Scales Mismatches

Scale Mismatches in Social-Ecological Systems: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions
Author(s): Graeme S. Cumming, David H. M. Cumming and Charles L. Redman

Source: Ecology and Society , Jun 2006, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Jun 2006)
Published by: Resilience Alliance Inc.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267802
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267802?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ecology and Society
This content downloaded from

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Copyright © 2006 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.
Cumming, G. S., D. H. M. Cumming, and C. L. Redman. 2006. Scale mismatches in social-ecological
systems: causes, consequences, and solutions . Ecology and Society 11(1): 14. [online] URL:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art14/
Insight, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems

Scale Mismatches in Social-Ecological Systems: Causes,
Consequences, and Solutions
Graeme S. Cumming1, David H. M. Cumming2, and Charles L. Redman3
ABSTRACT. Scale is a concept that transcends disciplinary boundaries. In ecology and geography, scale
is usually defined in terms of spatial and temporal dimensions. Sociological scale also incorporates space
and time, but adds ideas about representation and organization. Although spatial and temporal location
determine the context for social and ecological dynamics, social-ecological interactions can create dynamic
feedback loops in which humans both influence and are influenced by ecosystem processes. We hypothesize
that many of the problems encountered by societies in managing natural resources arise because of a
mismatch between the scale of management and the scale(s) of the ecological processes being managed.
We use examples from southern Africa and the southern United States to address four main questions: (1)
What is a “scale mismatch?” (2) How are scale mismatches generated? (3) What are the consequences of
scale mismatches? (4) How can scale mismatches be resolved? Scale mismatches occur when the scale of
environmental variation and the scale of social organization in which the responsibility for management
resides are aligned in such a way that one or more functions of the social-ecological system are disrupted,
inefficiencies occur, and/or important components of the system are lost. They are generated by a wide
range of social, ecological, and linked social-ecological processes. Mismatches between the scales of
ecological processes and the institutions that are responsible for managing them can contribute to a decrease
in social-ecological resilience, including the mismanagement of natural resources and a decrease in human
well-being. Solutions to scale mismatches usually require institutional changes at more than one hierarchical
level. Long-term solutions to scale mismatch problems will depend on social learning and the development
of flexible institutions that can adjust and reorganize in response to changes in ecosystems. Further research
is needed to improve our ability to diagnose, understand, and resolve scale mismatches in linked social-
ecological systems.
Key Words: scale; scale mismatch; conservation; management; ecosystem function; sociological scale;
southern Africa
INTRODUCTION many scales. On the other, there is the subjectivity

of our observations, which are by necessity tied to
The topic of scale is one of the themes that unifies the scale or range of scales at which we can collect
different disciplinary perspectives. Phenomena of information. The objectives of scaling studies are
interest such as processes, patterns, individuals, and to consider how our perceptions of phenomena of
networks exist within a context that may vary in its interest change as the scale of analysis changes and
dimensions, e.g., size, speed, complexity, or other to try to assess objectively the multiscale nature of
attributes. Studies of particular phenomena usually the phenomenon. When we consider the interactions
focus on events that occur within a particular of two systems, particularly those in which a cause-
combination of dimensions that defines a single and-effect relationship exists, we are faced with the
scale at which empirical observations are made. problem of understanding how scale influences the
Two considerations affect the choice of scale. On number and nature of those interactions.
the one hand, there is the empirical reality of the
phenomenon of interest, which may range across
1
University of Florida, 2University of Zimbabwe, 3Arizona State University

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Ecology and Society 11(1): 14
Social and ecological systems interact in many ecosystems as individuals or as representatives of

ways. In this paper, we consider the relevance of organizations. Human actions are influenced by
scale in the management of natural resources. We institutions, by perceptions of how ecosystems
hypothesize that many of the problems encountered function, and by perceptions of future change.
by societies in managing natural resources arise as Ecosystems in turn are structured by processes and
a consequence of a mismatch between the scale of feedbacks, including human influences, that arise
management and the scale of the ecological from the interactions of organisms with their
processes or natural resources being managed. environment. The goods and services that humans
Interactions occur because of the effects of humans obtain from ecosystems may be localized, e.g., fruit
on ecosystems and vice versa. Here we address four from a single tree, or derived from a relatively large
main questions: (1) What is a “scale mismatch?” (2) area, e.g., flood control by wetlands (see Daily et
How are scale mismatches generated? (3) What are al. 1997). Although spatial and temporal location
the consequences of scale mismatches? (4) How can determine the underlying context for both social and
scale mismatches be resolved? ecological dynamics, the interactions between
societies and ecosystems can create dynamic
feedback loops in which humans both influence and
SCALE CONCEPTS AND SCALE are influenced by ecosystem processes (Levin
MISMATCHES 1999).
An important difference between societies and

Sociological and ecological scales ecosystems is that some individual humans,
especially those in organizational roles, are able to
Societies and ecosystems interact over many spatial influence ecosystem patterns and processes at scales
and temporal scales. This paper is not an attempt to well beyond what might be expected, and far
review or redefine the concept of scale, which has exceeding those at which the influence of any
received thorough treatment elsewhere (e.g., Wiens individual organism of another species might be felt.
1989, Levin 1992, Gibson et al. 2000, Turner et al. Human influence can be a direct result of the number
2001), so we provide here only a brief summary of of people represented or led, or can occur via
relevant ideas. The concept of scale is used in subtly informal rules, transitory regulations, or more
different ways in sociology and in ecology (Gibson permanent laws. The connection between
et al. 2000). In ecology, scale usually refers to the representation and power contributes to a
spatial and temporal dimensions of a pattern or sociological concept of scale in which different
process. Ecological scale, also called “geographic levels of an organizational hierarchy respond and
scale,” has two main attributes: grain and extent act at particular spatial and temporal scales that may
(Turner et al. 2001). Extent describes the total area range from small to very large. Recognition of the
or time period under consideration; grain describes importance of social scale has been an underlying
the resolution of observations (Turner et al. 2001, motive for the development of political ecology,
Rietkirk et al. 2002). Changes in the number and which focuses first on local land users and their
nature of the interacting units in a system, for social relations and then traces those relations to
example, from individuals through populations to higher scales of decision-making power (Blaikie
an entire species, are usually considered to be 1985, Schmink and Wood 1992, Peterson 2000).
changes in the level of organization (e.g., Simon
1962). In contrast, sociological scale includes the
representative nature of social structures from Scale mismatches
individuals to organizations as well as the social
institutions, i.e., rules, laws, policies, and formal Although there are frequent references in the
and informal cultural norms, that govern the spatial literature to scale mismatches between ecological
and temporal extent of resource access rights and and social systems, most investigations are
management responsibilities (e.g., Barbier 1997, circumstantial rather than direct (e.g., Wolf and
Chidumayo 2002, Ziker 2003, Bodin and Norberg Allen 1995, Gunderson and Holling 2002, Perry and
2005). Ommer 2003). The specific impacts of scale
mismatches on natural resources and sustainability
Social and ecological scales are often, but not are seldom described, and no explicit framework
always, aligned. Humans may interact with has been proposed for examining scale mismatches

