Exploring adaptability through learning layers and learning loops

Abstract

Adaptability in social–ecological systems results from individual and collective action, and multi‐level interactions. It can be understood in a dual sense as a system's ability to adapt to disturbance and change, and to navigate system transformation. Inherent in this conception, as found in resilience thinking, are the concepts of learning and governance. Without learning, or unlearning, neither adaptation nor transformation is possible, and without governance we neither collectively act on nor institutionally embed learning experiences. This paper provides an attempt at synthesising and structuring this conceptual mapping and understanding of adaptability by adding insights from governance theory and using learning layers and learning loops as bridging concepts. As the overview demonstrates, the resilience–learning–governance interface provides some fruitful insights for the conceptual and theoretical understanding of adaptability, adaptation and transformation in resilience theory. Whereas resilience answers to why the adaptation–transformation distinction is important in the first place, learning provides the necessary link between the individual and system level, while governance brings further insights into the different potential mechanisms available for institutionally implementing adaptation and transformation. This exploration points to the need to develop a framework for understanding adaptability that: (1) identifies social–ecological systems in terms of structure, process and outcome, and particularly self‐reinforcing feedbacks; (2) adds an institutional framework including formal and informal decision‐making arenas; (3) explicitly addresses norms, values and ideas; (4) emphasises power, negotiation and facilitation; and (5) emphasises the importance of deliberate learning and transformation strategies.

Keywords:

• adaptability
• adaptation
• transformation
• governance
• multi‐level learning
• multiple‐loop learning
• resilience
• environmental education

Acknowledgements

I gratefully acknowledge support from the Swedish Research Council Formas for funding. Many thanks to the editors of this special issue (Krasny, Lundholm and Plummer) and to Camilla Sandström, Jon Moen, Carina Keskitalo and the anonymous reviewer for helpful discussions and insightful comments from which this paper benefited greatly. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the IHDP Open Meeting, 26–30 April 2009, Bonn, Germany.

Notes

1. I recognise that there exist not one but several learning perspectives. With regards to theories on learning this contribution does not situate itself explicitly albeit is closest to the so‐called ‘socio‐cultural’ perspective (see Lundholm and Plummer 2010). Furthermore, focus is on the dynamic processes of multi‐level learning and interaction rather than environmental education and individual learning processes.

2. As part of my recently begun Ph.D. project this framework will be further refined and applied empirically to reindeer husbandry in northern Sweden where multi‐layered adaptation and transformation will be analysed in view of climate and global change.

3. These dual capacities have also been conceived as adaptability and transformability, respectively (see, e.g., Walker et al. 2004). Here I have chosen to build on Walker and Salt's (2006) more recent definition, recognising that capacity to adapt and transform are both components of adaptability. But in essence, what I here label capacity for adaptation and transformation is similar to Walker et al.'s (2004) adaptability and transformability.

4. Empirical examples of social–ecological transformations (where both social and ecological functions and dynamics have changed qualitatively as a result of deliberate agency; cf. Janssen, Anderies, and Ostrom 2007) are more difficult to find. Arguably Willie Smits' restoration project in Borneo (Normile 2009) serves as one potential example.