This growing collection consists of scholarly works authored by ASU-affiliated faculty, staff, and community members, and it contains many open access articles. ASU-affiliated authors are encouraged to Share Your Work in KEEP.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 16
Filtering by

Clear all filters

129422-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Faced with numerous seemingly intractable social and environmental challenges, many scholars and practitioners are increasingly interested in understanding how to actively engage and transform the existing systems holding such problems in place. Although a variety of analytical models have emerged in recent years, most emphasize either the social or ecological

Faced with numerous seemingly intractable social and environmental challenges, many scholars and practitioners are increasingly interested in understanding how to actively engage and transform the existing systems holding such problems in place. Although a variety of analytical models have emerged in recent years, most emphasize either the social or ecological elements of such transformations rather than their coupled nature. To address this, first we have presented a definition of the core elements of a social-ecological system (SES) that could potentially be altered in a transformation. Second, we drew on insights about transformation from three branches of literature focused on radical change, i.e., social movements, socio-technical transitions, and social innovation, and gave consideration to the similarities and differences with the current studies by resilience scholars. Drawing on these findings, we have proposed a framework that outlines the process and phases of transformative change in an SES. Future research will be able to utilize the framework as a tool for analyzing the alteration of social-ecological feedbacks, identifying critical barriers and leverage points and assessing the outcome of social-ecological transformations.

ContributorsMoore, Michele-Lee (Author) / Tjornbo, Ola (Author) / Enfors, Elin (Author) / Knapp, Corrie (Author) / Hodbod, Jennifer (Author) / Baggio, Jacopo (Author) / Norstrom, Albert (Author) / Olsson, Per (Author) / Biggs, Duan (Author) / Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability (Contributor)
Created2013-11-30
128778-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Online communities are becoming increasingly important as platforms for large-scale human cooperation. These communities allow users seeking and sharing professional skills to solve problems collaboratively. To investigate how users cooperate to complete a large number of knowledge-producing tasks, we analyze Stack Exchange, one of the largest question and answer systems

Online communities are becoming increasingly important as platforms for large-scale human cooperation. These communities allow users seeking and sharing professional skills to solve problems collaboratively. To investigate how users cooperate to complete a large number of knowledge-producing tasks, we analyze Stack Exchange, one of the largest question and answer systems in the world. We construct attention networks to model the growth of 110 communities in the Stack Exchange system and quantify individual answering strategies using the linking dynamics on attention networks. We identify two answering strategies. Strategy A aims at performing maintenance by doing simple tasks, whereas strategy B aims at investing time in doing challenging tasks. Both strategies are important: empirical evidence shows that strategy A decreases the median waiting time for answers and strategy B increases the acceptance rate of answers. In investigating the strategic persistence of users, we find that users tends to stick on the same strategy over time in a community, but switch from one strategy to the other across communities. This finding reveals the different sets of knowledge and skills between users. A balance between the population of users taking A and B strategies that approximates 2:1, is found to be optimal to the sustainable growth of communities.

ContributorsWu, Lingfei (Author) / Baggio, Jacopo (Author) / Janssen, Marco (Author) / ASU-SFI Center for Biosocial Complex Systems (Contributor)
Created2016-03-02
Description

On-going efforts to understand the dynamics of coupled social-ecological (or more broadly, coupled infrastructure) systems and common pool resources have led to the generation of numerous datasets based on a large number of case studies. This data has facilitated the identification of important factors and fundamental principles which increase our

On-going efforts to understand the dynamics of coupled social-ecological (or more broadly, coupled infrastructure) systems and common pool resources have led to the generation of numerous datasets based on a large number of case studies. This data has facilitated the identification of important factors and fundamental principles which increase our understanding of such complex systems. However, the data at our disposal are often not easily comparable, have limited scope and scale, and are based on disparate underlying frameworks inhibiting synthesis, meta-analysis, and the validation of findings. Research efforts are further hampered when case inclusion criteria, variable definitions, coding schema, and inter-coder reliability testing are not made explicit in the presentation of research and shared among the research community. This paper first outlines challenges experienced by researchers engaged in a large-scale coding project; then highlights valuable lessons learned; and finally discusses opportunities for further research on comparative case study analysis focusing on social-ecological systems and common pool resources. Includes supplemental materials and appendices published in the International Journal of the Commons 2016 Special Issue. Volume 10 - Issue 2 - 2016.

