NANCY Seminar – Jean-Baptiste Pichancourt (INRAE)

Event details :

Title: Bridging Ostrom’s governance theory to dynamic adaptive policy pathway (DAPP) maps: Theory and application

Abstract: Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathway (DAPP) maps help guide management decisions when the future of a critical asset is deeply uncertain due to environmental changes. Recent discussions have highlighted the importance of creating DAPPs that better consider social-ecological factors for managing common-pool ecosystem services adaptively. The focus of this presentation is on evaluating how DAPPs could address three key challenges identified by Ostrom in adaptive governance of social-ecological systems (SES): (i) avoiding one-size-fits-all solutions (i.e. the panacea dilemma), (ii) ensuring resilience to system-wide shocks (i.e. systemic robustness), and (iii) coordinating different levels of governance initiatives effectively (i.e. operational, collective and constitutional-choice levels).

In this presentation, I will demonstrate that balancing these three goals hinges upon understanding the connection between DAPP and other key analytical frameworks: Ostrom’s SES framework, the Coupled Infrastructure System (CIS) framework, the Complex Dynamical Systems theory, and the Viable Control Theory.

I will detail this connection and present an application example, where I investigated potential governance transition pathways designed to manage hedgerow networks that provide a wide range of ecosystem goods and services. The focus is on two SES characterized by distinct community constraints and needs: a rural and a peri-urban SES located in the French Auvergne region. There, the viable delivery in hedgerows’ ecosystem goods and services faces threats from climate change, prompting our exploration of possible viable or optimal adaptation pathways between nine alternative nested governance arrangements. To facilitate understanding of results, I present indicators that were used to pinpoint the key drivers influencing DAPP map differences, in response to changes in SES context and climate stress level.

With this presentation I will try to convince you of the efficacy of this approach (without overlooking its limitations) in addressing simultaneously the three adaptation problems, for increasingly complex SES and semi-natural infrastructures that contain many species, stakeholders, and ecosystem (dis)services.

Following an open discussion, I would like to invite you to progressively refocus our exchanges on the most effective strategies for bridging the gap between all the analytical frameworks we develop for social-ecological evaluation (axiological dimension of science) and actionable decision-making tools (praxeological dimension of science).