Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70173799

Quantifying resilience

Craig R. Allen·David G. Angeler
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The biosphere is under unprecedented pressure, reflected in rapid changes in our global ecological, social, technological and economic systems. In many cases, ecological and social systems can adapt to these changes over time, but when a critical threshold is surpassed, a system under stress can undergo catastrophic change and reorganize into a different state. The concept of resilience, introduced more than 40 years ago in the ecological sciences, captures the behaviour of systems that can occur in alternative states. The original definition of resilience forwarded by Holling ( 1973 ) is still the most useful. It defines resilience as the amount of disturbance that a system can withstand before it shifts into an alternative stable state. The idea of alternative stable states has clear and profound implications for ecological management. Coral reefs, for example, are high-diversity systems that provide key ecosystem services such as fisheries and coastal protection. Human impacts are causing significant, ongoing reef degradation, and many reefs have shifted from coral- to algal-dominated states in response to anthropogenic pressures such as elevated water temperatures and overfishing. Understanding and differentiating between the factors that help maintain reefs in coral-dominated states vs. those that facilitate a shift to an undesired algal-dominated state is a critical step towards sound management and conservation of these, and other, important social–ecological systems. Resilience has gained popularity among both academicians and laypeople, as a term meant to describe a systems’ ability to withstand disturbance. Resilience has become a buzzword in the last decade, as shown by its increasing appearance in calls for research proposals and scientific citation data bases. The term resilience has in many cases lost the clarity of the original definition and in fact is frequently used in a manner in direct opposition to the original definition. Many current uses of the concept are loose and incorrect. The term is becoming increasingly used in a normative sense (Brand & Jax 2007 ), as if resilience were a desirable quality of systems. However, even systems in highly undesirable states, such as macro-algae dominated reefs, or city cores in poverty traps, may be highly resilient, which is to say they withstand attempts to transform them into different (desirable) states. Operationalizing the concept of resilience for application and management has been difficult. Misuse of the term can have significant negative impacts, because resilience is being used to help guide responses to natural disasters and to assess the sustainability of ecosystems and urban systems and has been driving international research priorities. Resilience has been argued to be a basic emergent property of systems, a process or a rate. We focus on the original concept as described by Holling, which is that of an emergent system property; when a system is in a desirable state and managers wish to enhance resilience, or when the system is in an undesirable state and managers wish to erode resilience and foster a transformation to an alternative state. Fostering or eroding resilience is a process. When a system is perturbed but resilience is not exceeded, then the recovery can be measured as a rate. Several frameworks to operationalize resilience have been proposed. A decade ago, a special feature focused on quantifying resilience was published in the journal Ecosystems (Carpenter, Westley & Turner 2005 ). The approach there was towards identifying surrogates of resilience, but few of the papers proposed quantifiable metrics. Consequently, many ecological resilience frameworks remain vague and difficult to quantify, a problem that this special feature aims to address. However, considerable progress has been made during the last decade (e.g. Pope, Allen & Angeler 2014 ). Although some argue that resilience is best kept as an unquantifiable, vague concept (Quinlan et al . 2016 ), to be useful for managers, there must be concrete guidance regarding how and what to manage and how to measure success (Garmestani, Allen & Benson 2013 ; Spears et al . 2015 ). Ideas such as ‘resilience thinking’ have utility in helping stakeholders conceptualize their systems, but provide little guidance on how to make resilience useful for ecosystem management, other than suggesting an ambiguous, Goldilocks approach of being just right (e.g. diverse, but not too diverse; connected, but not too connected). Here, we clarify some prominent resilience terms and concepts, introduce and synthesize the papers in this special feature on quantifying resilience and identify core unanswered questions related to resilience.

Explore related subjects

Journal of Applied EcologyArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Craig R. Allen, David G. Angeler. 2016-05-13. Quantifying resilience. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12649

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Solar energy development selectively filters avian taxonomic and functional diversity across a perennial agricultural landscape

