Table 2 –
The studied cases and (statistical) propensities for social-ecological alignmenta
| Case locality | Propensity for closed four cyclesb | Propensity for closed trianglesc |
|---|---|---|
| Highest level of aggregation | ||
| Pacific Northwest region of the USA20 | Not tested statistically, however large variation observed. There were qualitative indications of deliberate efforts to increasing social-ecological alignment. | Not tested nor elaborated |
| Middle level of aggregation | ||
| Indo West Pacific55 | Not tested statistically, however some variation observed. A qualitative assessment suggest mostly fairly good alignment. | Not tested nor elaborated |
| Lesser Antilles56 | Overall neither positive or negative, but there was a positive tendency to form closed four cycles across the critical sea-land interface. However, there was also a negative overall tendency of actors with a sea versus land focus not to engage with each other. | Not tested |
| Lowest level of aggregation | ||
| Western Australia57 | Negative | Positive |
| Southern Madagascar17 | Negative | Positive |
| Coastal southern Kenya17 | Not tested | Negative |
| County of Stockholm, Sweden62 | Neither positive or negative | Not tested |
a
Propensity for social-ecological alignment implies a selection process where, for example, actors prefer to engage with other actors and ecological entities in ways to enhance the social-ecological fit.
b
Two linked social entities are linked to two interdependent ecological entities, see Fig. 3b
c
Same social entity is linked to two interdependent ecological entities, see Fig. 3c