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
within linked social-ecological systems. Folke et al. are responsible for management or the ecological
(1998) have considered the problem of social- systems that are being managed. In these cases, the
ecological mismatches, but without offering either system may stop working, experience a disruption
a definition or a mechanism by which scale of function, work inefficiently, and/or start to
mismatches arise. In this paper we are particularly simplify through the loss of important components.
interested in the relationship between human The functions that are disrupted might include such
management and biophysical systems. We propose things as the provision of ecosystem goods and
as a working definition that scale mismatches occur services, self-maintenance or self-organization, and
when the scale of environmental variation and the key processes like information exchange or nutrient
scale of the social organization responsible for cycles (Daily et al. 1997, Levin 1999). For example,
management are aligned in such a way that one or many countries currently lack the broad-scale
more functions of the social-ecological system are institutions that are necessary to manage regional
disrupted, inefficiencies occur, and/or important deforestation; the resulting haphazard loss of forests
components of the system are lost. can disrupt a wide range of ecological functions,
including climate regulation, fruit provision, game
Several aspects of this definition require further species populations, and fire regimes (e.g., Nepstad
clarification. Building on the suggestions of Lee et al. 1999).
(1993), we envisage that scale mismatches between
social and ecological systems may be spatial, Scale mismatches are not always easy to diagnose.
temporal, or functional. Spatial mismatches will In natural resource management systems, we
occur when the spatial scales of management and suggest that scale mismatches will be evidenced by
the spatial scales of ecosystem processes do not a loss of adaptive capacity in resource managers and
align appropriately (Fig. 1). Temporal mismatches the social system in which they are embedded,
will occur when the temporal scales of management together with a loss of species, functions, and other
and the temporal scales of ecosystem processes do system components, processes, or relationships that
not align appropriately (Fig. 2). Functional contribute to ecological resilience. The loss of
mismatches will occur when the functional scales adaptive capacity in the system can be caused by a
of management do not align appropriately with the failure in feedback signals or an inability to respond
functional scales of ecosystem processes (Fig. 3). appropriately. An individual or organizational
By functional scale, we mean the magnitude or rate inability to respond in an appropriate manner, i.e.,
of a process of interest such as production, adapt, may be caused by externally imposed
consumption, or a management manipulation. constraints such as policy instruments or by
Appropriate alignment indicates a relationship in depleted resources, e.g. loss of reserves or capital,
which the functioning of the social-ecological within the hierarchical level in question. Effective
system is affected by scale-related issues. Another ecosystem management will respond to ecological
way of illustrating the same principles is to consider processes at the scales at which they occur and will
the ways in which social and ecological hierarchies often simulate or recreate formerly broad-scale
(Fig. 4) are aligned relative to one another. processes that have been disrupted. We next explore
the causes and consequences of scale mismatches
Scale mismatches arise through changes in the in more depth.
relationships between the spatial, temporal, or
functional scales at which the environment varies,
the scales at which human social organization CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF SCALE
occurs, and the demands of people and other MISMATCHES
organisms for resources. When there is a suitable
match between the scales of social organization and Scale mismatches result from changes in either the
environmental variation in such areas as production, scale of environmental variation, the scale of the
disturbances, and recycling, management can cope social organization responsible for management, or
adequately with environmental variation, demand both. In other words, they can arise from the internal
and production can be balanced, and the system as dynamics of social and ecological systems
a whole functions effectively (e.g., Wolf and Allen respectively, or from the dynamics of the social-
1995). When the scales of social organization and ecological interaction. The processes that lead to
environmental variation are mismatched, problems scale mismatches can thus be summarized as
inevitably arise in either the social institutions that primarily social, primarily ecological, or coupled

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Fig. 1. Consequences of mismatched spatial scales (indicated in red) between social and ecological systems.
For example, the scale of social organization at which control resides is too small for many global
environmental problems, such as regulating carbon emissions and managing oceanic fisheries. In contrast,
global conventions or national regulations that make sense for the average location over a broad scale can
have unfortunate consequences at finer scales at which local conditions may differ substantially from the
mean. A typical example would be the introduction of standard regulations governing the trade, production,
or use of an ecosystem service that is overabundant in some places and rare in others; harvesting regulations
typically need to be determined at relatively fine scales.
social-ecological. The social processes that lead to further influenced by changes in human
scale mismatches revolve primarily around land populations, governance, technology, infrastructure,
tenure, which constitutes the social institutions that and values. The ecological processes that lead to
control the allocation, use, and management of land scale mismatches primarily involve changes in the
and its associated resources; these institutions resource base through such things as trophic
include rules, rights and restrictions and the cascades, disease, reductions in productivity, and
organizations that enforce them. Land tenure is changes in the abiotic environment. Coupled social-

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Fig. 2. Consequences of mismatched temporal scales (indicated in red) between social and ecological
systems. For example, some ecological problems, such as the management of long-lived and slowly
reproducing species like redwood trees, baobabs, whales, and elephants, require consistent, long-term
policies that may be difficult to achieve over time horizons of 50 yr in western democracies. In contrast,
it may take time for large bureaucracies and cumbersome organizations to face up to and deal with rapid
ecological changes that demand immediate management action, such as the sudden introduction of an
invasive species.
ecological processes that lead to scale mismatches systems rather than by processes that are intrinsic
include changes in the nature, i.e., magnitude, rate, to either. Social-ecological processes may result in
frequency, or qualitative aspects, of social- system behaviors that differ from those of either
ecological interactions. These changes are often set social or ecological systems (Westley et al. 2002).
in motion by changes in societies or ecosystems and
so overlap considerably with the previous two
categories, but they are typically dominated by a
feedback dynamic between social and ecological

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Fig. 3.Consequences of mismatched functional scales (indicated in red) between social and ecological
systems. For example, problems arise when a city grows beyond the ability of the ecosystem to provide it
with fresh water, whereas large-scale environmental changes, such as rising sea levels or relatively sudden
reductions in primary production, can create crises for local communities.
Social processes leading to scale mismatches changes in food production have altered the
geographic scale, i.e., grain and extent, of
A diverse array of social processes has land use and land tenure (Boserup 1965,
progressively altered the scales of social-ecological 1981, Alados 2004).
relationships:
2. The global population has grown well beyond
1. At different times, different regions have any historical precedent (Whitmore et al.
seen a shift from dependence on hunted and 1993, UNEP 2002). Population growth has
gathered food resources to a reliance on been accompanied by the sedentarization of
agricultural production (Bender 1975, people into villages, towns, and cities.
Messerli et al. 2000). These and more recent

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Fig. 4. Examples of how hierarchies may be aligned or misaligned in a natural resource management
situation. Ecological processes (green boxes) are managed by people (blue boxes). Overlapping boxes
indicate interactions between units, and the labels A, B, and C denote matching levels between hierarchies.
(a) In an ideal situation, ecological processes will be managed by people who have the mandate and the
power to act at the same scale as the process. (b) Scale mismatches may result in upper-level managers
who have nothing to do but micromanage their juniors, while lower-level managers are confronted with
ecological problems that they lack the resources to deal with (C-B mismatch). (c) Another kind of mismatch
results in a lack of management at some key scales (unmanaged B) and the involvement of higher-level
managers in lower-level resource management (B-C mismatch), leaving junior managers with little power
to effect change (dangling C). (d) In a global or international context, a common scale mismatch occurs
when no institution exists to deal with the broad-scale environmental problem (unmanaged A). Note that
in many examples, scale mismatches are not necessarily system-wide.

