Institutions for biodiversity governance are located at the interface of human and ecological systems. The analysis of such institutions is challenged due to addressing a multitude of complex interactions between these two systems occurring at different natural scales and levels of human organization. Due to this complexity, empirical analysis of biodiversity management often leads to context-specific explanations, providing little scope for comparative work or the development of more generalised, theory-based accounts. We aim at reducing complexity in understanding human-biodiversity relations, making cases comparable across sites, and propose that, in order to address complexity, we need a method of abstraction that leads to the development of a more structured analysis, based on selection of explanatory factors according to cconceptual models as well as empirical significance. We suggest that the stylisation of typical "resource use-perspectives" - the combination of typical transactions that are inextricably linked by the interest of the actor - can be a useful method for realizing appropriate model selection. In this paper, we provide an account of how use-perspectives can be developed and to what kind of analysis they can contribute, using the example of agrobiodiversity in grain as seed, food, or genetic material.
- Wissenschaftliche Aufsätze
Padmanabhan, M., & Jungcurt, S. (2012). Biocomplexity—conceptual challenges for institutional analysis in biodiversity governance. Ecological Economics, 81, 70-79. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.06.002.