ContributorsRatajczyk, Elicia (Author) / Brady, Ute (Author) / Baggio, Jacopo (Author) / Barnett, Allain J. (Author) / Perez Ibarra, Irene (Author) / Rollins, Nathan (Author) / Rubinos, Cathy (Author) / Shin, Hoon Cheol (Author) / Yu, David (Author) / Aggarwal, Rimjhim (Author) / Anderies, John (Author) / Janssen, Marco (Author) / ASU-SFI Center for Biosocial Complex Systems (Contributor)
Created2016-09-09
Description

Governing common pool resources (CPR) in the face of disturbances such as globalization and climate change is challenging. The outcome of any CPR governance regime is the influenced by local combinations of social, institutional, and biophysical factors, as well as cross-scale interdependencies. In this study, we take a step towards

Governing common pool resources (CPR) in the face of disturbances such as globalization and climate change is challenging. The outcome of any CPR governance regime is the influenced by local combinations of social, institutional, and biophysical factors, as well as cross-scale interdependencies. In this study, we take a step towards understanding multiple-causation of CPR outcomes by analyzing 1) the co-occurrence of Design Principles (DP) by activity (irrigation, fishery and forestry), and 2) the combination(s) of DPs leading to social and ecological success. We analyzed 69 cases pertaining to three different activities: irrigation, fishery, and forestry. We find that the importance of the design principles is dependent upon the natural and hard human made infrastructure (i.e. canals, equipment, vessels etc.). For example, clearly defined social boundaries are important when the natural infrastructure is highly mobile (i.e. tuna fish), while monitoring is more important when the natural infrastructure is more static (i.e. forests or water contained within an irrigation system). However, we also find that congruence between local conditions and rules and proportionality between investment and extraction are key for CPR success independent from the natural and human hard made infrastructure. We further provide new visualization techniques for co-occurrence patterns and add to qualitative comparative analysis by introducing a reliability metric to deal with a large meta-analysis dataset on secondary data where information is missing or uncertain.

Includes supplemental materials and appendices publications in International Journal of the Commons 2016 Special Issue. Volume 10 - Issue 2 - 2016

ContributorsBaggio, Jacopo (Author) / Barnett, Alain J. (Author) / Perez, Irene (Author) / Brady, Ute (Author) / Ratajczyk, Elicia (Author) / Rollins, Nathan (Author) / Rubinos, Cathy (Author) / Shin, Hoon Cheol (Author) / Yu, David (Author) / Aggarwal, Rimjhim (Author) / Anderies, John (Author) / Janssen, Marco (Author) / Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability (Contributor)
Created2016-09-09
128315-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Many recent studies observe the increasing importance, influence, and analysis of resilience as a concept to understand the capacity of a system or individual to respond to change. The term has achieved prominence in diverse scientific fields, as well as public discourse and policy arenas. As a result, resilience has

Many recent studies observe the increasing importance, influence, and analysis of resilience as a concept to understand the capacity of a system or individual to respond to change. The term has achieved prominence in diverse scientific fields, as well as public discourse and policy arenas. As a result, resilience has been referred to as a boundary object or a bridging concept that is able to facilitate communication and understanding across disciplines, coordinate groups of actors or stakeholders, and build consensus around particular policy issues. We present a network analysis of bibliometric data to understand the extent to which resilience can be considered as a boundary object or a bridging concept in terms of its links across disciplines and scientific fields. We analyzed 994 papers and 35,952 citations between them to reveal the connectedness and links between and within fields. We analyzed the network according to different fields, modules, and sub-fields, showing a highly clustered citation network. Analyzing betweenness allowed us to identify how particular papers bridge across fields and how different fields are linked. With the exception of a few specific papers, most papers cite exclusively within their own field. We conclude that resilience is to an extent a boundary object because there are shared understandings across diverse disciplines and fields. However, it is more limited as a bridging concept because the citations across fields are concentrated among particular disciplines and papers, so the distinct fields do not widely or routinely refer to each other. There are some signs of resilience being used as an interdisciplinary concept to bridge scientific fields, particularly in social-ecological systems, which may itself constitute an emerging sub-field.