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
3. There has been a global shift in the style of periods to work their way out of social-ecological
governance toward the nation-state, with systems, and societal responses are often slow
increased levels of bureaucracy, changes in (Scheffer et al. 2003).
the distribution of power among individuals,
and increasing creation of boundaries, Changes in the human population
together with a fragmentation of responsibility.
The global human population has led to increasing
4. New technologies, such as chainsaws and pressure on natural resources and more competition
tractors, have allowed people to greatly alter between individuals and organizations at many
the scale at which they use land. levels of society. Competition has occurred both for
the resources themselves and for markets for
5. There has been a huge increase in the amount products. In some instances, increases in the human
of infrastructure in many places in the world, population have also resulted in greater cooperation.
making ecosystems more accessible than ever In both cases, although change is frequent, the
and providing opportunities for many areas social, political, and economic framework in which
to become involved in national and global land management occurs has a great deal of inertia
economies (e.g., Forman 2000). (Scheffer et al. 2003). Relevant institutions and
novel practices arise to solve newly perceived
6. Human values and the ways in which problems. Problem solution is often tied to existing
societies view nature have changed, leading conditions and to the scales involved; small
to fundamentally different kinds of social- enterprises and families can be adaptable, but entire
ecological interactions (Messerli et al. 2000, cultures are often highly resistant to change.
Lambin et al. 2003). Together, these Institutions are rarely as flexible as the world that
processes, each of which is discussed in more they emerged to deal with. Key aspects of natural
detail below, have resulted in both matches resource policy and law were formulated at an
and mismatches between key scales of earlier time, when encouraging exploration was the
ecological and social systems. main goal. Hence, mining law and subsidies, water
law, and public lands leasing were developed under
Changes in land tenure and food production socioeconomic conditions that no longer prevail.
Resistance to institutional change may be active or
Shifts in human production systems, and passive, stemming from such causes as the naïveté
particularly in agriculture, have occurred over very of managers to the immediate relevance of system
long time periods. In Zimbabwe, for instance, a shift change, institutional inertia, or the fact that most
from hunter-gatherer life-styles to agro-pastoralism institutions offer disproportionate benefits to some
began between AD 200 and 700 and was further individuals over others. Inequalities that were
modified by the introduction of capitalist systems justified in the original context of the institution’s
of production during colonization (Drinkwater emergence may have diminished or disappeared
1991). Government acts in 1911 and 1923 and their completely as the context changed. Additionally,
subsequent amendments resulted in an agricultural individuals often develop strong vested interests in
system that was divided between traditional forms maintaining institutions that are inadequate or
of land tenure and freehold commercial farmlands. inappropriate to new conditions once they derive
The country’s population grew from approximately social or economic benefits from them. For
500,000 people in 1900 to more than 12 x 106 in example, many countries still have laws governing
2000. However, communal areas, which cover 45% mining and forestry rights that hark back to an earlier
of the country, are still dominated by subsistence era of exploration.
agriculture despite the fact that the populations in
these areas have reached levels well beyond those Shifts in governance toward nation-states
that can be sustained by low-input agriculture alone
(e.g. Murphree and Cumming 1995, Campbell et al. As societies have shifted toward the model of a
2002). Similar conditions apply to much of sub- nation-state with rigid boundaries and a central
Saharan Africa, where continuing loss of nutrients government, natural resource rights have been
is resulting in declining yields and increasing food increasingly sequestered in the hands of centralized
insecurity (Drechsel et al. 2001). However, past agencies such as government departments.
events and traditional practices may take long Centralized institutions frequently lack the

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
necessary multiscale outlook and associated density, particularly in cultures in which land tenure
flexibility to solve unusual problems or those that occurs at the household scale. The inefficiencies
occur at scales that they are not used to considering. created by having to deal with units of a different
The higher levels of centralized government are scale may introduce potential vulnerabilities into
typically based in the capital city, and the decision the system, but they also create opportunities that
makers with the most power are often unaware of can be exploited for economic, social, or political
the true situation “on the ground” in each of the gain. Both boundary formation and boundary
localities under their administration. Consequently, bridging occur with different degrees of success in
finer-scale environmental heterogeneity may be different locations and cultures, and both processes
overlooked or ignored, and policies emanating from can create social-ecological scale mismatches. The
centralized bureaucracies will often adopt a “one- process of boundary formation is antagonistic to
size-fits-all” outlook that meshes poorly with a some other socioeconomic processes, such as the
diverse social and ecological reality. Similarly, the need for trade or companionship, that necessitate
structure of government departments may parcel out the development of approaches to bridging or
a range of different administrative functions in an permeating boundaries. The ways in which human
illogical way or lump too many functions together and biophysical drivers lead to boundary formation
in a single unit. Both cases have their associated have been widely discussed in the social scientific
weaknesses: “policy silos” lack cohesion and the literature (e.g., Barth 1962, 1967, Adams 1974,
exchange of essential information, whereas Boone et al. 1990), but not usually in reference to
“multitasking” structures often ignore certain their ecological impacts. Others have argued that
sectors and fail to clearly allocate responsibility for human groups not only take advantage of extant
achieving solutions to particular problems. Not all biogeophysical distinctions but also create
management problems stem from mismatched boundary conditions through distinct ethnic
central governance; in many cases, the evolution of identities, religions, or adaptive strategies (Astuti
tenure systems is driven by social and economic 1995, O’Connor 1995, Guston 1996).
pressures to further misalign ecological and social
scales. For example, many traditional societies Changes in technology
require that land holdings be distributed among all
sons or children, with the result that farms Changes in the scales of management have also been
eventually become too small to be sustainable. driven by technology. With the development of
faster, more efficient ways of planting and
The actions of organizations that regulate resource harvesting crops, individual land owners could
use are closely related to the process of boundary occupy larger areas, and improvements in hunting,
creation. It is often suggested that humans fishing, and forestry technologies have fundamentally
homogenize habitats, reducing the diversity of changed the ways in which humans interact with
landscapes and regions. This is true of many natural resources. In many cases, technologies with
contemporary landscapes, such as the famous huge impacts have been developed well in advance
cornfields of Iowa in which a single crop has of the appropriate management institutions. The
replaced naturally occurring plant diversity, or in many recent collapses of global fisheries provide a
Bangkok, where monotonous urban sprawl has case in point. Effective harvesting technologies
encroached on a formerly diverse landscape. Of have allowed societies to overexploit fisheries and
equal interest are those cases in which human action many other natural resources in the absence of
has resulted in greater than expected patchiness or regional and global institutions with the power to
excessive landscape heterogeneity. For a variety of regulate harvests at spatial and temporal scales that
reasons, humans often act to create additional are appropriate for the ecological processes of
boundaries in their environments, resulting in reproduction and dispersal (Larkin 1977, Hillborn
smaller patches than would exist without their 1992, Pauly et al. 1998, Jackson et al. 2001).
presence. Through boundary formation, humans
define their individual and group identities, create Another consequence of technological advances has
or enhance economic values, construct asymmetric been the increasing ease with which societies can
power relations, secure resources against subsidize one another. Subsidies arise when
competitors, and increase control over the way in institutions are created for the flow of expertise and
which resources are used. Boundary formation is other resources from one area to another. Just as
strongly related to increases in human population landscapes typically contain areas that are net

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Fig. 5. Changes in the human population and the area available per household in the Matibi II Communal
Land in South Eastern Zimbabwe. With minimal external inputs, a household requires 20 ha of arable land,
i.e., 4 ha with a minimum 5-yr rotation, and about 400 ha of grazing land to support a herd of 25 head of
cattle and 35 goats. The threshold of 400 ha per household was reached during the 1940s. Filled bars
indicate the number of people in the area (left-hand y-axis); empty bars indicate available area for farming
(right-hand y-axis). Figure after Cumming (2003).
exporters or net importers of individuals of East Lowveld (SEL) of Zimbabwe is about 20 ha of

particular species, termed “source” and “sink” areas arable land, i.e., 4 ha with a minimum 5-yr rotation,
respectively in the population ecology literature, and about 400 ha of grazing land. The threshold of
different societies or parts of societies may be 400 ha/household was passed 60 yr ago, and, by
sources or sinks for resources. Source-sink 2000, the land available per household in the Matibi
dynamics can maintain maladaptive institutions and II Communal land, for example, was about 35 ha
scale mismatches. As Fig. 5 shows, the amount of (Cumming 2005). The increase in population
land needed by a household in the semi-arid South density in the area has been possible primarily
through subsidies, mostly in the form of money

