No region beyond hope
This article sets the stage for future research on transformations in social-ecological systems and mechanisms for opening up new trajectories of sustainability. It covers tipping points and the role of innovation, entrepreneurs, and informal networks for seizing windows of opportunity.
 
With the development of a proper ecosystem stewardship, they argue, ecosystem services can continue to support human well-being even under conditions of uncertainty and change.
 
 - There is no region so resilient that policy makers and managers can ignore the potential threshold changes. Similarly, there is no region that is beyond hope of substantial enhancement of well-being, adaptive capacity and resilience, says Carl Folke, who is the centre science director and one of the authors of the article.
 
Time to be pragmatic
The article argues that ecosystem stewardship provides a perspective that better equips society to manage a spectrum of challenges.
 
 - We need to identify pragmatic strategies that increase the likelihood of socially beneficial outcomes and reduce the risk of bad outcomes, it states.
 
The ecosystem stewardship integrates three approaches for sustainable development, namely
-          reducing vulnerability to expected changes
-          fostering resilience to sustain desirable conditions in the face of perturbations and uncertainty
-          transforming from undesirable trajectories when opportunities emerge
 
Shift from reactive to proactive
The first approach focuses on the importance of monitoring trends in stressors that leads to change. By monitoring such trends, ecosystem stewards can gauge change over time and act to reduce stresses or the exposure to it. For example, overgrazing in drylands reduces the abundance of palatable plants, indicating the need to reduce grazing pressure.
 
Global-scale stresses such as climate change are particularly challenging because they require concerted global action. Unfortunately, these crises are outpacing the capacity of governments and institutions to deal with them.
 
The second approach emphasises the importance of shifting from a reactive resource management to more proactive solutions that can prepare us for the unexpected.
 
- The key here is to maintain a diversity of options, socially, economically and biologically. If we maintain and develop diversity in all three areas we are better equipped to respond and shape changes that come our way, says Per Olsson, another article author and theme leader at Stockholm Resilience centre.
 
Crisis can be a spur for change. Or...?
The third approach sets out to find ways for humans to escape from the persistent trajectories of poverty, hunger, civil strife and the overall social-ecological mismanagement that characterise so many parts of the world.
 
Transformational change often happens at times of crisis when enough stakeholders agree that the current system is dysfunctional. Crisis or pending crisis can trigger the emergence of new forms of management and governance of the biosphere.
 
 - For example, increasing recognition of climate change is a current crisis that could generate new technology and governance solutions that could fundamentally change or create new feedbacks and enhance the fit between ecosystems and governance systems. Unfortunately, because there is a lack of understanding of how transformations occur and a common response to crisis is to rebuild the pre-crisis system rather than to attempt transformation, says Per Olsson.