112
need for conservation agriculture due to generalized deforestation depleting their
natural resources. Needs for good leadership, collective action, networking, and
institutions working together toward common goals were strongly indicated.
The combination of participatory assessment tools and processes used for this
study highlighted people’s perceptions of resilience, its major determinants, and
available options for improvement. Establishing an innovative and communitybased multi-level coordinating body or committee is a key element for adoption of
solutions proposed by participants. The collective information identified through a
combination of different participatory tools in Table 6.3 can be used as an extension
guide to: facilitate the community to network with different stakeholders to discuss
and share knowledge; facilitate training on how to raise funds and write proposals
to support their initiatives; facilitate training workshops and seminars for government officials; and mobilize support for improvement of social infrastructure
including roads, health facilities, irrigation systems, wells, or boreholes. It can also
contribute to building a multi-lateral strategy for restoration of degraded ecosystems, as well as to monitor effectiveness of interventions.
6.4 Discussion
The diversity—in terms of type, approach, purpose, geography, and others—among
the examples presented here is an indication of the difficulties involved in assessing
resilience, as resilience itself is expressed in widely varying ways by communities
in different socio-ecological contexts. There are a multitude of factors—ecological,
economic, well-being, or governance-related—and challenges in knowledge transfer and management of resources and ecosystems that can affect resilience positively or negatively in different production landscapes and seascapes. Due to the
sector-based approach taken in most project and intervention planning, people have
tended to consider these factors separately, although on the ground they are part of
a system with complex, interconnected cause–effect relationships. The value of an
indicators approach like the one described in this chapter is its ability to simultaneously unravel components of SEPLS into factors that can be realistically assessed,
while not losing sight of the fact that they make up an interconnected system. This
thereby encourages just and sustainable use and management of resources, better
planning of livelihood activities, and cooperative partnership building among various stakeholders.
Nearly 10 years of experience with developing, testing, and implementing the
indicators of resilience in SEPLS has produced a great deal of knowledge on this
kind of indicators approach. Among the major benefits found in using the indicators
in all of these cases is their value in organizing local peoples’ perceptions by helping stakeholders to understand and identify elements of socio-ecological resilience,
challenges to resilience, and potential strategies to reach and sustain ecological
integrity and human well-being. With this base of improved understanding, the indicators can then serve as a tool for monitoring achievements and progress toward
W. Dunbar et al.
need for conservation agriculture due to generalized deforestation depleting their
natural resources. Needs for good leadership, collective action, networking, and
institutions working together toward common goals were strongly indicated.
The combination of participatory assessment tools and processes used for this
study highlighted people’s perceptions of resilience, its major determinants, and
available options for improvement. Establishing an innovative and communitybased multi-level coordinating body or committee is a key element for adoption of
solutions proposed by participants. The collective information identified through a
combination of different participatory tools in Table 6.3 can be used as an extension
guide to: facilitate the community to network with different stakeholders to discuss
and share knowledge; facilitate training on how to raise funds and write proposals
to support their initiatives; facilitate training workshops and seminars for government officials; and mobilize support for improvement of social infrastructure
including roads, health facilities, irrigation systems, wells, or boreholes. It can also
contribute to building a multi-lateral strategy for restoration of degraded ecosystems, as well as to monitor effectiveness of interventions.
6.4 Discussion
The diversity—in terms of type, approach, purpose, geography, and others—among
the examples presented here is an indication of the difficulties involved in assessing
resilience, as resilience itself is expressed in widely varying ways by communities
in different socio-ecological contexts. There are a multitude of factors—ecological,
economic, well-being, or governance-related—and challenges in knowledge transfer and management of resources and ecosystems that can affect resilience positively or negatively in different production landscapes and seascapes. Due to the
sector-based approach taken in most project and intervention planning, people have
tended to consider these factors separately, although on the ground they are part of
a system with complex, interconnected cause–effect relationships. The value of an
indicators approach like the one described in this chapter is its ability to simultaneously unravel components of SEPLS into factors that can be realistically assessed,
while not losing sight of the fact that they make up an interconnected system. This
thereby encourages just and sustainable use and management of resources, better
planning of livelihood activities, and cooperative partnership building among various stakeholders.
Nearly 10 years of experience with developing, testing, and implementing the
indicators of resilience in SEPLS has produced a great deal of knowledge on this
kind of indicators approach. Among the major benefits found in using the indicators
in all of these cases is their value in organizing local peoples’ perceptions by helping stakeholders to understand and identify elements of socio-ecological resilience,
challenges to resilience, and potential strategies to reach and sustain ecological
integrity and human well-being. With this base of improved understanding, the indicators can then serve as a tool for monitoring achievements and progress toward
W. Dunbar et al.