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
remitted from town to country and government and associated with certain ecosystem goods or services
international food aid during drought years. (Raskin et al. 2002). The two may be closely linked;
for example, tourism is driven largely by aesthetic
Changes in infrastructure values, but these may in turn alter the economic
values related to developing land vs. keeping it in a
Social subsidies are intricately connected to more aesthetically pleasing state. Because values
transport and the associated infrastructure. are subjective and may vary, particularly in an
Relatively recent improvements in the speed and economic context, the aesthetic and market values
capacity of transport have linked systems that were of resources can undergo dramatic swings. As
formerly independent of one another. This increase formerly valuable resources become less so, or vice
in connectivity has allowed societies to develop versa, the economic returns from a particular tenure
alternative solutions to ecological problems, in unit may change in such a way as to make the current
particular through institutions that provide spatial relationship between ecological and sociological
subsidies, without necessarily addressing the scales untenable. When changes in societal values
primary causes of the problem (e.g., Berlik and produce large changes in anthropogenic activities,
Kittredge 2002). This kind of perverse subsidy is institutions frequently fail to adjust accordingly.
particularly clear in the SEL, in which the current Changes in economic values can produce changes
high density of farmers would be impossible in the kind and intensity of resource use. Similarly,
without continuing international subsidies in the as particular kinds of land use are tested,
form of humanitarian assistance (Abel et al. 2006). economically unviable options will be discarded
Social organization facilitated by infrastructure and unless they are supported by state or international
improved communications has allowed an subsidies, e.g., European subsidies to beef
unfavorable social-ecological situation to persist production in developing countries (Pearce 1993).
and has enabled the authorities to avoid addressing The search for new solutions can lead to the
the underlying issues of ecosystem productivity and formation of novel and scale-matched institutions,
the sustainability of human livelihoods. as happened in the SEL of Zimbabwe when failing
commercial cattle ranches successfully made the
Scale mismatches can also arise through the transition to wildlife-based tourism by removing
influence of infrastructure. The development of boundary fences and jointly managing wildlife
road networks allows regional and national resources over very much larger areas (Cumming
sociological processes to have a far greater effect 1999, Abel et al. 2006).
on the ecosystems in a particular area than they ever
did before. Champions of infrastructural development
have emphasized the positive impacts of Ecological processes leading to scale
infrastructure, such as increased competitive ability mismatches
for farmers through access to markets (Vance 1986,
Owen 1987). Detractors point out the many negative The development of scale mismatches does not
impacts of roads, including forest fragmentation in depend solely on societal change. Mismatches can
areas near to roads (Nepstad et al. 1999), increases also arise through ecological change or unexpected
in fire frequency and carbon emissions, and species ecological responses to management, such as in
introductions and extinctions (Forman and rapid regime shifts (Scheffer and Carpenter 2003).
Alexander 1998, Trombulak and Frissell 2000). Resources are seldom static; they change through
Infrastructural development can have negative time, with production increasing or decreasing as
consequences for indigenous peoples (Davis 1977, the environment changes. Changes in the structure
Treece 1987) and lead to increased conflict, of ecological communities through both intrinsic
violence, inequality, and poverty in tropical regions and extrinsic mechanisms can alter the production
(Hall 1989, Schmink and Wood 1992). of particular resources or ecosystem services that
humans need. Disease outbreaks and predator-prey
Changes in values interactions can create spatial and temporal
fluctuations in the population sizes of species that
Finally, many of the institutions that are responsible humans depend on (Bakun and Broad 2003);
for the management of natural resources operate changes in herbivore communities can influence
according to a particular set of values, including seed dispersal and, hence, plant diversity (Wright
both intrinsic preferences and the economic values and Duber 2001, Bruun 2002); and populations of

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
keystone species such as elephants, sea otters, or clear idea of the current state of each individual fish
kangaroo mice can have impacts that ramify through stock and is less directly dependent on it; feedbacks
food webs to influence the spatiotemporal scales at from fish to fisherman become weaker, even though
which different kinds of resources are available (e. the feedback from fisherman to fish may remain
g., Power et al. 1996, Simberloff 1998, Krogh 2002). strong, and there is an increasing likelihood of
overexploitation of one or more populations.
For example, in both protected areas and ranching
systems, degradation of grazing areas as herbivore Anthropogenic activities often amplify resource
numbers increase or water supplies change can changes or modify the resource base directly. They
result in a gradual decrease in ecosystem may have a direct influence, for instance, by
productivity (e.g., Pamo 1998, Walker and Janssen reducing the productive potential of the land or
2002, Thiam 2003) or rapid transitions to alternative removing species such as large predators that play
stable states (Westoby et al. 1989). The obvious important ecological roles, or they may follow
solution to this problem is to increase the scale of indirectly from such changes as the introduction of
management to take better advantage of broad-scale a new crop, new technologies, or swings in world
environmental variation. If both grazing and water market prices. In each of these cases, societies can
are available over larger areas, degraded areas are trigger changes in the ecosystem processes that
given longer to recover and a more sustainable underlie resource production. Changes in
system, based on a mosaic of patches in different ecosystems in turn lead to alterations in the scales
successional stages, can be initiated. In this at which management and policy solutions are
example, tenure and management institutions at needed. Anthropogenic activities often modify not
scales that initially seemed well matched to the only the immediate biophysical environment but
scales of key ecological processes gradually become also the action of broad-scale natural processes.
less and less appropriate as the resource base Some of the classical examples of human impacts
changes; failure on the part of existing institutions include changes in flooding, fire regimes, and the
to recognize these changes and adapt to them or, migratory movements of large herbivores (e.g.,
alternatively, awareness of a problem followed by Pamo 1998, Cochrane and Laurance 2002, Laurance
management actions that accentuate it can result in et al. 2002). In each of these instances, humans
an ever-worsening scale mismatch. dampen natural variation through command-and-
control management approaches (Holling and
Meffe 1996). By changing the scale of natural
Social-ecological processes leading to scale variation in the landscape, ecosystem processes may
mismatches be disrupted or modified in such a way that scale
mismatches occur. Reductions or increases in the
Social-ecological interactions can lead to scale range of natural variation can be both a cause and a
mismatches when the nature of the interaction is consequence of scale mismatches.
substantially changed. Interactions that have been
stable for a long period of time may suddenly be A fascinating example of a social-ecological scale
transformed by changes in the broader context in mismatch comes from the early harvesting and later
which they occur or by a set of destabilizing conservation of populations of marine mammals.
feedbacks between social and ecological systems These efforts have largely been undertaken at scales
(Muradian 2001). Levin (1999) considers that smaller than entire oceans and have focused on
tightening the feedbacks between social and populations and individual species rather than on
ecological systems is an important component of communities. Recent evidence (Springer et al.
sustainability. For example, when a fisherman 2003) suggests that reductions in the populations of
harvests fish of a single species at the same spatial great whales, a consequence of excessive whaling
and temporal scales as fish production, changes in by maritime nations, may have left some killer
the fish population are immediate and obvious, and whale populations with insufficient food resources.
there is a tight feedback from fish population to As a result, several killer whale pods have turned to
fisherman. This creates a strong incentive to manage seals and sea otters for food. Sea otters are keystone
the population sustainably, for example, by species (Power et al. 1996) that can regulate
periodically reducing offtake to allow stocks to populations of sea urchins, influencing algal
recover. In contrast, if the fisherman can harvest production and the near-shore food web. The
over multiple populations and species, he has a less outcome of declining whale populations has been a

