Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 5;10(1):4136.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-59713-w.

Exploring non-linear transition pathways in social-ecological systems

Affiliations

Exploring non-linear transition pathways in social-ecological systems

Jean-Denis Mathias et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Tipping point dynamics are fundamental drivers for sustainable transition pathways of social-ecological systems (SES). Current research predominantly analyzes how crossing tipping points causes regime shifts, however, the analysis of potential transition pathways from these social and ecological tipping points is often overlooked. In this paper, we analyze transition pathways and the potential outcomes that these may lead to via a stylized model of a system composed of interacting agents exploiting resources and, by extension, the overall ecosystem. Interactions between the social and the ecological system are based on a perception-exploitation framework. We show that the presence of tipping points in SES may yield counter-intuitive social-ecological transition pathways. For example, the high perception of an alarming ecological state among agents can provide short-term ecological benefits, but can be less effective in the long term, compared to a low-perception condition. This work also highlights how understanding non-linear interactions is critical for defining suitable transition pathways of any SES.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Social-ecological feedbacks for defining transition pathways in SES. In order to reach a given target state, several transition pathways are possible. Here, an ecologically driven transition pathway A and a socially driven transition pathway B are represented.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Schematic view of social-ecological interactions based on the collective (a) and individual (b) points of view. The global exploitation of the ecological system depends on the sum of individual exploitations (a) that depends on several social processes (perception, social interactions, etc.) that yields changes in individual options (b).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Transition pathways based on social dynamics that yield two final ecological states. In both cases, there is a sudden social change of the state (around time = 120 for the first transition pathway and time = 200 for the second one) due to instability of the system (left figures): opinions of the moderate users (in black) are fluctuating until a tipping towards engaged users (in red) depending on the tipping case: ecological users for case 1 (a) when ecological users have influenced all the moderate users and defined a strongly ecological norm, and productive users for case 2 (b) when productive users have influenced all the moderate users and defined a strongly productive behavior. According to the social tipping (productive or ecological tipping), we have two transition pathways: either there is a convergence towards a stable biomass equilibrium (case 1, a) or an extinction of the biomass (case 2, b).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Socio-ecological transition pathway caused by socio-ecological feedbacks, social tipping points (STP) and ecological tipping points (ETP). For (a,d), red points represent engaged users whereas black points represent moderate users.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Influence of perception of alarming ecological states on ecological transition pathways. Despite of initial common trajectory (from point A to point B), perception level dramatically changes the trajectory of the ecological system. Three types of perceptions are tested. Low perception surprisingly leads to a higher final biomass (point E) whereas a high perception leads to a lower final biomass (point G). However, the minimum value of the biomass along the trajectory is lower for low perception compared to the trajectory induced by high perception.

References

    1. Liu J, et al. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science. 2007;317:1513–1516. doi: 10.1126/science.1144004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Folke C, et al. Resilience and sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio. 2002;31:437–440. doi: 10.1579/0044-7447-31.5.437. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Turner BL, et al. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2003;100:8074–8079. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1231335100. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. An, L. Modeling human decisions in coupled human and natural systems: Review of agent-based models. Ecological Modelling229, 25–36 (2012). Modeling Human Decisions.
    1. Pahl-Wostl, C. et al. Social learning and water resources management. Ecology and Society12 (2007).

Publication types