Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 91
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Partelow, Stefan 2015. Key steps for operationalizing social–ecological system framework research in small-scale fisheries: A heuristic conceptual approach. Marine Policy, Vol. 51, p. 507.

    Mavrommati, Georgia Bithas, Kostas and Panayiotidis, Panayiotis 2013. Operationalizing sustainability in urban coastal systems: A system dynamics analysis. Water Research, Vol. 47, Issue. 20, p. 7235.

    Salazar, Mónica Gómez 2014. Policies, complexity and the need for cooperation in epistemic inquiry for the stable use of natural resources. Environmental Science & Policy, Vol. 37, p. 91.

    Collins, Alan Fraser, Gavin and Snowball, Jen 2015. Issues and concerns in developing regulated markets for endangered species products: the case of rhinoceros horns. Cambridge Journal of Economics, p. bev076.

    Neis, Barbara 2015. Introduction to the special issue marine policy science, state and fishers knowledge in the Benguela ecosystem in Southern Africa. Marine Policy, Vol. 60, p. 287.

    Cumming, Graeme S. 2016. Heterarchies: Reconciling Networks and Hierarchies. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 31, Issue. 8, p. 622.

    Stanturf, John A. 2015. Future landscapes: opportunities and challenges. New Forests, Vol. 46, Issue. 5-6, p. 615.

    Bennett, Drew E. and Gosnell, Hannah 2015. Integrating multiple perspectives on payments for ecosystem services through a social–ecological systems framework. Ecological Economics, Vol. 116, p. 172.

    Vogt, Jessica 2016. Urban Forests.

    Leith, P. Ogier, E. Pecl, G. Hoshino, E. Davidson, J. and Haward, M. 2014. Towards a diagnostic approach to climate adaptation for fisheries. Climatic Change, Vol. 122, Issue. 1-2, p. 55.

    Clement, Sarah Moore, Susan A. Lockwood, Michael and Morrison, Tiffany H. 2015. A diagnostic framework for biodiversity conservation institutions. Pacific Conservation Biology, Vol. 21, Issue. 4, p. 277.

    Niles, Meredith T. and Lubell, Mark 2012. Integrative Frontiers in Environmental Policy Theory and Research. Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 40, p. 41.

    KimDung, Nguyen Bush, Simon and Mol, Arthur 2016. The Vietnamese State and Administrative Co-Management of Nature Reserves. Sustainability, Vol. 8, Issue. 3, p. 292.

    McClanahan, T.R. and Rankin, P.S. 2016. Geography of conservation spending, biodiversity, and culture. Conservation Biology, Vol. 30, Issue. 5, p. 1089.

    Partelow, Stefan 2016. Coevolving Ostrom’s social–ecological systems (SES) framework and sustainability science: four key co-benefits. Sustainability Science, Vol. 11, Issue. 3, p. 399.

    Winkler, Julie A. 2011. Geographical Sciences Versus Geography: How and Why?. The Professional Geographer, Vol. 63, Issue. 3, p. 314.

    Hayes, Tanya Murtinho, Felipe and Wolff, Hendrik 2015. An institutional analysis of Payment for Environmental Services on collectively managed lands in Ecuador. Ecological Economics, Vol. 118, p. 81.

    Wenger, Caroline 2015. Better use and management of levees: reducing flood risk in a changing climate. Environmental Reviews, Vol. 23, Issue. 2, p. 240.

    Khan, Tehmina 2016. Handbook of Environmental and Sustainable Finance.

    Tilt, Bryan and Gerkey, Drew 2016. Dams and population displacement on China’s Upper Mekong River: Implications for social capital and social–ecological resilience. Global Environmental Change, Vol. 36, p. 153.