Solar energy is rapidly expanding across agricultural landscapes, yet its consequences for avian communities remain poorly understood, particularly among heterogeneous land-use matrices. In 2024 and 2025, we surveyed birds across 107 sites in New York State, including conventional solar arrays with mowing or sheep grazing to manage vegetation, solar-adjacent working lands (e.g. hayfields, pastures) and reference working lands independently located from solar arrays. We integrated diversity metrics across four trait dimensions—taxonomic, morphological, ecological and conservation status—and examined interactions between species-level abundance and traits to understand avian community responses to solar energy development. Avian species in solar sites tended to be common, non-migratory (in behaviour and wing morphology) and associated with shrubland or forest. Compared to reference working lands, bird communities in solar and solar-adjacent sites were less taxonomically diverse and were composed of fewer declining and range-restricted species. However, solar and solar-adjacent sites retained comparable diversity of intrinsic traits, suggesting that ecological function may persist despite apparent species filtering and functional reshuffling. While solar energy development can support avian communities with unique functional signatures, our findings suggest that conventional solar arrays sited on agricultural working lands in New York maintain low bird diversity and are unlikely to support conservation-priority species—such as grassland birds characterized by declining populations, migratory tendencies and open-habitat dependence. Synthesis and applications . Our study provides a pathway to leverage functional diversity to quantitatively characterize solar-associated avian communities and the ecological mechanisms that shape them. Our results suggest that meeting biodiversity conservation goals while achieving solar energy targets requires ecologically informed siting and processes, particularly across regions in which co-prioritization of conservation, agriculture and energy presents sustainability trade-offs.

New York↗
USGS2026

Predictability creates vulnerability: Long-term acoustic telemetry reveals hidden threat windows for endangered Atlantic sturgeon

1.Individual movement strategies govern access to important habitats but can expose certain animals to spatially and temporally variable threats, producing consistent, phenotype-specific differences in risk. For endangered Atlantic sturgeon ( Acipenser oxyrinchu s), migration timing shapes exposure risk to vessel strikes, dredging activity, and shifting estuarine conditions, yet management to minimize exposure to these threats is predominantly based on population-average patterns of river occupancy. 2. We analysed a decade of acoustic telemetry data from 195 Atlantic sturgeon in the Hudson River to quantify individual variation in migration timing. We clustered individuals into distinct behavioural phenotypes and evaluated the consistency of these phenotypes across years to determine whether certain individuals may be present in spatiotemporal areas that are not represented in current conservation frameworks. 3. Results identified two persistent phenotypes: the short-residency phenotype exhibiting synchronized occupancy typical of the prescribed Atlantic sturgeon spawning run and an extended-residency group that migrates into the river later, displays prolonged river occupancy and diffuse outmigration into the fall. Extended-residency individuals were last detected approximately 88 days after short-residency individuals and occupied habitats downriver of the presumed spawning grounds, extending the period of sturgeon presence into riverine habitats outside the current spatiotemporal area of conservation focus. 4. Individual phenotypic membership was repeatable across nearly a decade, indicating that these behaviours reflect stable, consistent phenotypes rather than stochastic variation. 5. Synthesis and applications . Our results reveal persistent intrapopulation movement diversity in the largest remaining Atlantic sturgeon population and highlight predictable periods during which a unique phenotype may experience disproportionate exposure to in-river threats. These findings indicate that environmental reviews, permitting decisions and seasonal work windows may benefit from incorporating phenotype-specific occupancy patterns and percentile-based estimates of river residency rather than relying solely on historical spawning dates or population averages. Expanding telemetry and monitoring designs to include broader spatial and seasonal sampling may further improve detection of overlooked movement strategies and reduce potential biases in demographic and habitat use assessments. More broadly, recognizing behavioural diversity in recovery planning may provide a more complete basis for evaluating habitat use, threat exposure, and conservation priorities across sturgeon populations.

New York↗
USGS2026

Testing the efficacy of industrial mitigation measures for caribou in the Arctic

1. Mitigation measures are commonly employed to reduce the negative effects of industrial development on wildlife but are not often evaluated for their efficacy. For example, oil fields in the Arctic typically incorporate design features intended to increase permeability for migratory, barren-ground caribou ( Rangifer tarandus) , even though there is limited empirical evidence of the effectiveness of some of these features. 2. Given expected increases in energy development in the North American Arctic, we examined whether two mitigation measures commonly used for migratory caribou, elevating pipelines and separating roads and pipelines, were effective at increasing the probability caribou would cross infrastructure. 3. We conducted our investigation on adult female caribou in the Central Arctic Herd of Alaska during summer, analyzing movement data from telemetry collars (2015-2020) in conjunction with spatial data on oil field infrastructure. To evaluate whether caribou would cross infrastructure as a function of the mitigation measures, we employed a generalized additive modeling framework capable of detecting non-linear and threshold responses. 4. We found that caribou were more likely to cross a pipeline when the nearest pipeline was elevated (≥1.9-m), a result that supports current mitigation recommendations. We also found that caribou were more likely to cross both a road and pipeline when they were directly adjacent to one another, as opposed to being spatially separated, a result that contradicts recommended mitigation strategies. 5. Synthesis and applications . As new energy projects are designed and implemented in environments around the globe, it is important to ensure that mitigation efforts for wildlife are scientifically validated for their efficacy. In the North American Arctic, such efforts will be critical for minimizing the impacts of expanding industrial development on migratory caribou and on the human communities that rely on them for subsistence.

Alaska↗