4.8 Principles for Adaptive Change
bottom line and reasserts focus on outcomes, not
just outputs. Learning requires that hypotheses and
assumptions about how the natural world works
and how human and natural systems interact can
be made explicit. In doing so, accountability shifts
away from mindless adherence to rules to an understanding of whether what we are doing is having the beneficial consequences intended.
• Think and go slow to go fast. The political dynamics that drive quick fixes simply lead to more
unforgiving conditions for decisions, more fragile
natural systems, more dependent industries, and
more distrust from citizens (Holling, 1986). Analyze the pace at which change is occurring. More
often than not, the variables that attract most attention cause rapid change and operate at small
scales. Modem decision-making processes are beholden to the here and now. But life depends on a
web of interrelationships, and all meaningful relationships take time and energy to build and sustain.
Assessment should focus on long-term, slow
changes in structural variables or system properties
and challenge the assumptions on which current
policy rests. Expand the domain of rationality beyond the here and now by reflecting on how the
long ago and far away will influence how the future may unfold out there and then.
• The devil is in the dynamics, not just the details. Ecosystems are dynamic-constantly changing and inherently uncertain, with potential multiple futures-a moving target with no set endpoint.
Focus on learning from past patterns and processes.
Fire suppression in Yellowstone preserved scenic
beauty for a time, until fire on an unanticipated
scale was triggered by a slow moving dynamic.
Drainage in the Red River Valley allowed for productive agriculture and development, until unprecedented snowfall and rains in 1997 reminded
the world, with disastrous consequences, that the
valley was in fact the ancient lakebed of the former Glacial Lake Agassiz.
• Theory is not an intellectual luxury; it is a
practical necessity. Theory and practice must be
tightly linked. Without one, the other withers.
When theory or practice operates in a vacuum, precious time and resources are wasted, and unintended beneficial or adverse consequences go unexamined. Far too frequently, assessments and the
decisions that follow are unlinked, and opportunities for learning are lost. Assessment needs an integrated scientific framework on which to build
shared understanding that bridges with policy options. The lines that separate research, policy, and
practice must eliminate work in tandem.
65
• The goal of resource management is resilience.
We must maintain the capacity of living systemsecological, cultural, and economic-to renew
themselves and thrive, not just survive for a time.
We must design ways of thinking and acting that
will allow pattern (e.g., disturbance regimes) integral to ecosystem functioning to be restored. Resource assessments must communicate stories of
renewal: how the slow (climate, geology) and fast
(vegetation) variables are coupled (through hydrology and sedimentation) and evolve, revealing
themselves as configurations over time that cannot
be understood as snapshots. These stories must penetrate the surface of things and expose the deep
logic that provides insight, not universal answers.
Assessments should capture and convey the
essence of change in readily understandable caricatures (see Section 31.5.1). Assessments must
highlight uncertainties and search for flexibility,
identifying management and policy options that
eliminate or buffer negative relationships between
ecological and economic objectives.
• Embracing error is prerequisite to developing
trust and understanding. Human adaptation and
resilience depend on unlearning the past. Learning
new ways is predicated on understanding that yesterday's solutions are today's problems and tomorrow's blind spot. We must admit that we are
captives of the moment, trapped in a world where
change invariably outpaces comprehension, with
little thought given to the lessons of the past or the
emerging puzzles of the future. The result is that
our professional competencies (i.e., doing what society has asked of resource scientists and managers)
become increasingly short-lived, at risk, and untrustworthy. Too frequently, we resort to established patterns of activity and action that are economical and reassuring, but increasingly irrelevant
and pathological. Facing tough ecological challenges requires inventing fundamentally new ways
of thinking and acting and then communicating effectively and mobilizing with others to take action.
• Truth lies at the intersection of competing explanations. Inquiry and reflection are central to human endeavor. The era of science as the revealer
of universal truths on which the future could be
confidently predicted is over. Chaos, catastrophe,
criticality, and fractal theories have exposed the inadequacies of a Newtonian, deterministic world
view (not to mention the illuminating criticisms of
generations of social scientists, historians, and
philosophers). In its place is a world view that invites multiple and potentially competing modes of
inquiry and lines of evidence, using the differences
bottom line and reasserts focus on outcomes, not
just outputs. Learning requires that hypotheses and
assumptions about how the natural world works
and how human and natural systems interact can
be made explicit. In doing so, accountability shifts
away from mindless adherence to rules to an understanding of whether what we are doing is having the beneficial consequences intended.
