Sustainable Social-ecological Systems: an Impossibility?

Given rapid changes in large-scale human and biophysical processes—carbon emissions, population increase and migrations, overharvesting and pollution leading to loss of species—scientists are worried that many of the social-ecological systems existing today may collapse by the end of the 21st century. Is this an exaggerated worry? The thesis I will present is that the negative prognosis will indeed occur in many parts of the world if we do not worry a great deal about these processes and their consequences. More important than simply worrying, however, is the development of a strong diagnostic method for analyzing the diversity of processes and the multiplicity of potential social and biophysical solutions that are needed to cope effectively with these varied processes. Past efforts to impose simple solutions to these complex problems have frequently led to worse outcomes than the problems addressed. Our need today is building a strong interdisciplinary science of complex, multilevel systems that will enable over time a matching of potential solutions to a careful diagnosis of specific problems embedded in a social-ecological context. I will take some small steps toward this goal in my presentation. Presented at the 2007 Annual Meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, “Science and Technology for Sustainable Well-Being,” 15–19 February in San Francisco. A revised and shortened version of this paper will be the perspectives paper of a special feature of the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) to be published in the fall of 2007. Support from the National Science Foundation (grant SES0083511), the Ford Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation is greatly appreciated. © 2007 Elinor Ostrom Sustainable Social-Ecological Systems: An Impossibility? Elinor Ostrom Sustainable Social-Ecological Systems: An Impossibility? Given rapid changes in large-scale human and biophysical processes—carbon emissions, population increase and migrations, overharvesting and pollution leading to loss of species— scientists are worried that many of the social-ecological systems (SESs) existing today may collapse by the end of the 21st century. Chapin and colleagues (2006) warn us about the grave extent of worsening ecological conditions due to increased human activities. They urge us to consider a range of policy strategies that include diverse ways of improving the possibilities of sustainable social-ecological systems by creating diverse institutions that enhance learning and innovation at multiple scales. Unfortunately, much of the literature that focuses on remedies for the ecological threats we face predict disaster unless some preferred cure-all is adopted (Doyle 2006; Montero 2000; Rees 1992; Terborgh and Schaik 1997; Tipton 1995; Williams 2003). Many have followed in Garrett Hardin’s (1968) footsteps and predict dire consequences unless his first solution—government ownership—is imposed. The Task Force on Global Biodiversity of the National Science Board (NSB 1989) predicted that without solutions imposed by international bodies, most tropical forests will be diminished to fragments or lost entirely by the 21st century. Even though there are over 100,000 protected areas around the world, including about 10% of the forested areas of the world (UNEP-WCMC 2004), many call for still further efforts to create and maintain protected areas as the only way to protect biodiversity (Lovejoy 2006; Terborgh 1999). Others argue that “the only way to avoid the tragedy of the commons in natural resources and wildlife is . . . by creating a system of private property rights” (Smith 1981: 467; see also Wagner 1989). According to many analysts, sustainable SESs are impossible unless some particular panacea is adopted. The central task of this paper will be to outline a method for diagnostic assessments of complex SESs. I hope to counteract the sense that it is impossible to achieve sustainability as well as the presumption that scholars have the tools to make simple, predictive models of linked social-ecological systems and deduce the universal solution—a panacea—to problems of overuse or destruction of resources. Pearce et al. (1989) wrote a popular textbook on environmental economics with the title of Blueprint for a Green Economy in which marketable permits were presented as the method for achieving optimal prices and sustainable development (see also Pearce 1988). Others have agreed that marketable permits are the optimal method for solving free-rider problems and coping effectively with common-pool resources (CPRs) (Armstrong and Sumaila 2001; Groves and Ledyard 1977; Yaron and Dinar 1982). 1 In recent times, economists have begun to call into question the presumption that privatization is a panacea and the only way to protect the commons (Kikeri and Nellis 2004; Rees 1992; Tietenberg 2002). Mulherin (2005) challenges the presumption that there is one best structure for corporate governance. In contrast to panacea thinking,