Dieser Text ist zur Zeit nur auf Englisch verfügbar...
The Department of Social Sciences of ZMT has gradually grown and strategically diversified its disciplinary, thematic and regional expertise, comprising today of the following three groups: Social-ecological System Analysis, Institutional and Behavioural Economics and Development and Knowledge Sociology. In addition, the field of Ecosystem Valuation is being developed by a Leibniz chair (fixed appointment).
Drawing on disciplinary expertise from sociology, economics, geography, area studies and anthropology represented in the three groups, the department studies the role of social actors and actor constellations (i.e. networks, markets), institutional structures, discourses and political and economic regimes in marine and coastal resource governance and everyday life with processes of environmental changes in the tropics.
Most research in the department focuses on individual or collective actors, their interaction with coastal ecosystems and their resources, considering these interactions as guided by the institutional (legal, political, market; de jure and de facto) frameworks they operate in. It is the aim to assess these governance arrangements – for the purpose of academic and other forms of deep understanding, as well as for the formulation of sustainability-focused policy orientations – and for the assessment of how they contribute, mitigate or adapt to environmental and socio-political/ economic change processes. Individual and collective actors rely on and strongly influence coastal ecosystems, their ecological status as well as the societal contributions to and effects of changes in these ecosystems. As such they serve as entry points for studying the intricate, and in many instances locality-specific, patterns of governance – the interplay between actors, institutional structures (i.e. political, legal, or market system) and ecological conditions.
The social-ecological system perspective explicitly focuses on social-ecological interaction dynamics in coastal waters and lands that allow for or prevent a holistically sustainable management of these ecosystems. This is further substantiated by paying particular attention to institutions as rules and norms that mediate what is required, prohibited and allowed in a society in relation to the marine and coastal environment , as this determines whether human use of the ecosystem is sustainable or not. In addition to studying political, legal and economic incentive structures, public discourses, (religious) belief systems, political ideas, everyday knowledges and intergenerationally communicated systems of sense-making essentially determine societal change (non-linear progress) and societal capacities to living with rapidly ongoing change processes.
The aim of the social science department of ZMT is thus to assess this interplay of environmental change processes in the coastal ecosystems of the tropics with socio-political and economic transformation processes. While these different types of change processes often exacerbate each other, societal response capacity depends on the development of abilities to continuously adapt to the moving target, a continuously changing relationship between social and ecological systems. Understanding this relationship between selected coastal societies in the tropics, their coastal ecosystems and the socio-political-economic and environmental change processes that affect these intricate patterns of social-ecological interaction forms the basis for the development, jointly with the research partners and societal stakeholders in the research regions, of possible pathways of transformative change. Social inequalities, access to political and economic resources, health infrastructures or the possibility to migrate fundamentally determine individual life and system trajectories. The research of this department – in close interaction with the natural science departments of ZMT – aims to empirically understand the immense social and ecological change processes that are currently – and even more so in the future – along our planet’s tropical coasts. Mitigation and adaptation can only follow from there.
Methodologically the social science department’s research ranges from qualitative, ethnographic to quantitative, from experimental to critical social sciences, paying particular attention also to self-reflexive method discussions and high research ethics to be ensured in all partner engagements.
Research Goals in the next 5 to 10 years
The social science department of ZMT aims for a significant role in developing the field of Marine Sciences further. Over the next ten years, we intend to move beyond a uniquely natural science-based exploration of the ocean, to an interdisciplinary, natural and social science-based study of the ocean under ongoing environmental and socio-political change processes. As the environmental sciences and sustainability research have done, the Marine Sciences shall have developed into a comprehensively interdisciplinary field of research by 2030. ZMT`s social science department will contribute three crucial areas of innovation to this: (1) methods of data collection and integration that allow the long-term qualitative and quantitative monitoring of the socio-political and economic change processes of marine and coastal systems; (2) governance theory grounded in empirical marine and coastal practices from tropical, often developmental contexts, characterised by the strong interplay of formal and informal institutions; and (3) a conceptual framework and practical guide for the practice of marine inter- and transdisciplinarity. Together, these three areas of innovation will constitute the ZMT-Toolbox of Marine Interdisciplinarity: Methods, Concepts and Interdisciplinary Process Facilitation.