• Think and go slow to go fast. The political dynamics that drive quick fixes simply lead to more
unforgiving conditions for decisions, more fragile
natural systems, more dependent industries, and
more distrust from citizens (Holling, 1986). Analyze the pace at which change is occurring. More
often than not, the variables that attract most attention cause rapid change and operate at small
scales. Modem decision-making processes are beholden to the here and now. But life depends on a
web of interrelationships, and all meaningful relationships take time and energy to build and sustain.
Assessment should focus on long-term, slow
changes in structural variables or system properties
and challenge the assumptions on which current
policy rests. Expand the domain of rationality beyond the here and now by reflecting on how the
long ago and far away will influence how the future may unfold out there and then.
• The devil is in the dynamics, not just the details. Ecosystems are dynamic-constantly changing and inherently uncertain, with potential multiple futures-a moving target with no set endpoint.
Focus on learning from past patterns and processes.
Fire suppression in Yellowstone preserved scenic
beauty for a time, until fire on an unanticipated
scale was triggered by a slow moving dynamic.
Drainage in the Red River Valley allowed for productive agriculture and development, until unprecedented snowfall and rains in 1997 reminded
the world, with disastrous consequences, that the
valley was in fact the ancient lakebed of the former Glacial Lake Agassiz.
• Theory is not an intellectual luxury; it is a
practical necessity. Theory and practice must be
tightly linked. Without one, the other withers.
When theory or practice operates in a vacuum, precious time and resources are wasted, and unintended beneficial or adverse consequences go unexamined. Far too frequently, assessments and the
decisions that follow are unlinked, and opportunities for learning are lost. Assessment needs an integrated scientific framework on which to build
shared understanding that bridges with policy options. The lines that separate research, policy, and
practice must eliminate work in tandem.
65
• The goal of resource management is resilience.
We must maintain the capacity of living systemsecological, cultural, and economic-to renew
themselves and thrive, not just survive for a time.
We must design ways of thinking and acting that
will allow pattern (e.g., disturbance regimes) integral to ecosystem functioning to be restored. Resource assessments must communicate stories of
renewal: how the slow (climate, geology) and fast
(vegetation) variables are coupled (through hydrology and sedimentation) and evolve, revealing
themselves as configurations over time that cannot
be understood as snapshots. These stories must penetrate the surface of things and expose the deep
logic that provides insight, not universal answers.
Assessments should capture and convey the
essence of change in readily understandable caricatures (see Section 31.5.1). Assessments must
highlight uncertainties and search for flexibility,
identifying management and policy options that
eliminate or buffer negative relationships between
ecological and economic objectives.
• Embracing error is prerequisite to developing
trust and understanding. Human adaptation and
resilience depend on unlearning the past. Learning
new ways is predicated on understanding that yesterday's solutions are today's problems and tomorrow's blind spot. We must admit that we are
captives of the moment, trapped in a world where
change invariably outpaces comprehension, with
little thought given to the lessons of the past or the
emerging puzzles of the future. The result is that
our professional competencies (i.e., doing what society has asked of resource scientists and managers)
become increasingly short-lived, at risk, and untrustworthy. Too frequently, we resort to established patterns of activity and action that are economical and reassuring, but increasingly irrelevant
and pathological. Facing tough ecological challenges requires inventing fundamentally new ways
of thinking and acting and then communicating effectively and mobilizing with others to take action.
• Truth lies at the intersection of competing explanations. Inquiry and reflection are central to human endeavor. The era of science as the revealer
of universal truths on which the future could be
confidently predicted is over. Chaos, catastrophe,
criticality, and fractal theories have exposed the inadequacies of a Newtonian, deterministic world
view (not to mention the illuminating criticisms of
generations of social scientists, historians, and
philosophers). In its place is a world view that invites multiple and potentially competing modes of
inquiry and lines of evidence, using the differences