Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience

Samuel A. Markolf, Mikhail Chester, Daniel A. Eisenberg, David M. Iwaniec, Cliff I. Davidson, Rae Zimmerman, Thaddeus R. Miller, Benjamin L. Ruddell, Heejun Chang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Traditional infrastructure adaptation to extreme weather events (and now climate change) has typically been techno-centric and heavily grounded in robustness—the capacity to prevent or minimize disruptions via a risk-based approach that emphasizes control, armoring, and strengthening (e.g., raising the height of levees). However, climate and nonclimate challenges facing infrastructure are not purely technological. Ecological and social systems also warrant consideration to manage issues of overconfidence, inflexibility, interdependence, and resource utilization—among others. As a result, techno-centric adaptation strategies can result in unwanted tradeoffs, unintended consequences, and underaddressed vulnerabilities. Techno-centric strategies that lock-in today's infrastructure systems to vulnerable future design, management, and regulatory practices may be particularly problematic by exacerbating these ecological and social issues rather than ameliorating them. Given these challenges, we develop a conceptual model and infrastructure adaptation case studies to argue the following: (1) infrastructure systems are not simply technological and should be understood as complex and interconnected social, ecological, and technological systems (SETSs); (2) infrastructure challenges, like lock-in, stem from SETS interactions that are often overlooked and underappreciated; (3) framing infrastructure with a SETS lens can help identify and prevent maladaptive issues like lock-in; and (4) a SETS lens can also highlight effective infrastructure adaptation strategies that may not traditionally be considered. Ultimately, we find that treating infrastructure as SETS shows promise for increasing the adaptive capacity of infrastructure systems by highlighting how lock-in and vulnerabilities evolve and how multidisciplinary strategies can be deployed to address these challenges by broadening the options for adaptation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEarth's Future
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

infrastructure
vulnerability
weather
climate change
climate
resource

Keywords

  • infrastructure systems
  • lock-in
  • resilience
  • robustness
  • social-ecological-technological systems
  • urban systems

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience. / Markolf, Samuel A.; Chester, Mikhail; Eisenberg, Daniel A.; Iwaniec, David M.; Davidson, Cliff I.; Zimmerman, Rae; Miller, Thaddeus R.; Ruddell, Benjamin L.; Chang, Heejun.

In: Earth's Future, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Markolf, Samuel A. ; Chester, Mikhail ; Eisenberg, Daniel A. ; Iwaniec, David M. ; Davidson, Cliff I. ; Zimmerman, Rae ; Miller, Thaddeus R. ; Ruddell, Benjamin L. ; Chang, Heejun. / Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience. In: Earth's Future. 2018.
@article{3de4918ead264b679abab80232d46b75,
title = "Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience",
abstract = "Traditional infrastructure adaptation to extreme weather events (and now climate change) has typically been techno-centric and heavily grounded in robustness—the capacity to prevent or minimize disruptions via a risk-based approach that emphasizes control, armoring, and strengthening (e.g., raising the height of levees). However, climate and nonclimate challenges facing infrastructure are not purely technological. Ecological and social systems also warrant consideration to manage issues of overconfidence, inflexibility, interdependence, and resource utilization—among others. As a result, techno-centric adaptation strategies can result in unwanted tradeoffs, unintended consequences, and underaddressed vulnerabilities. Techno-centric strategies that lock-in today's infrastructure systems to vulnerable future design, management, and regulatory practices may be particularly problematic by exacerbating these ecological and social issues rather than ameliorating them. Given these challenges, we develop a conceptual model and infrastructure adaptation case studies to argue the following: (1) infrastructure systems are not simply technological and should be understood as complex and interconnected social, ecological, and technological systems (SETSs); (2) infrastructure challenges, like lock-in, stem from SETS interactions that are often overlooked and underappreciated; (3) framing infrastructure with a SETS lens can help identify and prevent maladaptive issues like lock-in; and (4) a SETS lens can also highlight effective infrastructure adaptation strategies that may not traditionally be considered. Ultimately, we find that treating infrastructure as SETS shows promise for increasing the adaptive capacity of infrastructure systems by highlighting how lock-in and vulnerabilities evolve and how multidisciplinary strategies can be deployed to address these challenges by broadening the options for adaptation.",
keywords = "infrastructure systems, lock-in, resilience, robustness, social-ecological-technological systems, urban systems",
author = "Markolf, {Samuel A.} and Mikhail Chester and Eisenberg, {Daniel A.} and Iwaniec, {David M.} and Davidson, {Cliff I.} and Rae Zimmerman and Miller, {Thaddeus R.} and Ruddell, {Benjamin L.} and Heejun Chang",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1029/2018EF000926",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Earth's Future",
issn = "2328-4277",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interdependent Infrastructure as Linked Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETSs) to Address Lock-in and Enhance Resilience

AU - Markolf, Samuel A.