Moving beyond panaceas: a multi-tiered diagnostic approach for social-ecological analysis

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 25 November 2010

Disturbances to key aspects of ecological systems, including biodiversity loss, climate change, pollution and natural resource degradation, have become a major concern to many policy analysts. Instead of learning from the study of biological complexity however, social scientists tend to recommend simple panaceas, particularly government or private ownership, as ‘the’ way to solve these problems. This paper reviews and assesses potential solutions for such overly simplified institutional prescriptions, referred to here as the ‘panacea problem’. In contrast to these simple prescriptions, recent research efforts are now illustrating the diversity of institutions around the world related to environmental conservation. The complexity of working institutions, however, presents a challenge to scholars who equate scientific knowledge with relatively simple models that predict optimal performance if specific institutional arrangements are in place. Dealing with this complexity has led to the development of frameworks as meta-theoretical tools. The institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework has been used over the last three decades as a foundation for a focused analysis of how institutions affect human incentives, actions and outcomes. Building on this foundation, the social-ecological systems (SES) framework has recently enabled researchers to begin the development of a common language that crosses social and ecological disciplines to analyse how interactions among a variety of factors affect outcomes. Such a framework may be able to facilitate a diagnostic approach that will help future analysts overcome the panacea problem. Using a common framework to diagnose the source, and possible amelioration, of poor outcomes for ecological and human systems enables a much finer understanding of these complex systems than has so far been obtained, and provides a basis for comparisons among many systems and ultimately more responsible policy prescriptions.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Dr Elinor Ostrom Tel: +1 812 855 0441 Fax: +1 812 855 3150 assistant's e-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

A. Agrawal (2003) Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context, methods, and politics. Annual Review of Anthropology 32: 234262.

A. Agrawal , A. Chhatre & R. Hardin (2008) Changing governance of the world's forests. Science 320: 14601462.

K. Andersson , C. Gibson & F. Lehoucq (2006) Municipal politics and forest governance: comparative analysis of decentralization in Bolivia and Guatemala. World Development 34 (3): 576595.

C.B. Barrett , K. Brandon , C. Gibson & H. Gjertsen (2001) Conserving tropical biodiversity amid weak institutions. Bioscience 51: 497502.

M. Batistella , S. Robeson & E.F. Moran (2003) Settlement design, forest fragmentation, and landscape change in Rondônia, Amazônia. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 69 (7): 805812.

F. Berkes (2007) Community-based conservation in a globalized world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (39): 1518815193.

F. Berkes & N.J. Turner (2006) Knowledge, learning and the evolution of conservation practice for social-ecological system resilience. Human Ecology 34 (4): 479494.

P. Blaikie (2006) Is small really beautiful? Community-based natural resource management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34 (11): 19421957.

J.A. Brander & M. Scott Taylor (1998) Open access renewable resources: trade and trade policy in a two-country model. Journal of International Economics 44: 181209.

W.A. Brock & S.R. Carpenter (2007) Panaceas and diversification of environmental policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (39): 1520615211.

D. Brunckhorst , I. Reeve , P. Morley & K. Bock (2008) Strategic spatial governance: deriving social–ecological frameworks for managing landscapes and regions. In: Landscape Analysis and Visualisation: Spatial Models for Natural Resource Management and Planning, ed. C. Pettit , W. Cartwright , I. Bishop , K. Lowell , D. Pullar & D. Duncan , pp. 253276. Berlin, Germany: Springer.

M.W. Brunson & L. Huntsinger (2008) Ranching as a conservation strategy: can old ranchers save the new west? Rangeland Ecology and Management 61 (2): 137147.

B.M. Campbell , I.J. Gordon , M.K. Luckert , L. Petheram & S. Vetter (2006) In search of optimal stocking regimes in semi-arid grazing lands: one size does not fit all. Ecological Economics 60 (1): 7585.

J.G. Canadell & M.R. Raupach (2008) Managing forests for climate change mitigation. Science 320: 14561457.

L. Carlsson & F. Berkes (2005) Co-management: concepts and methodological implications. Journal of Environmental Management 75: 6576.

D.W Cash , W.C. Clark , F. Alcock , N.M. Dickson , N. Eckley , D.H. Guston , J. Jager & R.B. Mitchell (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 (14): 80868091.

A. Chhatre & A. Agrawal (2008) Forest commons and local enforcement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (36): 1328613291.

F. Cleaver (1999) Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development 11: 597612.

F. Cleaver (2000) Moral ecological rationality, institutions and the management of common property resources. Development and Change 31 (2): 361383.

E. Coleman (2009) Institutional factors affecting ecological outcomes in forest management. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 28 (1): 122146.

