Assessment of rivers as social–ecological systems: a response to ‘The imperative need for nationally coordinated bioassessment of rivers and streams’, by Susan J. Nichols et al.
Melissa Parsons A B and Martin C. Thoms A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Riverine Landscapes Research Laboratory, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: melissa.parsons@une.edu.au
Marine and Freshwater Research 68(12) 2179-2183 https://doi.org/10.1071/MF17012
Submitted: 20 January 2017 Accepted: 9 June 2017 Published: 17 July 2017
Abstract
Nichols et al. in Marine and Freshwater Research (https://doi.org/10.1071/MF15329) call for a reinvestment in national-scale bioassessment in Australia. With recent transition back to single-impact and subcatchment-level assessment, Nichols et al. (2017) argued that the ability to detect larger-scale and longer-term impacts of climate change and land-use change are being lost. They called for modernising bioassessment through programs with a clear policy mandate, political context and which are fit for purpose with currency and relevance. We agree that the absence of a national-scale assessment of river health is impeding the detection of declines in river health. However, we suggest that assessment of river health in Australia should go beyond bioassessment and assess rivers as social–ecological systems. We call for modernisation through a national assessment of river resilience. Monitoring for river resilience will evaluate not only the biophysical state of a river ecosystem, but the state of social influences on river health, and the capacities of society to adapt and transform towards river-ecosystem sustainability.
Additional keywords: biological monitoring, resilience, river science.
References
ABARE–BRS (2010). ‘Indicators of Community Vulnerability and Adaptive Capacity across the Murray–Darling Basin: a Focus on Irrigation in Agriculture.’ (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Bureau of Rural Sciences: Canberra, ACT, Australia.)Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress in Human Geography 24, 347–364.
| Social and ecological resilience: are they related?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Benson, M. H., and Garmestani, A. S. (2011). Embracing panarchy, building resilience and integrating adaptive management through a rebirth of the National Environmental Policy Act. Journal of Environmental Management 92, 1420–1427.
| Embracing panarchy, building resilience and integrating adaptive management through a rebirth of the National Environmental Policy Act.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Berkes, F., and Folke, C. (1998). Linking social and ecological systems for resilience and sustainability. In ‘Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience’. (Eds F. Berkes and C. Folke.) pp. 1–26. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.)
Biggs, R., Schluter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (Eds) (2015). ‘Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social–Ecological Systems.’ (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.)
Brooks, A., Chessman, B., and Haeusler, T. (2010). ‘Assessing the Ecological Impact of Water Abstraction on Macroinvertebrates in Unregulated Rivers: Reference Site Selection.’ (NSW Office of Water: Sydney, NSW, Australia.)
Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (Eds) (2009). ‘Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World.’ (Springer: New York, NY, USA.)
COAG (2011). ‘National Strategy for Disaster Resilience: Building the Resilience of our Nation to Disasters.’ (Council of Australian Governments: Canberra, ACT, Australia.)
Cumming, G. S., Barnes, G., Perez, S., Schmink, M., Sieving, K. E., Southworth, J., Binford, M., Holt, R. D., Stickler, C., and Van Holt, T. (2005). An exploratory framework for the empirical measurement of resilience. Ecosystems 8, 975–987.
| An exploratory framework for the empirical measurement of resilience.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Delong, M. D., and Thoms, M. C. (2016). An ecosystem framework for river science and management. In ‘River Science: Research and Management for the 21st Century’. (Eds D. A. Gilvear, M. W. Greenwood, M. C. Thoms, and P. A. Wood.) pp. 15–36. (Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, UK.)
Dollar, E. S. J., James, C. S., Rogers, K. H., and Thoms, M. C. (2007). A framework for interdisciplinary understanding of rivers as ecosystems. Geomorphology 89, 147–162.
| A framework for interdisciplinary understanding of rivers as ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
GBRMPA (2014). Great Barrier Reef outlook report, 2014. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Qld, Australia.
Hicks, C. C., Crowder, L. B., Graham, N. A. J., Kittinger, J. N., and Le Cornu, E. (2016). Social drivers forewarn of marine regime shifts. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14, 252–260.
| Social drivers forewarn of marine regime shifts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Land, K. C., Michalos, A. C., and Sirgy, M. J. (2012). ‘Handbook of Social Indicators and Quality of Life Research.’ (Springer: Dordrecht, Netherlands.)
Lindenmayer, D. B., and Likens, G. E. (2010). ‘Effective Ecological Monitoring.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Vic., Australia.)
Marshall, G. R., Connell, D., and Taylor, B. M. (2013). Australia’s Murray Darling Basin: a century of polycentric experiments in cross-border integration of water resources management. International Journal of Water Governance 1, 197–218.
| Australia’s Murray Darling Basin: a century of polycentric experiments in cross-border integration of water resources management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Namoi CMA (2010). ‘Namoi Catchment Action Plan, 2010–2020.’ (Namoi Catchment Management Authority: Gunnedah, NSW, Australia.)
Nichols, S. J., Barmuta, L. A., Chessman, B. C., Davies, P. E., Dyer, F. J., Harrison, E. T., Hawkins, C. P., Jones, I., Kefford, B. J., Linke, S., Marchant, R., Metzeling, L., Moon, K., Ogden, R., Peat, M., Reynoldson, T. B., and Thompson, R. M. (2017). The imperative need for nationally coordinated bioassessment of rivers and streams. Marine and Freshwater Research 68, 599–613.
| The imperative need for nationally coordinated bioassessment of rivers and streams.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ostrom, E. (2007). A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104, 15 181–15 187.
| A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXhtFagtb7I&md5=e2e0eb5d9ea8a34785c0eb047e0429b3CAS |
Parsons, M., Thoms, M. C., Flotemersch, J., and Reid, M. (2016a). Monitoring the resilience of rivers as social–ecological systems: a paradigm shift for river assessment in the twenty-first century. In ‘River Science: Research and Management for the 21st Century’. (Eds D. A. Gilvear, M. W. Greenwood, M. C. Thoms, and P. A. Wood.) pp. 197–221. (Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, UK.)
Parsons, M., Glavac, S., Hastings, P., Marshall, G., McGregor, J., McNeill, J., Morley, P., Reeve, I., and Stayner, R. (2016b). Top-down assessment of disaster resilience: a conceptual framework using coping and adaptive capacities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 19, 1–11.
| Top-down assessment of disaster resilience: a conceptual framework using coping and adaptive capacities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Parsons, M., Thoms, M. C., and Flotemersch, J. E. (2017). Eight river principles for navigating the science–policy interface. Marine and Freshwater Research 68, 401–410.
Ross, H., and Berkes, F. (2014). Research approaches for understanding, enhancing, and monitoring community resilience. Society & Natural Resources 27, 787–804.
| Research approaches for understanding, enhancing, and monitoring community resilience.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thoms, M. C., and Parsons, M. (2016). The physical template of Australia’s floodplain landscapes. In ‘Vegetation of Australian Riverine Landscapes: Biology, Ecology and Management’. (Eds S. Capon, C. James, and M. Reid.) pp. 27–44. (CSIRO: Melbourne, Vic., Australia.)
Thoms, M. C., Gilvear, D. A., Greenwood, M. W., and Wood, P. A. (2016). An introduction to river science: research and applications. In ‘River Science: Research and Management for the 21st Century’. (Eds D. A. Gilvear, M. W. Greenwood, M. C. Thoms, and P. A. Wood.) pp. 1–11. (Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, UK.)
Thorp, J. H., Thoms, M. C., and Delong, M. D. (2008). ‘The Riverine Ecosystem Synthesis: Toward Conceptual Cohesiveness in River Science.’ (Elsevier: San Diego, CA, USA.)
Thorp, J. H., Flotemersch, J. E., Delong, M. D., Casper, A. F., Thoms, M. C., Ballantyne, F., Williams, B. S., O’Neill, B. J., and Haase, S. C. (2010). Linking ecosystem services, rehabilitation, and river hydrogeomorphology. Bioscience 60, 67–74.
| Linking ecosystem services, rehabilitation, and river hydrogeomorphology.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
