronous marine
pelagic regime shifts in the Northern Hemisphere. Philos Trans R
Soc B 370:20130272. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0272
Beisner BE, Haydon DT, Cuddington K (2003) Alternative stable
states in ecology. Front Ecol Environ 1:376–382. https://doi.
org/10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0376:ASSIE]2.0.CO;2
Regime Shifts – A Global Challenge for the Sustainable Use of Our Marine Resources