The research on humandimensions of globalenvironmental change

in Latin AmericaLooking back, moving forward

Rafael D’Almeida Martins and Leila da Costa FerreiraCenter for Environmental Studies (NEPAM),

University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil

Abstract

Purpose – Environmental studies have developed slowly within social sciences in Latin America.This paper seeks to assess and systematize the contribution of social sciences in the research on thehuman dimensions of global environmental change (HDGEC) in the region outlining its state of the artand process of development.

Design/methodology/approach – The approach taken is the organization of a manual compilationand systematic review of publications on topics related to the HDGEC in order to investigate majorresearch topics covering the period between 2001 and 2008.

Findings – Although it is possible to identify an emergent body of the literature and scholarship inthe region, the involvement of Latin American social science in the HDGEC research is still timid andtentative and not yet institutionalized. The evidence from this compilation has shown that thisliterature is fragmented bringing difficulties for the homogenization of criteria for analysis andassessment.

Originality/value – The paper is one of the very few attempts to assess and analyze the research onHDGEC in Latin America through an international perspective. It provides an overview of itsdevelopment building upon the progress of environmental studies in the region and looks to itschallenges ahead in order to call for more involvement of social sciences in these research activities.

Keywords Global warming, Environmental management, Environmental studies, Society,Latin America

Paper type Research paper

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-8692.htm

Earlier versions of this research have been presented at the Climate 2009 Online Conference,2009; the XXVIII International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association inRio de Janeiro, 2009; and the IHDP Open Meeting 2009, 7th International Science Conference onthe Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Bonn, 2009.

The authors acknowledge financial support received from the Sao Paulo ResearchFoundation and the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of GraduateEducation. They also thank the Department of Environmental Policy Analysis, Institute forEnvironmental Studies at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands for the hospitalityprovided during visiting fellowship of one of the authors, as well as useful comments receivedfrom an anonymous reviewer.

IJCCSM2,3

264

Received 17 September 2009Revised 22 January 2010Accepted 23 February 2010

International Journal of ClimateChange Strategies and ManagementVol. 2 No. 3, 2010pp. 264-280q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1756-8692DOI 10.1108/17568691011063042

IntroductionThe environmental studies had developed slowly within social sciences[1] in LatinAmerica. The emergence of socio-environmental movements and the social conflictsembedded in these processes combined with serious environmental problems across theregion placed the environment in the social sciences agenda in the 1970s (Hogan, 2007).In the beginning attention was directed to identify the environment components of anunequal society. Unlike the experience of social sciences in many developed countries,the concern of social scientists with ecosystems and the environment appeared later andattention given to biodiversity and ecological important areas emerged with the effectsof degradation and environmental protection in the livelihood of traditional populations(Hogan and Tolmasquim, 2001, p. 9).

The last two decades have been marked by the expansion of research andteaching activities in the environmental field in the region. Many environmental centers,interdisciplinary research programs and journals dedicated to the environmentalarea have been created and fostered in Latin American countries. In addition, theseactivities have been mostly concerned with environmental problems at the local, regionaland national levels (Hogan and Tolmasquim, 2001).

The environmental field within the social sciences was subject of many reviews(Dunlap and Catton, 1979; Lowe and Rudig, 1986; Buttel, 1987, 1996, 1997; Hannigan,1995; Pulido, 1996; Dunlap, 1997; Redclift and Woodgate, 1997; Mol and Spaargaren,2000; Lima and Portilho, 2001). The scientific research on environment and societyincludes a variety of topics and these reviews show that the number of topics has beenincreasing over the years. This body of the literature and intellectual production hasbeen trying to answer calls for more interdisciplinary studies (Ferreira et al., 2006a, b;Brunn and O’Lear, 1999; Miller, 2002). Some authors argue that incorporating theenvironmental issues in the social sciences has not resulted in a new paradigm(Alonso and Costa, 2002). Instead of a field of environmental studies, these issues havecreated sub-areas of research distributed according to different theoretical approaches.

On the other hand, the likely impacts of global environmental changes (GECs) haverapidly penetrated and shaped contemporary academic debates within environmentalstudies (Giddens, 2008, 2009), initially in the developed countries and later on in thedeveloping world, including Latin America (Hogan, 2009). The attention given tomeasures in order to mitigate greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions and to adapt to theimpacts of climate change has been gradually increasing (Adger et al., 2009; Bicknellet al., 2009; Hogan and Marandola, 2009).