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
series of sequential crashes in conserved Mismatched organizations may also lack

populations of smaller marine mammals and a lot appropriate monitoring frameworks. Consequently,
of finger-pointing and accusations in the social the kind and amount of information that they acquire
system. The mismatch between the scale of whale about the problem may be inadequate for the
offtake by humans, which is a social phenomenon, formulation of a true solution. When the available
and the scale of whale reproduction, which is an information is incomplete or incorrect, it becomes
ecological phenomenon, has had ecosystem-wide harder to realize the significance of the problem. In
consequences that influence other kinds of social- other instances, too much information of the wrong
ecological interactions in complex ways and may kind is collected; data gathering and analysis can
take decades to resolve. Hopefully, management then become traps that distract members of the
actions at broad spatial and temporal scales will organization from truly coming to grips with the key
eventually lead to the recovery of the whale issues.
population and the restoration of the food chain that
supports killer whales, while maintaining smaller- As members of mismatched institutions gradually
scale institutions that mitigate smaller-scale threats, become aware of the problems with their approach,
such as by-catch, hunting, and disease, to marine several responses are possible; they range from
mammal populations. making a measured attempt to reach a new solution
to ignoring problems for as long as possible. A
common outcome is that organizations become
General consequences of scale mismatches more inward-looking or get caught up with in-
fighting. In the meantime, the ecological problem
As the preceding discussion has illustrated, may either fix itself or get worse. In either instance,
mismatches between the scales of ecological there tends to be a further decoupling of social and
processes and the institutions that are responsible ecological processes. The consequences of scale
for managing them can contribute to a decrease in mismatches for the environment may be severe:
social-ecological resilience. Resilience is reduced inappropriate management often results in a loss of
when the integrity or long-term sustainability of natural landscape heterogeneity and further impacts
desirable components of either ecological or social on broad-scale ecological processes such as the
systems, or both, are compromised. Degraded movement of fire or species through landscapes.
ecological systems become less able to provide the
goods and services that humans rely on. Degraded As property sizes in a particular area decrease, social
social systems result in a net decrease in human networks grow larger and economies of scale are
well-being, including negative impacts on such reduced. Economies of scale occur when the profit
things as health, freedom, and rights. per item as a function of the number of items
produced increases more rapidly than the per item
One of the most pervasive problems resulting from cost. Higher production rates lead to greater
scale mismatches is the mismanagement of economies of scale, although this trend may also be
ecosystems. Mismatched organizations are frequently accompanied by a reduction in the market value of
confronted with ecological situations in which they each item in a competitive situation unless returns
do not understand the nature of the problem, are are optimized by controlling production, as in the
incapable of managing effectively, or lack the OPEC strategy. In many natural-resource-based
necessary power to achieve the scale of production systems such as forestry or agriculture,
management that is required. Territorial institutions economies of scale occur with expansions in the
in these circumstances are often reluctant to give up area of production. This tendency works against the
power, and fine-scale decisions seldom add up to socioeconomic drivers of boundary development
the kind of cohesive action that is required for broad- and property splitting. One approach to reconciling
scale ecological management. Institutional confusion the two has been intensification to obtain higher
over the nature of the problem translates into a lack returns per unit area. Boserup (1965) proposed that
of clear responsibility for finding solutions. At the population growth will lead to more intensive forms
same time, key decisions may be made by of production through what is essentially the same
individuals acting on their own, rather than in a mechanism. One of the consequences of
coordinated manner across the organization. mismatches in scale between the ecological
production system and the embedded socioeconomic
system is that increasingly greater pressure is

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
exerted on natural resources (Campbell et al. 2002). economic hierarchy, because a scale realignment
Negative economies of scale also occur in the almost always requires a restructuring of multiple
community; as social networks expand, the aspects of the hierarchy. Because changes in
transaction costs of maintaining them increase and hierarchical structures are difficult to achieve,
social capital may be lost. successful solutions will generally have to involve
either reaching a critical mass of stakeholder
Unexpected economic thresholds and constraints opinion and involvement, i.e., bottom-up forcing,
may emerge as property sizes are reduced. If income or top-down forcing in the form of an appropriate
relates to production according to a nonlinear grant or other intervention from outside the local
function, it may be relatively easy for stochastic system. In exceptional circumstances, we can also
environmental fluctuations to push the returns from envisage that transformative adjustment by a single
a smaller property across a threshold at which group at a single ecological and social scale might
management costs are greater than returns. As the solve the problem.
sizes of holdings are reduced, it becomes less likely
that a single area will contain all the necessary The first step in resolving scale mismatches is the
resources, thus compounding the problem. For awareness that one of the causes of the problem is
example, as the sizes of farms are reduced, it may a mismatch between ecological and institutional
no longer be possible for all holdings to connect scales. The identification of diagnostic properties
directly to streams or impoundments. Many kinds of mismatched systems is challenging; similar
of activity require complementarity of resources changes will accompany many different kinds of
(Fahrig 2001). Where complementarity is not natural resource management problems, making it
present, some form of subsidy is often necessary, e. difficult to separate out the explicit consequences
g., water may be pumped from boreholes or moved of scale mismatches. Superficially, in systems in
down pipelines or ditches. Reductions in property which scale mismatches are prevalent we would
size may thus entail an increasing reliance on expect to see evidence of resource-related social
subsidies and a vulnerability to their continued conflict and/or feelings of powerlessness in the
provision. social system and, in the ecosystem, evidence of
changes in ecosystem function and/or biodiversity.
Finally, we note that the impacts of scale Recognition of the underlying scale dependency of
mismatches are not necessarily all negative, the problem may require significant social learning.
depending on how the ensuing challenges are
approached. Crowding may encourage innovations The second step in resolving problems related to
such as the development of irrigation systems and scale mismatches is to formulate an active approach,
more effective systems of rules and institutions, or a range of alternative approaches, to solving both
although such changes also provide an opportunity the immediate and underlying causes of the
for the imposition of asymmetries in wealth and mismatch. Given the problems of institutional
power on the system. Shared recognition of a single inertia and continual change in both institutions and
obvious problem can foster social capital as people resources, the most effective solutions are likely to
work together to overcome it, and increases in social involve the creation of enabling conditions for
capital can have benefits beyond the solution of the adaptive co-management regimes to emerge in
problem that produced them. which experimentation, learning, and adaptation at
the appropriate scales are supported and
communities of resource managers are given the
RESOLVING SCALE MISMATCHES scope to experiment with alternative solutions
(Ruitenbeek and Cartier 2001). In the short term, it
Given that scale mismatches are the products of a is often possible to dismantle, modify, or create
range of complex social and ecological factors, they institutions, including tenure, that can operate at the
are unlikely to be simple to resolve. Scale appropriate scale. One of the best solutions to many
mismatches are difficult to find solutions to because kinds of mismatch problems may be to modify
(1) the problems that they engender are easily boundary locations or to alter their properties, for
blamed on other, apparently more obvious factors example, by removing fences to create permeable
and (2) even though a problem has been clearly boundaries. Decreasing pressure on resources, an
identified as scale-related, it can not usually be alternative solution, will generally be difficult to
solved at any single level or scale in the social or achieve. In any institutional rearrangement, it is