E. Coleman & B. Steed (2009) Monitoring and sanctioning in the commons: an application to forestry. Ecological Economics 68 (7): 21062113.

P. Degnbol , H. Gislason , S. Hanna , S. Jentoft , J. Raakjær , Sverdrup-Jensen S. Nielsen & D. Clyde Wilson (2006) Painting the floor with a hammer: technical fixes in fisheries management. Marine Policy 30: 534543.

T. Dietz , E. Ostrom & P.C. Stern (2003) The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302 (5652): 19071912.

P. Evans (2004) Development as institutional change: the pitfalls of monocropping and the potentials of deliberation. Studies in Comparative International Development 38 (4): 3052.

D. Feeny , F. Berkes , B.J. McCay & J.M. Acheson (1990) The tragedy of the commons: twenty-two years later. Human Ecology 18 (1): 119.

C.C. Gibson , J.T. Williams & E. Ostrom (2005) Local enforcement and better forests. World Development 33 (2): 273284.

J.D. Hackel (1999) Community conservation and the future of Africa's wildlife. Conservation Biology 13 (4): 726734.

S. Hanna & M. Munasinghe (1995) Property Rights in a Social and Ecological Context; Case Studies and Design Principles. Washington, DC, USA: The Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics and The World Bank.

T. Hayes (2006) Parks, people, and forest protection: an institutional assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas. World Development 34 (12): 20642075.

D.C. Korten (1980) Community organization and rural development: a learning process approach. Public Administration Review 40 (5): 480511.

S.A. Levin (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 19431967.

T.E. Lovejoy (2006) Protected areas: a prism for a changing world. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21: 329333.

R. Meinzen-Dick (2007) Beyond panaceas in water institutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (39): 1520015206.

R.M. Netting (1972) Of men and meadows: strategies of alpine land use. Anthropological Quarterly 45: 132144.

E. Ostrom (1986) An agenda for the study of institutions. Public Choice 48 (1): 325.

E. Ostrom , M. Janssen & M.A. Anderies (2007) Going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (39): 1517615178.

E. Ostrom (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325: 419422.

E. Ostrom & H. Nagendra (2006) Insights on linking forests, trees, and people from the air, on the ground, and in the laboratory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (51): 1922419231.

A. Pagdee , Y. Kim & P.J. Daugherty (2006) What makes community forest management successful: a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Society and Natural Resources 19 (1): 3352.

A.R. Poteete & E. Ostrom (2004) Heterogeneity, group size and collective action: the role of institutions in forest management. Development and Change 35 (3): 437461.

C.C. Ragin (2008) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.

T.K. Rudel (2008) Meta-analysis of case studies: a method for studying regional and global climate change. Global Environmental Change 18 (1): 1825.

C. Sandström (2009) Institutional dimensions of comanagement: Participation, power and process. Society and Natural Resources 22: 230244

A. Satria , Y. Matsuda & M. Sano (2006) Questioning community based coral reef management systems: case study of Awig-Awig in Gili Indah, Indonesia. Environment, Development and Sustainability 8: 99118.

E. Schlager & E. Ostrom (1992) Property-regimes and natural resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Economics 68 (3): 249262.

J.T. Scholz & C-L. Wang (2006) Cooptation or transformation? Local policy networks and federal regulatory enforcement. American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 8197.

N. Shanmugaratnam (1996) Nationalisation, privatisation, and the dilemmas of common property management in western Rajasthan. Journal of Development Studies 33: 163187.

K. St Martin , B.J. McCay , G. Murray , T. Johnson & B. Oles (2007) Communities, knowledge and fisheries of the future. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues 7 (2/3): 221239.

R.N. Stavins (2008) Addressing climate change with a comprehensive U.S. cap-and-trade system. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 24 (2): 298321.

P.B. Trawick (2001) Successfully governing the commons: principles of social organization in an Andean irrigation system. Human Ecology 29 (1): 125.

C.M. Tucker (2008) Changing Forests: Collective Action, Common Property, and Coffee in Honduras. New York, NY, USA: Springer.

E. Wollenberg , L. Merino , A. Agrawal & E. Ostrom (2007) Fourteen years of monitoring community-managed forests: learning from IFRI's experience. International Forestry Review 9 (2): 670684.

O. Young (2002) The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *