Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes (SEPLs)


    United Nations University
    Policy Brief, Nr. 10/2013
    Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes (SEPLs)
    by Nadia Bergamini, Robert Blasiak, Pablo Eyzaguirre, Kaoru Ichikawa, Dunja Mijatovic, Fumiko Nakao and Suneetha M. Subramanian
    ISBN 13:
    ISBN 10:
    United Nations University

    Download PDF: Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes (SEPLs) (2.0 MB)

    The following policy report constitutes an important supplement to a set of 20 indicators for resilience in socio-ecological production landscapes (SEPLs) that was developed over the course of joint collaboration between Bioversity International and the United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS). The indicators were disseminated widely in pamphlet form for the first time in March 2012. Subsequently, a need was identified for sharing a more in-depth overview of the considerations that went into creating this list of indicators as well as the outcomes of initial field-testing.

    The report begins by defining the terminology of socio-ecological production landscapes (SEPLs), resilience, and the existing gap that this set of inclusive indicators has helped to bridge. In subsequent sections, the principles for developing the indicators are introduced and the four groupings of indicators are described in detail, namely

    1. Ecosystems protection and the maintenance of biodiversity;
    2. Agricultural biodiversity;
    3. Knowledge, learning and innovation;
    4. Social equity and infrastructure.

    The latter portion of the policy report introduces the indicators themselves as well as the respective set of scores (1-5) for each indicator. A short section on the practical application of the indicators is then followed by a description of the first lessons learned from applying the indicators in Cuba’s Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve. The fieldtesting took place from October-November 2011 and a supplementary annex provides a detailed indicator-by-indicator record of this process, including whether the indicators could be adequately assessed using the survey method or if further revisions to the study methodology are also required. In addition to summarizing the key lessons learned from the development and testing of the indicators, the conclusion section also provides a short overview of further progress made in testing and refining the indicators as well as next steps.