Panarchy: Theory and Application | Ecosystems Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Panarchy: Theory and Application

  • Published:
Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of panarchy provides a framework that characterizes complex systems of people and nature as dynamically organized and structured within and across scales of space and time. It has been more than a decade since the introduction of panarchy. Over this period, its invocation in peer-reviewed literature has been steadily increasing, but its use remains primarily descriptive and abstract. Here, we discuss the use of the concept in the literature to date, highlight where the concept may be useful, and discuss limitations to the broader applicability of panarchy theory for research in the ecological and social sciences. Finally, we forward a set of testable hypotheses to evaluate key propositions that follow from panarchy theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen CR, Holling CS, Eds. 2008. Discontinuities in ecosystems and other complex systems. New York: Columbia University Press.

  • Allen CR, Holling CS. 2010. Novelty, adaptive capacity, and resilience. Ecol Soc 15(3):24. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art24/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen CR, Saunders DA. 2002. Variability between scales: predictors of nomadism in birds of an Australian Mediterranean-climate ecosystem. Ecosystems 5:348–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen CR, Saunders DA. 2006. Multimodel inference and the understanding of complexity, discontinuity, and nomadism. Ecosystems 9:694–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen CR, Forys EA, Holling CS. 1999. Body mass patterns predict invasions and extinctions in transforming landscapes. Ecosystems 2:114–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen CR, Gunderson L, Johnson AR. 2005. The use of discontinuities and functional groups to assess relative resilience in complex systems. Ecosystems 8:958–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angeler DG, Johnson RK. 2012. Temporal scales and patterns of invertebrate biodiversity dynamics in boreal lakes recovering from acidification. Ecol Appl 22:1172–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Angeler DG, Viedma O, Moreno JM. 2009. Statistical performance and information content of time lag analysis and redundancy analysis in time series modeling. Ecology 90:3245–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Angeler DG, Trigal C, Drakare S, Johnson RK, Goedkoop W. 2010. Identifying resilience mechanisms to recurrent ecosystem perturbations. Oecologia 164:231–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Angeler DG, Drakare S, Johnson RK. 2011. Revealing the organization of complex adaptive systems through multivariate time series modeling. Ecol Soc 16(3):5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04175-160305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angeler DG, Allen CR, Johnson RK. 2012. Insights on invasions and resilience derived from spatiotemporal discontinuities of biomass at local and regional scales. Ecol Soc 17(2):32. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04928-170232.

  • Angeler DG, Allen CR, Johnson RK. 2013. Measuring the relative resilience of subarctic lakes to global change: redundancies of functions within and across temporal scales. J Appl Ecol 50:572–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beier C, Lovecraft AL, Chapin T. 2009. Growth and collapse of a resource system: an adaptive cycle of change in public lands governance and forest management in Alaska. Ecol Soc 14(2):5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art5/.

  • Benson MH, Garmestani AS. 2011. Embracing panarchy, building resilience and integrating adaptive management through a rebirth of the National Environmental Policy Act. J Environ Manag 92:1420–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bessey KM. 2002. Structure and dynamics in an urban landscape: toward a multiscale view. Ecosystems 5:360–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bremner AP, Taplin RH. 2004. Performance of localized regression tree splitting criteria on data with discontinuities. Aust N Z J Stat 46:367–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks ML, D’Antonio CM, Richardson DM, Grace JB, Keeley JE, DiTomaso JM, Hobbs RJ, Pellant M, Pyke D. 2004. Effects of invasive alien plants on fire regimes. Bioscience 54:677–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunckhorst DJ. 2002. Institutions to sustain ecological and social systems. Ecol Manag Restor 3:108–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR, Brock WA. 2006. Rising variance: a leading indicator of ecological transition. Ecol Lett 9:311–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carreiro MM, Zipperer WC. 2011. Co-adapting societal and ecological interactions following large disturbances in urban park woodlands. Aust Ecol 36:904–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chipman HA, George EI, McCulloch RE. 1998. Bayesian CART model search. J Am Stat Assoc 93:935–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE. 1916. Plant succession: an analysis of the development of vegetation. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dakos V, Scheffer M, van Nes EH, Brovkin V, Petoukhov V, Held H. 2008. Slowing down as an early warning signal for abrupt climate change. PNAS 105:14308–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond JM. 2005. Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick JM, Smith RI, Scott ME. 2011. Ecosystem services and associated concepts. Environmetrics 22:598–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorren LKA, Berger F, Imeson AC, Maier B, Rey F. 2004. Integrity, stability and management of protected forests in the European Alps. For Ecol Manage 195:165–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downey SS. 2010. Can properties of labor-exchange networks explain the resilience of swidden agriculture? Ecol Soc 15(4):15. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art15/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eason T, Garmestani AS. 2012. Cross-scale dynamics of a regional urban system through time. Region et Developement 36-2012.

  • Eason T, Garmestani AS, Cabezas H. 2014. Managing for resilience: early detection of catastrophic shifts in ecological systems. Clean Technol Environ Policy. doi:10.1007/s10098-013-0687-2.