As a matter of fact, human behavior is responsible for a variety of large-scaleenvironmental changes, ranging from systemic developments like climate change tocumulative impacts like loss of biological diversity or changes in the land cover (Parryet al., 2007; International Human Dimensions Programme (IHDP), 2007; Wilbanks andKates, 1999). Addressing these large-scale environmental issues and finding ways tofoster sustainable development require a concerted effort on the part of researcherswho focus on human behavior.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the NationalResearch Council (NRC) in the USA and the Stern Review in the UK, among otherinternational scientific bodies, have systematically appraised the state of climate changeresearch, and have called for a more robust engagement of social sciences to tackle thesocial and human dimensions of environmental problems. This, in turn, has led the

Globalenvironmental

change

265

scientific community, policy makers and practitioners to undertake a number of“stock-taking” projects[2]. These projects have been seeking to map and synthesize thehistory of past and existing ad hoc environmental research activities by social scientists,in the hope that reflecting upon this compounded knowledge would spur more necessarysocial science research.

Building on these efforts, this paper seeks to contribute in this direction. It is part of alarger ongoing research project trying to systematize and assess the intellectualproduction over environmental issues within social sciences in Latin America[3]. Basedon preliminary finding, this paper contributes by providing an overview of thedevelopment of the human dimensions of global environmental change (HDGEC)research in Latin America and unpacks its state of the art with a particular focus onBrazil. We are interested in understanding the development of human dimensionsresearch within these countries and identify what is essential for supporting socialscience participation in climate research within the social science community(Hogan, 2007, p. 162).

This paper joins in a series of efforts to assess the existing human dimensionsresearch as an inherent part of the HDGEC research agenda is the study of GECresearch itself, and the analysis of science as an inherently social activity (Gallopınet al., 2001; Janssen et al., 2006; Janssen, 2007). Core questions like how scientists frametheir problems and how particular worldviews shape the scientific research in theconstruction of models or scenarios are some examples of these activities (Biermannet al., 2008, p. 13).

First, we present some brief methodological notes followed by an attempt to defineHDGEC. Then we present the state of the art of the human dimension research inLatin America building upon what we found about Brazil and some other countries.In the last section we discuss the findings and present our final remarks. We argue inthis paper that although it is possible to identify an emergent body of the literature in theregion on the interaction between environment and society, the involvement of LatinAmerican social science in the human dimension research is still timid and tentative.Evidence shows that the roles played by international collaboration and internationalresearch programs as well as the active role on the part of funding agencies are crucial insecuring human dimensions research and inducing the engagement of Latin Americansocial science communities in the discussion. Finally, we call for more involvement ofLatin American social science in the research on the HDGEC by providing some areasthat should be better developed.

Methodological noteIn order to analyze the research on HDGEC in Latin America, we organized a manualcompilation and systematic review of publications on topics and themes related to thehuman dimensions research taking into consideration the diversity of approaches anddifferent conceptual and methodological frameworks. The main objective of this workis to investigate the major research topics in the research on HDGEC identified throughthe compilation. The background of the bibliographical compilation is largelydetermined by the outcomes of the ongoing research project “Environmental issues,interdisciplinary, social theory and intellectual production in Latin America”.The assumption is that publications can be considered as one of the main indicatorsof researchers’ active involvement in research activities.

IJCCSM2,3

266

It is not the purpose of this paper to provide an exhaustive collection of the humandimensions field, including all its authors and publications, but to have an overview ofits development and process of institutionalization (Ferreira, 2006). However, mostresearch results in this domain are published in journals in English, Spanish andPortuguese languages. The manual compilation includes HDGEC-related publicationssuch as papers published in Latin American and international peer-reviewed journalsand peer-reviewed books. It consists of publications that have a clear focus on HDGECaddressed in the context of Latin America. We considered only documents that had atleast one scholar affiliated to a Latin American organization covering the periodbetween 2001 and 2008.

The documents were retrieved during 2008 from scientific databases such as theISI Web of Science, Redalyc, Scielo, Springer, Scientific Direct and Blackwell Synergyand web sites from organizations[4], from which we had previous knowledge that theirwork were related to HDGEC. The retrieving process has been taken in English,Spanish and Portuguese languages.

The focus of this paper is on social sciences and on disciplines concentrating oninteractions between humans and the environment, rather than on the natural aspectsof environmental change (Hogan, 2007; Ferreira, 2006). In our search, we were limitedby the selection of citations particularly on the “human dimensions” of environmentalchange. On the other hand, we did not include the comprehensive and more abundantliterature available on natural sciences. We were also guided by the need to select the“global” component within the environmental change field. These inputs required anin-depth evaluation of the data to assess the linkages or implications for certain aspectsof environmental change on a global scale.

