Structured output methods and environmental issues: perspectives on co-created bottom-up and ‘sideways’ science

Participatory methods for researching human–environmental interactions seek detailed inputs on all manner of issues, but the outputs are often only understandable to the technically literate. On the other hand, participatory methods that involve the co-design of structured outputs (maps, models, games, stories, etc.) can be used to represent and integrate the knowledge and views of participants authentically and can be interpretable to both ‘scientist’ and ‘non-scientist’ alike, thereby creating ‘sideways’ rather than top-down or bottom-up perspectives. This paper is both a methodological paper and a treatise that looks at some of the theory underpinning such approaches, drawing on the theory of citizen or ‘bottom-up’ stakeholder engagement in science but also co-created engagement, emphasising the learning and trust-building benefits of this ‘sideways’ engagement. It describes how some established and novel methods (participatory agent-based modelling; co-constructing computer games; and participatory social network mapping), can be used to engage stakeholders in iterative, constructivist communication, allowing researchers and stakeholders to co-create a structured ‘reality’ separate from the reality it represents. We discuss how such approaches support and contribute to scientific outputs that better represent participants’ reality. Our findings show that, when applied to ecosystem services, agricultural adaptation and disaster risk management, such representations provide communication opportunities and spaces for reflection and constructivist learning. The structured outputs allow stakeholders—both participant and researcher—to ‘mirror’ their human-environmental system to collaboratively think about gaps and problems in understanding

Mountain Resilience: a Systematic Literature Review and Paths To the Future

Mountains are home to a considerable share of the human population. Around a billion people live in mountainous areas, which harbor rich natural and sociocultural diversity. Today, many people living in mountainous areas worldwide face fundamental changes to their cultural and economic living conditions. At the same time, mountain communities have defied harsh environments in the past by adapting to changing natural conditions and showing remarkable levels of resilience. In this review paper, we provide a comprehensive overview of English-language scientific literature on resilience-related topics in mountain areas based on a systematic review of the Scopust literature database. We propose a structured starting point for science–practice interactions and concrete action-based activities to support livelihoods and strengthen resilience in mountain areas. We suggest that existing knowledge gaps can be addressed by relying on local knowledge and cocreating solutions with communities. In this way, we can build innovative capacity and actively buffer against the impact of crises while supporting deliberate transformation toward sustainability and regeneration to further enhance resilience. © 2022 Wyss et al.We acknowledge the support received from the Mountain Research Initiative (MRI) for this publication via its organizational support to the MRI Mountain Resilience Working Group and coverage of the publication fee

Conceptualizing community resilience to natural hazards - the emBRACE framework

The level of community is considered to be vital for building disaster resilience. Yet, community resilience as a scientific concept often remains vaguely defined and lacks the guiding characteristics necessary for analysing and enhancing resilience on the ground. The emBRACE framework of community resilience presented in this paper provides a heuristic analytical tool for understanding, explaining and measuring community resilience to natural hazards. It was developed in an iterative process building on existing scholarly debates, on empirical case study work in five countries and on participatory consultation with community stakeholders where the framework was applied and ground-tested in different contexts and for different hazard types. The framework conceptualizes resilience across three core domains: (i) resources and capacities, (ii) actions and (iii) learning. These three domains are conceptualized as intrinsically conjoined within a whole. Community resilience is influenced by these integral elements as well as by extra-community forces comprising disaster risk governance and thus laws, policies and responsibilities on the one hand and on the other, the general societal context, natural and human-made disturbances and system change over time. The framework is a graphically rendered heuristic, which through application can assist in guiding the assessment of community resilience in a systematic way and identifying key drivers and barriers of resilience that affect any particular hazard-exposed community