  • Evans GR. 2008. Transformation from “Carbon Valley” to a “Post-Carbon Society” in a climate change hot spot: the coalfields of the Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia. Ecol Soc 13(1):39. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art39/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell BH, Twining-Ward L. 2004. Reconceptualizing tourism. Ann Tour Res 31:274–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Montague-Drake R. 2008. The role of landscape texture in conservation biogeography: a case study on birds in south-eastern Australia. Divers Distrib 14:38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Carpenter SR, Walker BH, Scheffer M, Elmqvist T, Gunderson LH, Holling CS. 2004. Regime shifts, resilience and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35:557–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forys EA, Allen CR. 2002. Functional group change within and across scales following invasions and extinctions in the Everglades ecosystem. Ecosystems 5:339–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser EDG. 2003. Social vulnerability and ecological fragility: building bridges between social and natural sciences using the Irish Potato Famine as a case study. Conserv Ecol 7(2):9. http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss2/art9/.

  • Fraser EDG, Stringer LC. 2009. Explaining agricultural collapse: macro-forces, micro-crises and the emergence of land use vulnerability in southern Romania. Glob Environ Change 19:45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser EDG, Mabee W, Figge F. 2005. A framework for assessing the vulnerability of food systems to future shocks. Futures 37:465–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia JH, Garmestani AS, Karunanithi AT. 2011. Threshold transitions in a regional urban system. J Econ Behav Organ 78:152–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Benson MH. 2013. A framework for resilience-based governance of social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 18(1):9. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art9/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Bessey KM. 2005. Time series analysis of clusters in city size distributions. Urban Stud 42:1507–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Mittelstaedt JD, Stow CA, Ward WA. 2006. Firm size diversity, functional richness and resilience. Environ Dev Econ 11:533–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Gallagher CM, Mittelstaedt JD. 2007. Departures from Gibrat’s law, discontinuities and city size distributions. Urban Stud 44:1997–2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Gallagher CM. 2008. Power laws, discontinuities and regional city size distributions. J Econ Behav Organ 68:209–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Cabezas H. 2009a. Panarchy, adaptive management and governance: policy options for building resilience. Neb Law Rev 87:1036–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani AS, Allen CR, Gunderson L. 2009b. Panarchy: discontinuities reveal similarities in the dynamic system structure of ecological and social systems. Ecol Soc 14 (1):15. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art15/.

  • Gotts NM. 2007. Resilience, panarchy, and world-systems analysis. Ecol Soc 12(1):24. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art24/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groffman P, Baron J, Blett T, Gold A, Goodman I, Gunderson L, Levinson B, Palmer M, Paerl H, Peterson G, Rejeski D, Reynolds J, Turner M, Weathers K, Wiens J. 2006. Ecological thresholds: the key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems 9:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson L. 2010. Ecological and human community resilience in response to natural disasters. Ecol Soc 15(2):18. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art18/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Eds. 2002. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Light SS, Holling CS, Eds. 1995. Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson L, Allen CR, Wardwell D. 2007. Temporal scaling in complex systems: resonant frequencies and biotic variability. In: Bissonette JA, Storch I, Eds. Temporal dimensions in landscape ecology: wildlife responses to variable resources. New York: Springer. p. 78–89.

  • Havlicek T, Carpenter SR. 2001. Pelagic size distributions in lakes: are they discontinuous? Limnol Oceanogr 46:1021–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS. 1986. Resilience of ecosystems: local surprise and global change. In: Clark WC, Munn RE, Eds. Sustainable development of the biosphere. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 292–317.

  • Holling CS. 2001. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Gunderson LH, Peterson GD. 2002. Sustainability and panarchies. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Eds. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press. p. 63–102.

  • Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M. 1994. Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69:373–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karkkainen BC. 2005. Panarchy and adaptive change: around the loop and back again. Minn J Law Sci Technol 7:59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karunanithi AT, Cabezas H, Frieden R, Pawlowski C. 2008. Detection and assessment of ecosystem regime shifts from Fisher information. Ecol Soc 13(1):22. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art22/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kueker GD, Hall TD. 2011. Resilience and community in the age of world-system collapse. Nat Cult 6:18–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leaper R, Raffaelli D, Emes C, Manly B. 2001. Constraints on body-size distributions: an experimental test of the habitat architecture hypothesis. J Anim Ecol 70:248–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuteritz TEJ, Ekbia HR. 2008. Not all roads lead to resilience: a complex systems approach to the comparative analysis of tortoises in arid ecosystems. Ecol Soc 13(1):1. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art1/.