Method Development & Data Integration
Understanding the dynamic interdependence of environmental and socio-political change processes, how they play out and determine development trajectories of social-ecological systems in multiple localities in the tropics requires the integration of long-term data on the social, political, economic, ecological and biogeophysical of the respective systems. Major challenges lie in integrating qualitative and quantitative data and from different disciplinary fields in ways that grasp crucial system aspects and dynamics. A particular focus is laid on qualitative data, as, first, marine governance is largely a qualitative phenomenon, second, the aim is to develop a marine and explicitly coastal governance theory (see below) and third, those processes are largely context dependent. Due to its various research locations across the tropical belt, ZMT is particularly suited for comparative research approaches. Therefore, ZMT and its social science department aim to develop semi-standardised quanti- and qualitative data collection and indicator development and integration methods to allow for a deepened interdisciplinary understanding of marine and coastal social-ecological systems. Since 2016, there exists a strategic cooperation with the founders of the SESMAD Database, which aims to compare social ecological systems across many sectors and countries. Some relevant collaborations are currently being developed as part of the proposed ‘Digital ZMT’ as well as in collaboration with the QualiService, Socium, University of Bremen.
Marine Governance Theory
The development of conceptual and theoretical approaches to understanding coastal and marine social-ecological systems forms a second, crucial part in the toolbox of interdisciplinary marine social sciences. Existing conceptual work on governance – a core research field to marine social sciences – continues to be mostly terrestrially biased (for exceptions see Olsen, 2003; Olsen et al. 2009, Schlüter et al. 2013). The existing conceptual discussions on governance processes based on marine empiricism (i.e. the interactive governance theory – Kooiman et al. 2008) continue to be centred around governances in fisheries. There is a great potential to expand on other crucial marine resources, coming more and more to the fore and let marine governance theory be more inspired by ongoing theoretical, in-depth discussions on governance in the non-marine social sciences (Ostrom 2005, Van Assche 2014). It is therefore the aim of the ZMT social science department to fill this conceptual niche by developing an empirically based marine governance theory. Respective conceptual discussions stand at the centre of a subgroup of the Ocean Governance for Sustainability COST-Action hosted by ZMT. Here, ZMT social scientists in collaboration with colleagues from a number of European countries and Canada work towards the establishment of a marine governance theory that inspires governance theory in general and thus advances the conceptual toolbox for studying governance processes from a marine, coastal and Southern, in many instances developmental, perspective.
Marine Interdisciplinarity
A systematic crossing of disciplinary boundaries that enables our science system to study coastal ecosystems in the tropics, their users and their use and management patterns in an integrated and temporally dynamic way, requires practical tools, formats and facilitative settings for interdisciplinary work. The social sciences at ZMT are in a unique position for developing such a toolbox for marine inter- and possibly transdisciplinarity. Taking into account important pioneer work in the coastal and marine realm (Olsen et al, 2009) and based on Mollinga’s boundary-crossing framework (2008, 2010) developed in the setting of development research within agricultural water management in South and Central Asia, Barry’s (2008) work on different types of interdisciplinarity, as well as a systematic assessment of the particularities of interdisciplinary cooperation in the marine sciences (on coast and on research vessels) the social sciences at ZMT in five years’ time will have developed and empirically tested a practical toolbox for everyday interdisciplinarity in marine sciences, as well as the institutional structures it requires.
References:
Barry, A. , Born, G. and Weszkalnys, G. (2008) 'Logics of interdisciplinarity', Economy and Society, 37: 1, 20 — 49.
Kooiman, J., M. Bavinck, M., R. Chuenpagdee, R. Mahon, R. Pullin (2008) Interactive Governance and Governability: An Introduction, Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, 7 (1) : 2-11.
Olsen, S., Ed. (2003). Crafting coastal governance in a changing world. Coastal Management Report 2241. Narragansett, Rhode Island, USA, University of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Center.
Olsen, S. B., et al. (2009). The Analysis of Governance Responses to Ecosystem Change: A Handbook for Assembling a Baseline. Geesthacht, Germany, LOICZ Report and Studies.
Ostrom, E. 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Mollinga, P. P. (2010) Boundary Work and the Complexity of Natural Resources Manage-ment. Crop Science 50. 1–9.
Mollinga, P. P. (2008) The Rational Organisation of Dissent. Boundary concepts, boundary objects and boundary settings in the interdisciplinary study of natural resources manage-ment. ZEF Working Paper Series No. 33. Bonn: ZE
Schlüter, A., Wise, S., Schwerdtner Mánez, K., de Morais, G., Glaser, M., 2013. Institutional Change, Sustainability and the Sea. Sustainability 5, 5373-5390.
Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., Duineveld, M., 2014. Evolutionary governance theory: an introduction. Springer.
Exemplary Research Results
Analysing actions for sustainability of human-nature relations in tropical coastal and marine areas from a collective action perspective, we found in various cases that patience (low preference rate) and cooperative behaviour are – different to what is normally hypothesised – no significant predictors of sustainable behaviour of an individual. This has been shown by our research using behavioural experiments (Gehrig, 2016; Javaid et al., 2017; Javaid et al., 2016; Torres-Guevara and Schlüter, 2016) and qualitative based case study approaches (Gorris, 2016). We conclude and also many studies of various scholars advise that if this theoretically predicted relationship holds is very much context dependent. The interaction with other influencing factors is crucial (Torres-Guevara et al., 2016). As our Tanzanian research shows, it might, for example, depend on the alternative livelihood options available (Javaid et al., 2017), or the daily practiced fishing activities, which might foster cooperative norms, despite being very unsustainable (Gehrig, 2016). Strong cooperation and networks might be used particularly to organise criminal activity as shown by Gorris et al. (2016) for the Spermonde Archipelago (Indonesia). In Tasajera (Colombia) cooperation for sustainability was entirely overshadowed by the violent conflict between societal groups outside the focal SES analysed (guerrilla, paramilitaries and state, and fisheries of the Cienaga Grande respectively) (Torres Guevara et al., 2016).
As the ZMT is working in many different cultural, social, economic and ecological contexts around the tropical belt, and the social sciences are using to a large degree a qualitative approach producing thick data, it becomes obvious that analysing the context specific diversity of understandings, discourses, knowledges, and systems of meaning construction is paramount. This could be shown by many studies around the tropical belt (Siriwardane and Hornidge 2016; van Assche and Hornidge, 2015; Ferrol-Schulte et al., 2015; Rohe et al., 2017; Weber de Morais et al., 2015; Feuer and Hornidge, 2015; Glaser et al., 2015). Several of these studies were disciplinarily rooted in phenomenological thought, contributing to a decolonisation and deterrestrialisation of European phenomenological theory based on Asian empiricism. With reference to the concept of the “lifeworld” (Ger. Lebenswelt) by Edmund Husserl and Alfred Schütz for instance, we assessed the efficacy of adopting a phenomenological-lifeworlds approach in order to inductively explore diverse realities of coastal and sea-based peoples, while acknowledging the terrestrially-bound and anthropocentric genesis of the lifeworld as a concept (Siriwardane and Hornidge, 2016). Therefore, in order to enliven hybrid thematic currents, conceptual debates and methodologies on “marine lifeworlds” on their own terms, we propose two thematic vantage points for interdisciplinary intervention by: (a) critically engaging with cognitive-material meanings and lived interpretations of “saltwater” realities; (b) tracing multiple modes of sociality and being with/in-the-world that go beyond human entanglements. So far, it could be shown that while the lifeworlds concept affords spaces where to study the complexities and ambivalences rife in surface-level perceptions, it promises the means with which to sidestep over-simplistic inferences to the vague and embattled notion of “culture,” while widening horizons for reflective and experimental-experiential lines of inquiry.
All this indicates that understanding the reasons for societies to behave sustainably in the use of tropical marine systems while ensuring the well-being of coastal societies is multifaceted, complex and requires a diverse set of conceptual approaches and theorisations, disciplines, multiple methods and methodological approaches. Therefore, the social science department has very much focused on the further enhancement and development of frameworks for analysis (Glaser and Glaeser , 2014; Partelow and Boda, 2015; Schlüter and Madrigal, 2012; Torres Guevara et al., 2016). In the Anthropocene ,various levels (global, regional, local) and scales (temporal, jurisdictional, institutional etc.) are becoming ever more interdependent. It is important that conceptual frameworks account for those interdependencies. Therefore, we developed a framework aimed at understanding current sustainability problems and at supporting sustainable global environmental governance structures, processes and outcomes (Glaser and Glaeser, 2014). This focuses on the regional scale, allowing for connections with the global and the local. A coastal social ecological typology was developed and applied to nine coastal cases. The levels and scales used in the framework have been central analytical categories, for analysing current trends in tropical marine sciences, using 753 recent articles (Partelow et al., 2017). Three findings might be pointed out here: the analysis shows that certain regions along the tropical belt get substantially less attention (Africa) than others (Australia), despite their high relevance from a sustainability perspective. Coral reefs get far more attention than any other tropical marine ecosystem. Presence and diversity of natural science are much higher than those of the social sciences or of social-ecological approaches. Rising recognition in academia and society that the human dimension is key for tropical marine sustainability might (hopefully) change this trend.