AU - Chester, Mikhail

AU - Eisenberg, Daniel A.

AU - Iwaniec, David M.

AU - Davidson, Cliff I.

AU - Zimmerman, Rae

AU - Miller, Thaddeus R.

AU - Ruddell, Benjamin L.

AU - Chang, Heejun

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Traditional infrastructure adaptation to extreme weather events (and now climate change) has typically been techno-centric and heavily grounded in robustness—the capacity to prevent or minimize disruptions via a risk-based approach that emphasizes control, armoring, and strengthening (e.g., raising the height of levees). However, climate and nonclimate challenges facing infrastructure are not purely technological. Ecological and social systems also warrant consideration to manage issues of overconfidence, inflexibility, interdependence, and resource utilization—among others. As a result, techno-centric adaptation strategies can result in unwanted tradeoffs, unintended consequences, and underaddressed vulnerabilities. Techno-centric strategies that lock-in today's infrastructure systems to vulnerable future design, management, and regulatory practices may be particularly problematic by exacerbating these ecological and social issues rather than ameliorating them. Given these challenges, we develop a conceptual model and infrastructure adaptation case studies to argue the following: (1) infrastructure systems are not simply technological and should be understood as complex and interconnected social, ecological, and technological systems (SETSs); (2) infrastructure challenges, like lock-in, stem from SETS interactions that are often overlooked and underappreciated; (3) framing infrastructure with a SETS lens can help identify and prevent maladaptive issues like lock-in; and (4) a SETS lens can also highlight effective infrastructure adaptation strategies that may not traditionally be considered. Ultimately, we find that treating infrastructure as SETS shows promise for increasing the adaptive capacity of infrastructure systems by highlighting how lock-in and vulnerabilities evolve and how multidisciplinary strategies can be deployed to address these challenges by broadening the options for adaptation.

AB - Traditional infrastructure adaptation to extreme weather events (and now climate change) has typically been techno-centric and heavily grounded in robustness—the capacity to prevent or minimize disruptions via a risk-based approach that emphasizes control, armoring, and strengthening (e.g., raising the height of levees). However, climate and nonclimate challenges facing infrastructure are not purely technological. Ecological and social systems also warrant consideration to manage issues of overconfidence, inflexibility, interdependence, and resource utilization—among others. As a result, techno-centric adaptation strategies can result in unwanted tradeoffs, unintended consequences, and underaddressed vulnerabilities. Techno-centric strategies that lock-in today's infrastructure systems to vulnerable future design, management, and regulatory practices may be particularly problematic by exacerbating these ecological and social issues rather than ameliorating them. Given these challenges, we develop a conceptual model and infrastructure adaptation case studies to argue the following: (1) infrastructure systems are not simply technological and should be understood as complex and interconnected social, ecological, and technological systems (SETSs); (2) infrastructure challenges, like lock-in, stem from SETS interactions that are often overlooked and underappreciated; (3) framing infrastructure with a SETS lens can help identify and prevent maladaptive issues like lock-in; and (4) a SETS lens can also highlight effective infrastructure adaptation strategies that may not traditionally be considered. Ultimately, we find that treating infrastructure as SETS shows promise for increasing the adaptive capacity of infrastructure systems by highlighting how lock-in and vulnerabilities evolve and how multidisciplinary strategies can be deployed to address these challenges by broadening the options for adaptation.

KW - infrastructure systems

KW - lock-in

KW - resilience

KW - robustness

KW - social-ecological-technological systems

KW - urban systems

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058158588&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058158588&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1029/2018EF000926

DO - 10.1029/2018EF000926

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85058158588

JO - Earth's Future

JF - Earth's Future

SN - 2328-4277

ER -