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
likely that a number of social and political barriers citizenry to respond on two levels (Smith 1986).
will have to be overcome; in reality, successful Locally, many people bound themselves together
reorganizations may have to wait for the appropriate into the Salt River Water Users Association in 1903;
alignment of different institutional levels at stages this was later renamed the Salt River Project, and it
in which key individuals are receptive to new ideas still manages most of the water distributed in the
(Westley 2002). valley. At the same time, some of the more
influential citizens lobbied in Washington for a
There are a number of examples of successful National Reclamation Act that eventually
solutions to scale mismatches. The history of water transformed many regions in the western United
use in the Salt River Valley in Arizona provides an States, among them the Salt River Valley. These
informative case study. Mismatches have been two responses were efforts to overcome the same
created in many places by alternate systems of set of threats and worked together at different scales
ownership for both agricultural land and the surface to put in place lasting changes in the surface water
water flow that is used to irrigate river valleys in regime of the Salt River Valley and the political and
arid lands. During the settlement of the Salt River economic organizations that managed it. The first
Valley of central Arizona during the late 19th response, collective local action, moved the scale
century by immigrants of European origin, land was of water management in the valley up from
first allocated in discrete parcels of 160 acres, and individual farmers and small canal companies to a
then 640 acres, to which all normal rights of private single supplier of water administered by all the users
property applied. Rights to the use of surface water as a semi-public entity in which one acre equaled
flow were assigned according to temporal priority one vote. The second response was a classic cross-
of claim and continuity of use. This principle of prior scale interaction in which local pressure led to
appropriation worked well in the early stages of national-level changes that in turn affected a much
agricultural settlement when farm densities were larger region and population than the group from
low and demands on the surface flow were well which the political pressure had originated.
below capacity. Although farmland was divisible Sometimes the realignment of resource management
into finite units that could be individually owned, is not simply an aggregation of similar participants
the water that gave the land its value was not as into a larger administrative unit, but requires the
easily divisible. For instance, a downstream farmer cooperation of natural resource extractors from
with prior rights on water would have to be various sectors that all depend on a common-pool
continually vigilant during a dry year to keep an resource.
upstream farmer from taking most of the water. The
resulting conflicts eventually led to collective Following the history in the Salt River valley of
agreements on water distribution. Other examples central Arizona into recent decades, the emergence
of ecological processes that encourage collective of rapidly growing urban centers drawing on the
action include the spread of pests overland and of same surface water flows as the existing agrarian
algae through canals, and the salinization of fields community has led to an increasing extraction of
because of rising groundwater (Fiege 1999). In each groundwater well beyond the natural recharge rate.
of these situations, individual farmers would be Although surface water flows were highly
unable to adequately redress the problem without regulated, groundwater extraction was based on
regional cooperation. Cooperative action was an virtually unlimited “beneficial use” to the land
early hallmark of irrigation farming and led to the owner. Growing demand from the agricultural,
creation of social, economic, and political municipal, and industrial sectors throughout the
institutions that reflected this pressure. 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s led to a rapidly dropping
aquifer level with accompanying threats of ground
Collective action and the realignment of subsidence and eventual water shortages. However,
management institutions have also been responses the only administrative unit with authority over all
to climatic variability when it exceeds the of these sectors was the state government, and it did
absorptive capability of small-scale farmers. In the not have the political will to force a compromise on
Salt River Valley, catastrophic floods in 1890 and any one of these constituencies. It was the national
1891 were followed by a severe drought during government that used its leverage as the financial
1897–1903. These serious, but not extraordinary, backer of a new water project, the Central Arizona
environmental events threatened the existence of Project canal that would carry supplemental water
this still young farming center, leading the local needed by all sectors, and threatened to cut off

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
federal funds if serious groundwater reforms were development patterns, they may also be facilitated
not instituted. This led to forced negotiations by poorly designed policy and management
between competing sectors and the passage of state initatives. Some of the main causes of scale
legislation, the Groundwater Management Act of mismatches are changes in food production, human
1980, which created four Active Management Areas demography, governance, technology, infrastructure
paralleling groundwater basins to monitor and and transport, and human values and perceptions of
control groundwater pumping in the vicinity of the natural world. Scale mismatches may have a
growing urban areas, plus a new state Agency of variety of consequences, including the mismanagement
Water Resources to ensure compliance (Kupel of ecosystems and the resulting decline or
2003). degradation of both social and ecological systems.
Recognizing and resolving scale mismatches is thus
As the Salt River example implies, institutional an important aspect of building resilience in social-
change will typically have to occur through a ecological systems. At present, our understanding
process of social learning that includes education, of the topic of scale mismatches is limited and would
information sharing, and the formation of a common benefit from more synthetic, interdisciplinary
vision among stakeholders (Argyris and Schoen research. In particular, we are currently lacking
1978). It may be difficult and frustrating to achieve information in several essential areas: we need to
as well as critically dependent on small windows of develop the tools to accurately diagnose scale
opportunity during which different institutional and mismatches, we need to understand the dynamics
ecological components are appropriately aligned that maintain maladaptive institutional arrangements,
with one another to produce the necessary social, and we need to determine what kinds of remedial
political, and economic capitals. action are most likely to be effective. The long-term
resolution of scale mismatches is part of a broader
Institutional reorganization is not necessarily the problem of developing flexible learning institutions
only solution to scale mismatch problems, although that can change and adapt to a changing
it seems to be the easiest alternative to achieve. environment. Although widespread institutional
Although it is difficult to modify the scales at which reform may be too difficult an agenda to achieve, it
ecological processes occur, it may be possible to is also clear that taking advantage of windows of
find a socioeconomic win-win solution by working opportunity to resolve scale mismatches can have
with existing institutions to take advantage of profound and long-term benefits for both societies
higher-value land uses that rely on processes that and ecosystems.
occur at a scale that is more appropriate for existing
institutions to manage.
Responses to this article can be read online at:
The question of how best to resolve scale http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art14/responses/
mismatches remains a frontier for research on
social-ecological management and policy. Although
we would like to be able to offer a much more
detailed outline of how the resolution of scale Acknowledgments:
mismatches can be achieved, there is very little
literature that is explicitly about this topic and We are grateful to colleagues in the Resilience
relatively few published case studies that have Alliance who discussed these ideas with us and
documented successful solutions to scale mismatch contributed to the initial framework for this paper,
problems. Consequently, rather than trying to particularly Nick Abel, Thomas Elmqvist, and Tim
speculate, it seems best that we highlight this Lynam.
important area as a question that remains open.
CONCLUSIONS
Scale mismatches between social and ecological

components are widespread in social-ecological
systems. Although they often arise as an unintended
consequence of human social and economic

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
LITERATURE CITED natural resources. Journal of Biogeography

