Resilience thinking and optimization are often viewed as opposites, but resilience thinking is more critical of how optimization is frequently applied rather than the technique per-se. A new paper in TREE Integrating resilience thinking and optimisation for conservation (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.020) by Joern Fischer and others, including myself, attempt to integrate resilience thinking and optimization. We propose that by actively embedding optimisation analyses within a resilience-thinking framework ecosystem management could draw on the complementary strengths of both, thereby promoting cost-effective and enduring conservation outcomes.
The paper’s Table 1 provides an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of optimization for conservation and resilience thinking:
|
|
Optimisation for conservation
|
Resilience thinking
|
|---|---|---|
| Strengths (inherent) | Recognises resource scarcity | Recognises system complexity |
| Encourages transparency in resource allocation | Recognises interdependence of social and biophysical systems | |
| Strengths (in practice) | Can provide specific answers to a well-defined problem | Encourages anticipation of undesirable surprises or thresholds |
| Fits well with how business and governments operate | Encourages reflection on how a system works | |
| Weaknesses (inherent) | Sensitive to accuracy of underlying assumptions and system model | Potentially difficult to apply to systems without identifiable alternate states |
| Weaknesses (in practice) | Targets or budget constraints are often informed by politics rather than an in-depth understanding of underlying system dynamics | Reliant on tools from other disciplines to be operational to inform policy |
| The term ‘optimal’ can sound absolute to policymakers and the general public | The term ‘resilience’ can appear vague to policymakers and the general public |
And we discuss three themes that both approaches need to address (i) dealing with social issues; (ii) dealing with uncertainties and the limited extent to which they can be controlled; and (iii) avoiding undesirable states that constrain reversibility.