Ferrol-Schulte, D., Gorris, P., Baitoningsih, W., Adhuri, D.S., Ferse, S.C., 2015. Coastal livelihood vulnerability to marine resource degradation: A review of the Indonesian national coastal and marine policy framework. Marine Policy 52, 163-171.
Feuer, Hart and Anna-Katharina Hornidge. (2015) “Higher Education Cooperation in ASEAN: Building Towards Integration or Manufacturing Consent?”, Comparative Education Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 327-352.
Gehrig, S., 2016. Social-cultural Heterogeneity and Scarcity in an Artisanal Fishery: Economic Experiments in Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar, Tanzania, ISATEC Master Thesis, Bremen University.
Glaser, M., Glaeser, B., 2014. Towards a framework for cross-scale and multi-level analysis of coastal and marine social-ecological systems dynamics. Regional environmental change 14, 2039.
Glaser, M., et al. (2015). "Of exploited reefs and fishers – A holistic view on participatory coastal and marine management in an Indonesian archipelago." Ocean & Coastal Management 116: 193-213.
Gorris, P., 2016. Deconstructing the Reality of Community-Based Management of Marine Resources in a Small Island Context in Indonesia. Frontiers in Marine Science 3, 120.
Javaid, A., Janssen, M.A., Reuter, H., Schlüter, A., 2017. When Patience Leads to Destruction: The Curious Case of Individual Time Preferences and the Adoption of Destructive Fishing Gears. Ecological Economics 142, 91-103.
Javaid, A., Kulesz, M.M., Schlüter, A., Ghosh, A., Jiddawi, N.S., 2016. Time Preferences and Natural Resource Extraction Behavior: An Experimental Study from Artisanal Fisheries in Zanzibar. PLOS ONE 11, e0168898.
Partelow, S., Boda, C., 2015. A modified diagnostic social-ecological system framework for lobster fisheries: Case implementation and sustainability assessment in Southern California. Ocean & Coastal Management 114, 204-217.
Partelow, S., Schlüter, A., von Wehrden, H., Jänig, M., Senff, P., 2017. A Sustainability Agenda for Tropical Marine Science. Conservation Letters, n/a-n/a.
Rohe, J.R., Aswani, S., Schlüter, A., Ferse, S.C.A., 2017. Multiple Drivers of Local (Non-) Compliance in Community-Based Marine Resource Management: Case Studies from the South Pacific. Frontiers in Marine Science 4.
Schlüter, A., Madrigal, R., 2012. The SES Framework in a Marin Setting: Turtle Egg Harvesting in Costa Rica. Rationality, Moral and Markets 3 148-167.
Siriwardane, Rapti, Anna-Katharina Hornidge, (2016) Putting Lifeworlds at Sea: Studying Meaning-Making in Marine Research, Frontiers in Marine Science. 3:197. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00197
Torres-Guevara, L.E., Lopez, M.C., Schlüter, A., 2016. Understanding Artisanal Fishers’ Behaviors: The Case of Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Colombia. Sustainability 8, 549.
Torres-Guevara, L.E., Schlüter, A., 2016. External validity of artefactual field experiments: A study on cooperation, impatience and sustainability in an artisanal fishery in Colombia. Ecological Economics 128, 187-201.
Torres Guevara, L.E., Schlüter, A., Lopez, M.C., 2016. Collective action in a tropical estuarine lagoon: adapting Ostrom’s SES framework to Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Colombia. International Journal of the Commons 10.
van Assche, Kristof and Anna-Katharina Hornidge (2015): “Rural Development. Knowledge and Expertise in Governance.” Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Weber de Morais, G., Schlüter, A., Verweij, M., 2015. Can institutional change theories contribute to the understanding of marine protected areas? Global Environmental Change 31, 154-162.
Kontakte
Prof. Dr. Achim Schlüter +49 421 23800 - 104 Diese E-Mail-Adresse ist vor Spambots geschützt! Zur Anzeige muss JavaScript eingeschaltet sein!
Kontakte 
Arbeitsgruppen 
Forschungsschwerpunkte