ContributorsBaggio, Jacopo (Author) / Brown, Katrina (Author) / Hellebrandt, Denis (Author) / ASU-SFI Center for Biosocial Complex Systems (Contributor)
Created2015
128244-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Large-N comparative studies have helped common pool resource scholars gain general insights into the factors that influence collective action and governance outcomes. However, these studies are often limited by missing data, and suffer from the methodological limitation that important information is lost when we reduce textual information to quantitative data.

Large-N comparative studies have helped common pool resource scholars gain general insights into the factors that influence collective action and governance outcomes. However, these studies are often limited by missing data, and suffer from the methodological limitation that important information is lost when we reduce textual information to quantitative data. This study was motivated by nine case studies that appeared to be inconsistent with the expectation that the presence of Ostrom’s Design Principles increases the likelihood of successful common pool resource governance. These cases highlight the limitations of coding and analyzing Large-N case studies.

We examine two issues: 1) the challenge of missing data and 2) potential approaches that rely on context (which is often lost in the coding process) to address inconsistencies between empirical observations theoretical predictions. For the latter, we conduct a post-hoc qualitative analysis of a large-N comparative study to explore 2 types of inconsistencies: 1) cases where evidence for nearly all design principles was found, but available evidence led to the assessment that the CPR system was unsuccessful and 2) cases where the CPR system was deemed successful despite finding limited or no evidence for design principles. We describe inherent challenges to large-N comparative analysis to coding complex and dynamically changing common pool resource systems for the presence or absence of design principles and the determination of “success”. Finally, we illustrate how, in some cases, our qualitative analysis revealed that the identity of absent design principles explained inconsistencies hence de-facto reconciling such apparent inconsistencies with theoretical predictions. This analysis demonstrates the value of combining quantitative and qualitative analysis, and using mixed-methods approaches iteratively to build comprehensive methodological and theoretical approaches to understanding common pool resource governance in a dynamically changing context.

ContributorsBarnett, Allain (Author) / Baggio, Jacopo (Author) / Shin, Hoon Cheol (Author) / Yu, David (Author) / Perez Ibarra, Irene (Author) / Rubinos, Cathy (Author) / Brady, Ute (Author) / Ratajczyk, Elicia (Author) / Rollins, Nathan (Author) / Aggarwal, Rimjhim (Author) / Anderies, John (Author) / Janssen, Marco (Author) / ASU-SFI Center for Biosocial Complex Systems (Contributor)
Created2016-09-09
128245-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Research on collective action and common-pool resources is extensive. However, little work has concentrated on the effect of variability in resource availability and collective action, especially in the context of asymmetric access to resources. Earlier works have demonstrated that environmental variability often leads to a reduction of collective action in

Research on collective action and common-pool resources is extensive. However, little work has concentrated on the effect of variability in resource availability and collective action, especially in the context of asymmetric access to resources. Earlier works have demonstrated that environmental variability often leads to a reduction of collective action in the governance of shared resources. Here we assess how environmental variability may impact collective action. We performed a behavioral experiment involving an irrigation dilemma. In this dilemma participants invested first into a public fund that generated water resources for the group, which were subsequently appropriated by one participant at a time from head end to tail end. The amount of resource generated for the given investment level was determined by a payoff table and a stochastic event representing environmental variability, i.e., rainfall. Results show that that (1) upstream users’ behavior is by far the most important variable in determining the outcome of collective action; (2) environmental variability (i.e. risk level in investing in the resource) has little effect on individual investment and extraction levels; and (3) the action-reaction feedback is fundamental in determining the success or failure of communities.

ContributorsBaggio, Jacopo (Author) / Rollins, Nathan (Author) / Perez, Irene (Author) / Janssen, Marco (Author) / ASU-SFI Center for Biosocial Complex Systems (Contributor)
Created2015
127929-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Previous studies in building energy assessment clearly state that to meet sustainable energy goals, existing buildings, as well as new buildings, will need to improve their energy efficiency. Thus, meeting energy goals relies on retrofitting existing buildings. Most building energy models are bottom-up engineering models, meaning these models calculate energy

Previous studies in building energy assessment clearly state that to meet sustainable energy goals, existing buildings, as well as new buildings, will need to improve their energy efficiency. Thus, meeting energy goals relies on retrofitting existing buildings. Most building energy models are bottom-up engineering models, meaning these models calculate energy demand of individual buildings through their physical properties and energy use for specific end uses (e.g., lighting, appliances, and water heating). Researchers then scale up these model results to represent the building stock of the region studied.

Studies reveal that there is a lack of information about the building stock and associated modeling tools and this lack of knowledge affects the assessment of building energy efficiency strategies. Literature suggests that the level of complexity of energy models needs to be limited. Accuracy of these energy models can be elevated by reducing the input parameters, alleviating the need for users to make many assumptions about building construction and occupancy, among other factors. To mitigate the need for assumptions and the resulting model inaccuracies, the authors argue buildings should be described in a regional stock model with a restricted number of input parameters. One commonly-accepted method of identifying critical input parameters is sensitivity analysis, which requires a large number of runs that are both time consuming and may require high processing capacity.

This paper utilizes the Energy, Carbon and Cost Assessment for Buildings Stocks (ECCABS) model, which calculates the net energy demand of buildings and presents aggregated and individual- building-level, demand for specific end uses, e.g., heating, cooling, lighting, hot water and appliances. The model has already been validated using the Swedish, Spanish, and UK building stock data. This paper discusses potential improvements to this model by assessing the feasibility of using stepwise regression to identify the most important input parameters using the data from UK residential sector. The paper presents results of stepwise regression and compares these to sensitivity analysis; finally, the paper documents the advantages and challenges associated with each method.

ContributorsArababadi, Reza (Author) / Naganathan, Hariharan (Author) / Parrish, Kristen (Author) / Chong, Oswald (Author) / Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering (Contributor)
Created2015-09-14
127931-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Construction waste management has become extremely important due to stricter disposal and landfill regulations, and a lesser number of available landfills. There are extensive works done on waste treatment and management of the construction industry. Concepts like deconstruction, recyclability, and Design for Disassembly (DfD) are examples of better construction waste

Construction waste management has become extremely important due to stricter disposal and landfill regulations, and a lesser number of available landfills. There are extensive works done on waste treatment and management of the construction industry. Concepts like deconstruction, recyclability, and Design for Disassembly (DfD) are examples of better construction waste management methods. Although some authors and organizations have published rich guides addressing the DfD's principles, there are only a few buildings already developed in this area. This study aims to find the challenges in the current practice of deconstruction activities and the gaps between its theory and implementation. Furthermore, it aims to provide insights about how DfD can create opportunities to turn these concepts into strategies that can be largely adopted by the construction industry stakeholders in the near future.

ContributorsRios, Fernanda (Author) / Chong, Oswald (Author) / Grau, David (Author) / Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability (Contributor)
Created2015-09-14
127949-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The United State generates the most waste among OECD countries, and there are adverse effects of the waste generation. One of the most serious adverse effects is greenhouse gas, especially CH4, which causes global warming. However, the amount of waste generation is not decreasing, and the United State recycling rate,

The United State generates the most waste among OECD countries, and there are adverse effects of the waste generation. One of the most serious adverse effects is greenhouse gas, especially CH4, which causes global warming. However, the amount of waste generation is not decreasing, and the United State recycling rate, which could reduce waste generation, is only 26%, which is lower than other OECD countries. Thus, waste generation and greenhouse gas emission should decrease, and in order for that to happen, identifying the causes should be made a priority. The research objective is to verify whether the Environmental Kuznets Curve relationship is supported for waste generation and GDP across the U.S. Moreover, it also confirmed that total waste generation and recycling waste influences carbon dioxide emissions from the waste sector. The annual-based U.S. data from 1990 to 2012 were used. The data were collected from various data sources, and the Granger causality test was applied for identifying the causal relationships. The results showed that there is no causality between GDP and waste generation, but total waste and recycling generation significantly cause positive and negative greenhouse gas emissions from the waste sector, respectively. This implies that the waste generation will not decrease even if GDP increases. And, if waste generation decreases or recycling rate increases, the greenhouse gas emission will decrease. Based on these results, it is expected that the waste generation and carbon dioxide emission from the waste sector can decrease more efficiently.

ContributorsLee, Seungtaek (Author) / Kim, Jonghoon (Author) / Chong, Oswald (Author) / Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering (Contributor)
Created2016-05-20