29:1557-1568.
Abel, N., D. H. M. Cumming, and J. M. Anderies.
2006. Collapse and reorganization in social- Blaikie, P. 1985. The political economy of soil
ecological systems: questions, some ideas, and erosion in developing countries. Longman, Harlow,
policy implications. Ecology and Society 11(1): 17. UK.
[online] URL:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art17/ Bodin, Ö., and J. Norberg. 2005. Information
. network topologies for enhanced local adaptive
management. Environmental Management 35:175-193.
Adams, R. M. 1974. Anthropological perspectives
on ancient trade. Current Anthropology 15:239-258. Boone, J. L., J. E. Myers, and C. L. Redman.
1990. Archaeological and historical approaches to
Alados, C. L., Y. Pueyo, O. Barrantes, J. Escos, complex societies: the Islamic states of medieval
L. Giner, and A. B. Robles. 2004. Variations in Morocco. American Anthropologist 92:630-646.
landscape patterns and vegetation cover between
1957 and 1994 in a semiarid Mediterranean Boserup, E. 1965. The conditions of agricultural
ecosystem. Landscape Ecology 19:543-559. growth. Allen and Unwin, London, UK.
Argyris, C., and D. A. Schoen. 1978. Boserup, E. 1981. Population and technological
Organizational learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading, change. University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
Massachusetts, USA. Illinois, UK.
Astuti, R. 1995. The Vezo are not a kind of people: Bruun, H. H., and B. Fritzboger. 2002. The past
identity, difference and “ethnicity” among a fishing impact of livestock husbandry on dispersal of plant
people of western Madagascar. American seeds in the landscape of Denmark. Ambio
Ethnologist 22:464-482. 31:425-431.
Bakun, A., and K. Broad. 2003. Environmental Campbell, B. M., P. Bradley, and S. E. Carter.
‘loopholes’ and fish population dynamics: 2002. Sustainability and peasant farming systems:
comparative pattern recognition with focus on El observations from Zimbabwe. Agriculture and
Niño effects in the Pacific. Fisheries Oceanography Human Values 14:159-168.
12:458-473.
Chidumayo, E. N. 2002. Changes in miombo
Barbier, E. B. 1997. The economic determinants of woodland structure under different land tenure and
land degradation in developing countries. use systems in central Zambia. Journal of
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of Biogeography 29:1619-1626.
London, Series B: Biological Sciences 352:891-899.
Cochrane, M. A., and W. F. Laurance. 2002. Fire
Barth, F. 1962. The role of the entrepreneur in as a large-scale edge effect in Amazonian forests.
social change in northern Norway. Universitietsforlaget Journal of Tropical Ecology 18:311-325.
Bergen, Oslo, Norway.
Cumming, D. H. M. 1999. Living off
Barth, F. 1967. Economic spheres in Darfur. Pages ‘biodiversity’: whose land, whose resources and
149-174 in R. Firth, editor. Themes in economic where? Environment and Development Economics
anthropology. Tavistock, London, England. 4:220-223.
Bender, B. 1975. Farming in prehistory: from Cumming, D. H. M. 2005. Wildlife, livestock and
hunter-gatherer to food producer. Baker, London, food security in the South-East Lowveld of
UK. Zimbabwe. Pages 41-45 in Proceedings of the
Southern and East African Experts Panel on
Berlik, M. M., D. B. Kittredge, and D. R. Foster. Designing Successful Conservation and Development
2002. The illusion of preservation: a global Interventions at the Wildlife/Livestock Interface:
environmental argument for the local production of implications for wildlife, livestock and human

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
health. IUCN Occasional Paper. IUCN, Gland, C., USA.

Switzerland.
Guston, D. H. 1996. Principal-agent theory and the
Daily, G. C., S. Alexander, P. Ehrlich, L. Goulder, structure of science policy. Science and Public
J. Lubchenco, P. Matson, H. A. Mooney, S. L. Policy (August): 229-240.
Postel, S. H. Schneider, D. Tilman, and G. M.
Woodwell. 1997. Ecosystem services: benefits Hall, A. L. 1989. Developing Amazonia:
supplied to human societies by ecosystems. Issues deforestation and social conflict in Brazil’s Carajás
in Ecology (2). Available online at: Program. Manchester University Press, Manchester,
http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/ecosystabstr.html. UK.
Davis, S. 1977. Victims of the miracle: development Hillborn, R. 1992. Can fisheries agencies learn
and the Indians of Brazil. Cambridge University from experience? Fisheries 17:6-14.
Press, Cambridge, UK.
Holling, C. S., and G. K. Meffe. 1996. Command
Drinkwater, R. 1991. The state and agrarian change and control and the pathology of natural-resource
in Zimbabwe’s communal areas. Macmillan, management. Conservation Biology 10:328-337.
London, UK.
Jackson, J. B. C., M. X. Kirby, W. H. Berger, K.
Drechsel, P., L. Gyiele, D. Kunze, and O. Cofie. A. Bjorndal, L. W. Botsford, B. J. Bourque, R. H.
2001. Population density, soil nutrient depletion, Bradbury, R. Cooke, J. Erlandson, J. A. Estes, T.
and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa. P. Hughes, S. Kidwell, C. B. Lange, H. S. Lenihan,
Ecological Economics 38:251-258. J. M. Pandolfi, C. H. Peterson, R. S. Steneck, M.
J. Tegner, and R. R. Warner. 2001. Historical
Fahrig, L. 2001. How much habitat is enough? overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal
Biological Conservation 100:65-74. ecosystems. Science 293:629-638.
Fiege, M. 1999. Irrigated Eden: the making of an Krogh, S. N., M. S. Zeisset, E. Jackson, and W.
agricultural landscape in the American West. G. Whitford. 2002. Presence/absence of a keystone
University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, species as an indicator of rangeland health. Journal
USA. of Arid Environments 50:513-519.
Folke, C., R. Pritchard Jr., F. Berkes, J. Colding, Kupel, D. E. 2003 Fuel for growth: water and
and U. Svedin. 1998. The problem of fit between Arizona’s urban environment. University of
ecosystems and institutions. IHDP Working Paper Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Number 2. International Human Dimensions
Programme on Global Environmental Change Lambin, E. F., H. J. Geist, and E. Lepers. 2003.
(IHDP), Bonn, Germany. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in
tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and
Forman, R. T. T. 2000. Estimate of the area affected Resources 28:205-241.
by the road system in the United States.
Conservation Biology 14:31-35. Larkin, P. A. 1977. An epitaph for the concept of
maximum sustained yield. Transactions of the
Forman, R. T. T., and L. E. Alexander. 1998. American Fisheries Society 106:1-11.
Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual
Review of Ecology and Systematics 29:307-331. Laurance, W. F., T. E. Lovejoy, H. L. Vasconcelos,
E. M. Bruna, R. K. Didham, P. C. Stouffer, C.
Gibson, C. C., E. Ostrom, and T. Ahn. 2000. The Gascon, R. O. Bierregaard, S. G. Laurance, and
concept of scale and human dimensions of global E. Sampaio. 2002. Ecosystem decay of Amazonian
change: a survey. Ecological Economics 32:217-239. forest fragments: a 22-year investigation.
Conservation Biology 16:605-618.
Gunderson, L., and C. S. Holling, editors. 2002.
Panarchy: understanding transformations in human Lee, K. N. 1993. Greed, scale mismatch, and
and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, D. learning. Ecological Applications 4:560-564.