  • Ludwig D, Jones D, Holling CS. 1978. Qualitative analysis of insect outbreak systems: the spruce budworm and forest. J Anim Ecol 47:315–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mhango J, Dick J. 2011. Analysis of fertilizer subsidy programs and ecosystem services in Malawi. Renew Agric Food Syst 26:200–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moen J, Keskitalo ECH. 2010. Interlocking panarchies in multi-use boreal forests in Sweden. Ecol Soc 15(3):17. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art17/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash KL, Graham NAJ, Wilson SK, Bellwood DR. 2013. Cross-scale habitat structure drives fish body size distributions on coral reefs. Ecosystems 16:478–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash KL, Allen CR, Angeler DG, Barichievy C, Eason T, Garmestani AS, Graham NAJ, Granholm D, Knutson M, Nelson RJ, Nyström M, Stow CA, Sundstrom SM. 2014. Discontinuites, cross-scale patterns and the organization of ecosystems. Ecology. doi:10.1890/13-1315.1.

  • Nyström M, Folke C. 2001. Spatial resilience of coral reefs. Ecosystems 4:406–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, DeAngelis DL, Wade JB, Allen TFH. 1986. A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, Johnson AR, King AW. 1989. A hierarchical framework for the analysis of scale. Landsc Ecol 3:193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum HT. 1983. Systems ecology: an introduction. New York: Wiley.

  • Peterson GD. 2002. Estimating resilience across landscapes. Conserv Ecol 6(1):17. http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss1/art17/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson GD, Allen CR, Holling CS. 1998. Ecological resilience, biodiversity and scale. Ecosystems 1:6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrosillo I, Zaccarelli N. 2010. Multi-scale vulnerability of natural capital in a panarchy of social–ecological landscapes. Ecol Complex 7:359–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restrepo C, LM Renjifo, Marples P. 1997. Frugivorous birds in fragmented neotropical montane forests: landscape pattern and body mass distribution. In: Laurance WF, Bierregaard RO, Eds. Tropical forest remnants: ecology, management and conservation of fragmented communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 171–89.

  • Ruhl JB. 2012. Panarchy and the law. Ecol Soc 17(3):31. doi:10.5751/ES-05109-170331.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute, Inc. 1999. SAS user’s guide: statistics. Version 5. Cary, NC, USA.

  • Scheffer M, Bascompte J, Brock WA, Brovkin V, Carpenter SR, Dakos V, Held H, van Nes EH, Rietkerk M, Sugihara G. 2009. Early-warning signals for critical transitions. Nature 461:53–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skillen JJ, Maurer BA. 2008. The ecological significance of discontinuities in body mass distributions. In: Allen CR, Holling CS, editors. Discontinuities in ecosystems and other complex systems. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 193–218.

  • Sommer UZ, Gliwicz M, Lampert W, Duncan A. 1986. PEG-model of seasonal succession of planktonic events in freshwaters. Archiv fuer Hydrobiologie 106:433–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundstrom SM, Allen CR, Barichievy C. 2012. Species, functional groups, and thresholds in ecological resilience. Conserv Biol 26:305–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabó P, Meszéna G. 2006. Spatial ecological hierarchies: coexistence on heterogeneous landscapes via scale niche diversification. Ecosystems 9:1009–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Apeldoorn DF, Kok K, Sonneveld MPW, Veldkamp TA. 2011. Panarchy rules: rethinking resilience of agroecosystems, evidence from Dutch dairy-farming. Ecol Soc 16(1):39. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art39/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker B, Holling CS, Carpenter SR, Kinzig A. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 9(2):5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardwell D, Allen CR. 2009. Variability in population abundance is associated with thresholds between scaling regimes. Ecol Soc 14(2):42. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art42/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardwell DA, Allen CR, Peterson GD, Tyre AJ. 2008. A test of the cross-scale resilience model: functional richness in Mediterranean-climate ecosystems. Ecol Complex 5:165–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner K. 2011. Environmental change and migration: methodological considerations from ground-breaking global survey. Popul Environ 33:3–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaccarelli N, Petrosillo I, Zurlini G, Hans Riitters K. 2008. Source/sink patterns of disturbance and cross-scale mismatches in a panarchy of social–ecological landscapes. Ecol Soc 13(1):26. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art26/.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

An earlier version of this manuscript was improved by comments from K. Nash, T. Spanbauer, and two anonymous reviewers. We also thank Bev Gunderson for graphics support. The Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly supported by a cooperative agreement between the U.S. Geological Survey, the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Wildlife Management Institute. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United States Government or U.S. EPA. We gratefully acknowledge funding from the August T. Larsson Foundation of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, and the U.S. Geological Survey John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. U.S. Geological Survey, Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, 68583, USA

    Craig R. Allen

  2. Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7050, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden

    David G. Angeler

  3. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45268, USA

    Ahjond S. Garmestani

  4. Department of Environmental Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA

    Lance H. Gunderson

  5. Resilience Center, Vancouver Island, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada

    C. S. Holling

Authors
  1. Craig R. Allen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David G. Angeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahjond S. Garmestani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lance H. Gunderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. S. Holling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Craig R. Allen.

Additional information

Author Contributions

CRA, DGA, ASG, and LHG conceived and wrote the paper. CSH conceived the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Allen, C.R., Angeler, D.G., Garmestani, A.S. et al. Panarchy: Theory and Application. Ecosystems 17, 578–589 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-013-9744-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-013-9744-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation