LESSON 1.
3 INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
HUMAN-ENVIRONMENT SYSTEM APPROACH
The Human-Environment Systems (HES) in the social sciences is an interdisciplinary
approach in the social sciences. It bridges the gap between, and integrate knowledge
from, the social and the natural sciences within one framework in the study of
environmental and social issues.
Human-environment system (HES) refers to the interaction of human systems with
corresponding environmental or technological systems" Scholz & Binder, (n.d., 791).
The HES approach conceptualizes mutual dependence between human and
environmental systems. Scholz and Binder (n.d., 791) describe this mutual dependence
as "two different systems that exist in essential dependencies and reciprocal
endorsement." The use of the term human systems or "social systems ranging from
society to individuals" (Apostle 1952 in Scholz and Binder n.d.) can be traced as far
back as the time of the ancient Greeks, while the use of the term environmental
systems began late in the early nineteenth Century (Scholz and Binder n.d., 791).
Human-environment interactions existed since time immemorial, but the scope and
intensity of these interactions have increased significantly since the Industrial
Revolution. Whereas most of the early human-environment interactions have taken
place at a local/national scale, contemporary interactions between human and natural
systems have not only reached regional, subregional, continental, and global scales but
have also become special concerns (Liu J et al., 2007).
The human-environment system, also referred to as the "coupled human- environment
system" or the "coupled human and natural system" or CHANS "acknowledges the fact
that humans, as users, actors, and managers are not external, but integral elements of
the human-environment system" (Schrter D. et al. 2004, 11). As integral parts of the
human-environment system-as users, actors, and managers—they become duty
bearers themselves who must share the responsibility for the sustainability of the
human-environment system.
The science of CHANS builds on but moves beyond previous work such as human
ecology, ecological anthropology, and environmental geography (Liu. et. a., 2007). The
following are three central features of HES or CHANS.
First, CHANS research focuses on the patterns and processes that link human and
natural systems. Second, CHANS research, such as integrated assessment of climate
change, emphasizes reciprocaj interactions and feedbacks-both the effects of humans
on the environment and the effects of the environment on humans. Third understanding
within-scale and cross-scale interactions between human and natural components (e.g.,
how large-scale phenomena emerge from local interactions of multiple agents and in
turn influence local systems) is a major challenge for the science of CHANS. Although
each of these three aspects has been addressed in some studies on human-
environment interactions, the science of CHANS promotes the integration of all these
aspects (Liu J. et al., 2007, 639).
Liu, J. et al. (2007) made a clear articulation of the reason why an integration of the
three aspects is necessary. They argued that "such integration is needed to tackle the
increased complexity and to help prevent the dreadful consequences that may occur
due to the fundamentally new and rapid changes, because the magnitude, extent, and
rate of changes in human-natural couplings have been unprecedented in the past
several decades, and the accelerating human impacts on natural systems may lead to
degradation and collapse of natural systems which in turn compromise the adaptive
capacity of human systems."
To understand and appreciate the human-environment system (HES) approach in the
social sciences, the following discussion outlines three areas or fields of inquiry where
the HES approach is relevant and necessary both as an analytical tool and framework.
One is the study of the human causes of environmental change—not only proximate
causes, such as burning coal, releasing heavy metals into rivers, and clearing forests,
that immediately change a part of the environment-but especially indirect causes or
driving forces, such as population growth, economic development, technological
change, and alterations in social institutions and human values, that must be
understood to forecast trends in environmentally destructive human activity and, if
necessary, to change those trends.
A second field of inquiry concerns the effects of environmental change on things people
value-both proximate effects, such as on growing seasons and rainfall in agricultural
areas, soil fertility, endangered species, and so on, and indirect effects, such as on
population migrations, international conflict, agricultural markets, and government
policies.
The third field is the study of the feedbacks between humanity and the environment-the
ways individuals, organizations, and governments act on the basis of experienced or
anticipated environmental change to manage human activity and preserve
environmental values. These feedbacks provide the greatest challenge for scientists
and policy-makers, partly because there are so many ways people can intervene in the
system (Stern 1993, 1897).
To date, significant studies on the many problems of human-environment interaction
have been undertaken. For example, "in understanding how people perceive and judge
environmental risks; how societies create institutions for managing common-property
resources, such as fisheries, grasslands, and the atmosphere; what brought about
anthropogenic environmental changes in the past; the dynamics of public concern about
the environment; and the economic forces affecting natural resource availability" (Stern
1993, 1898).
However, the field of inquiry of human-environment interaction has achieved modest
progress only. Stern (1993, 1898) identified both scientific and institutional reasons that
explain such modest outcome.
It has all the scientific problems of other interdisciplinary fields, but more intensely
because it involves all the disciplines of environmental science and those of social
science as well. It is difficult in such a field to do high-quality interdisciplinary work,
integrate separate disciplinary projects, and set productive research agendas, and
some are tempted to proceed without the requisite background knowledge.
There are also significant institutional barriers in academia and government.
Universities are reluctant to give institutional support to interdisciplinary fields that do
not yet have widespread recognition or a proven ability to attract resources ... the field
does not have a unifying society or journal, university departments, or the other
conventional signs of a cohesive intellectual community.
In government, there is an almost complete mismatch between the roster of federal
agencies that support research on environmental change and the roster of federal
agencies with strong capabilities."
So what can be done? Adopting the National Research Council report's
recommendations for global change research, (Stern 1993, 1899) proposed that there
should be: (1) increased institutional and financial support for research, post-graduate
and-doctoral fellowships, as well as interdisciplinary research centers to enhance
interdisciplinary training; (2) improved systems for acquisition and management of data
related to human-environment interactions; and (3) environmental research activities of
disciplinary associations in social science.