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
Biosphere Series, Number 12. UNESCO, Paris,

Levin, S. A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale France, and Parthenon, London, UK.
in ecology. Ecology 73:1943-1967.
Perry, R. I., and R. E. Ommer. 2003. Scale issues
Levin, S. A. 1999. Fragile dominion: complexity in marine ecosystems and human interactions.
and the commons. Perseus, Cambridge, UK. Fisheries Oceanography 12:513-522.
Messerli, B., M. Grosjean, T. Hofer, L. Nunez, Peterson, G. D. 2000. Political ecology and
and C. Pfister. 2000. From nature-dominated to ecological resilience: an integration of human and
human-dominated environmental changes. Quaternary ecological dynamics. Ecological Economics
Science Reviews 19:459-479. 35:323-336.
Muradian, R. 2001. Ecological thresholds: a Power, M. E., D. Tilman, J. A. Estes, B. A. Menge,

survey. Ecological Economics 38:7-24. W. J. Bond, L. S. Mills, G. Daily, J. C. Castilla,
J. Lubchenco, and R. T. Paine. 1996. Challenges
Murphree, M. W. and D. H. M. Cumming. 1993. in the quest for keystones. Bioscience 46:609-620.
Savanna land use: policy and practice in Zimbabwe.
Pages 139-178 in M. D. Young and O. T. Solbrig, Raskin, P., T. Banuri, G. Gallopin, P. Gutman, A.
editors. The world's savannas: economic driving Hammond, R. Kates, and R. Swart. 2002. Great
forces, ecological constraints and policy options for transition: the promise and lure of the times ahead.
sustainable land use. Man and the Biosphere Series, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm,
Number 12. UNESCO, Paris, France, and Sweden.
Parthenon, London, UK.
Rietkirk, M., J. van de Koppel, L. Kumar, and F.
Nepstad, D. C., A. Verissimo, A. Alencar, C. van Langevelde. 2002. Editorial: the ecology of
Nobre, C. Lima, P. Lefebvre, W. Schlesinger, C. scale. Ecological Modelling 149:1-4.
Potter, P. Mourinho, E. Mendoza, M. Cochrane,
and V. Brooks. 1999. Large-scale impoverishment Ruitenbeek, J., and C. Cartier. 2001. The invisible
of Amazonian forests by logging and fire. Nature wand: adaptive co-management as an emergent
398:505-508. strategy in complex bio-economic systems. CIFOR
Occasional Paper Number 34. Center for
O’Connor, R. 1995. Agricultural change and ethnic International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor
succession in Southeast Asian states: a case for Barat, Indonesia.
regional anthropology. Journal of Asian
Studies 54:968-996. Scheffer, M., and S. R. Carpenter. 2003.
Catasrophic regime shifts ecosystems: linking
Owen, W. 1987. Transportation and world theory to observation. Trend in Ecology and
development. Johns Hopkins University Press, Evolution 18:648-656.
Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Scheffer, M., F. Westley, and W. Brock. 2003.
Pamo, E. T. 1998. Herders and wildgame behaviour Slow response of society to new problems: causes
as a strategy against desertification in northern and costs. Ecosystems 6:493-502.
Cameroon. Journal of Arid Environments
39:179-190. Schmink, M., and C. H. Wood. 1992. Contested
frontiers in Amazonia. Columbia University Press,
Pauly, D., V. Christensen, J. Dalsgaard, R. New York, New York, USA.
Froese, and F. Torres. 1998. Fishing down marine
food webs. Science 279:860-863. Simberloff, D. 1998. Flagships, umbrellas, and
keystones: Is single-species management passe in
Pearce, D. W. 2003. Developing Botswana’s the landscape era? Biological Conservation
savannas. Pages 205-220 in M. D. Young and O. T. 83:247-257.
Solbrig, editors. The world's savannas: economic
driving forces, ecological constraints and policy Simon, H. A. 1962. The architecture of complexity.
options for sustainable land use. Man and the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC
106:467-482. Washington, D.C., USA.
Smith, K. L. 1986. The magnificent experiment: Westley, F., S. R. Carpenter, W. A. Brock, C. S.

building the Salt River Reclamation Project, Holling, and L. H. Gunderson. 2002. Why systems
1890-1917. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, of people and nature are not just social and
Arizona, USA. ecological systems. Pages 103-119 in L. H.
Gunderson and C. S. Holling, editors. Panarchy:
Springer, A. M., J. A. Estes, G. B. van Vliet, T. M. understanding transformations in human and
Williams, D. F. Doak, E. M. Danner, K. A. Forney, natural systems. Island Press, Washington, D.C.,
and B. Pfister. 2003. Sequential megafaunal USA.
collapse in the North Pacific Ocean: an ongoing
legacy of industrial whaling? Proceedings of the Westoby, M., B. Walker, and I. Noy-Meir. 1989.
National Academy of Sciences of the United States Opportunistic management for rangelands not at
of America 100:12223-12228. equilibrium. Journal of Range Management
42:266-274.
Thiam, A. K. 2003. The causes and spatial pattern
of land degradation risk in southern Mauritania Whitmore, T. M., B. L. Turner II, D. I. Johnson,
using multitemporal AVHRR-NDVI imagery and R. W. Kates, and T. R. Gottschang. 1990. Long-
field data. Land Degradation and Development term population change. Pages 23-30 in B. L. Turner
14:133-142. II, W. C. Clark, R. W. Kates, J. F. Richards, J. T.
Mathews, and W. B. Meyer, editors. The Earth as
Treece, D. 1987. Bound in misery and iron: the transformed by human action. Cambridge
impact of the Grande Carajas Program on the University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Indians of Brazil. Survival International, London,
UK. Wiens, J. A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology.
Functional Ecology 3:385-397.
Trombulak, S. C.. and C. A. Frissell. 2000. Review
of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and Wolf, S. A., and T. F. H. Allen. 1995. Recasting
aquatic communities. Conservation Biology alternative agriculture as a management model: the
14:18-30. value of adept scaling. Ecological Economics
12:5-12.
Turner, M. G., R. H. Gardner, and R. V. O’Neill.
2001. Landscape ecology in theory and practice: Wright, S. J., and H. C. Duber. 2001. Poachers
pattern and process. Springer-Verlag, New York, and forest fragmentation alter seed dispersal, seed
New York, USA. survival, and seedling recruitment in the palm
Attalea butyraceae, with implications for tropical
UNEP. 2002. Global environment outlook 3. tree diversity. Biotropica 33:583-595.
Earthscan Publications, London, UK.
Ziker, J. P. 2003. Assigned territories, family/clan/
Vance, J. E. 1986. Capturing the horizon: the communal holdings, and common-pool resources
historical geography of transportation. Harper and in the Taimyr autonomous region, northern Russia.
Row, New York, New York, USA. Human Ecology 31:331-368.
Walker, B. H., and M. A. Janssen. 2002.

Rangelands, pastoralists and governments: interlinked
systems of people and nature. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series
B: Biological Sciences 357:719-725.
Westley, F. 2002. The devil in the dynamics:

adaptive management on the front lines. Pages
333-360 in L. H. Gunderson and C. S. Holling,
editors. Panarchy: understanding transformations
in human and natural systems. Island Press,

193.51.119.116 on Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:38:09 UTC

Scales Mismatches

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scales Mismatches

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scales Mismatches

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scale Mismatches in Social-Ecological Systems: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Author(s): Graeme S. Cumming, David H. M. Cumming and Charles L. Redman

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267802

This content downloaded from

Insight, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems

INTRODUCTION many scales. On the other, there is the subjectivity

This content downloaded from

Social and ecological systems interact in many ecosystems as individuals or as representatives of

An important difference between societies and

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

exporters or net importers of individuals of East Lowveld (SEL) of Zimbabwe is about 20 ha of

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

series of sequential crashes in conserved Mismatched organizations may also lack

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

Scale mismatches between social and ecological

This content downloaded from

LITERATURE CITED natural resources. Journal of Biogeography

This content downloaded from

health. IUCN Occasional Paper. IUCN, Gland, C., USA.

This content downloaded from

Biosphere Series, Number 12. UNESCO, Paris,

Muradian, R. 2001. Ecological thresholds: a Power, M. E., D. Tilman, J. A. Estes, B. A. Menge,

This content downloaded from

106:467-482. Washington, D.C., USA.

Smith, K. L. 1986. The magnificent experiment: Westley, F., S. R. Carpenter, W. A. Brock, C. S.

Walker, B. H., and M. A. Janssen. 2002.

Westley, F. 2002. The devil in the dynamics:

This content downloaded from

You might also like