We created a set of keywords that cover major areas of HDGEC (Table I). The title,keywords and abstract of each document were retrieved by keyword based andchecked manually. Only publications in the area of HDGEC were kept. The decision toinclude or exclude a publication in the database was based on the information providedin the title and abstract of the publication (Janssen et al., 2006; Janssen, 2007).

Defining human dimensions of global environmental changesDefinitions of “global environmental change” can vary widely and be interpreted in manycontexts (Adger et al., 2005). However, there is a common agreement that GEC isunderstood as changes in the physical and biogeochemical environment (e.g. Earth, oceansand atmosphere) either caused naturally or influenced by human activities such asdeforestation, fossil fuel consumption, urbanization, land use, agricultural intensification,freshwater extraction, fisheries over-exploitation and waste production. It includesclimate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and losses of biodiversity, changes inhydrological systems and the supplies of freshwater, land degradation and stresses onfood-producing systems. It also refers to the suite of interacting physical, chemical,biological and human processes that transport and transform materials and energyand thus provide the conditions necessary for life on the planet (InternationalGeosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), 2001).

There is much debate in the literature on what constitutes “human dimensions”research. For example, the IHDP on GECs defines the HDGEC as “the set of biophysicaltransformations of land, oceans and atmosphere, driven by an interwoven system ofhuman activities and natural processes”. This definition comprises the causes and

Globalenvironmental

change

267

consequences of people’s individual and collective actions, including changes thatlead to modifications of the Earth’s physical and biological systems. These changesaffect the quality of human life and sustainable development on a worldwide scale(Parry et al., 2007).

In this paper, research on the HDGEC concerns:

[. . .] human activities that alter the Earth’s environment, the driving forces of those activities,the consequences of environmental change for societies and economies, and human responsesto the experience or expectation of global change (NRC, 1999a, p. 293).

It covers an integrated approach of natural and social dimensions and:

[. . .] encompasses analysis of the human causes of global environmental transformations, theconsequences of such changes for societies and economies, and the ways in which people andinstitutions respond to the changes. It also involves the broader social, political, and economicprocesses and institutions that frame human interactions with the environment and influencehuman behavior and decisions (NRC, 1999b, p. 295).

In sum, human dimensions research aims at understanding how human activity drivesGHGs emissions, regional air quality, land cover change and alterations in terrestrial andmarine ecosystems; predicting the course of the activities that drive those transformations;estimating how changes in climate, land cover, ecosystems and atmospheric chemistryaffect food, water, natural resources, human health and the economy; analyzing the ways

Keywords AdaptationAdaptive capacityAdaptive responseClimate changeClimate changeClimate change impactsDeforestationDesertificationEnvironmental changeFood securityGlobal changeGlobal climate changeGECGlobal warmingHuman adaptationHDGECHuman securityLand coverLand use changeMitigationResilienceSocial adaptabilitySocial adaptationVulnerabilityUrbanizationWater resources management

Note: In EnglishSource: The author

Table I.Keywords used toretrieve papers andpublications for HDGECresearch compilation

IJCCSM2,3

268

that societies manage environmental resources; and analyzing the feasibility and possiblecosts and implications of technical, economic, behavioral and policy responses to thoseenvironmental changes (Miller, 2002). HDGEC research builds basic understanding ofhuman-environment interactions and provides information and responsive tools todecision makers (Brunn and O’Lear, 1999).

Although research on the social and policy aspects of environmental change has along history, human dimensions research only became formally linked to the globalchange research in the late 1980s (NRC, 1999a; Miller, 2002). It is greatly acknowledgedthat GECs cannot be understood, much less dealt sensibly, in the absence of substantialcontributions from the social sciences and the analysis of the social aspects of theseprocesses (Pachauri, 2008; Hogan, 2007; Miller, 2002).

Throughout the decades, human dimensions researchers have been trying tounderstand major human causes of changes in the global environment and how theyvary over time, across space, scales and the human consequences and impacts of GEC forwater, health and agriculture (Pachauri, 2008; Miller, 2002). For instance, the globalchange research community has made considerable progress in recent years on severalimportant questions, such as the social causes of deforestation in regions like theAmazon River basin and the role of social, political and economic institutions in land usedecisions; and the relationships between population and land use (and land cover)change (Lahsen and Nobre, 2007). There have also been expressive improvements in theability to combine social, physical and remote sensing data within geographicinformation systems, often with the explicit purpose of understanding how processesat local scales are nested in regional, national and global scales (Brondizio andMoran, 2008).

The first calls for social science involvement came from physical sciences that clearlysaw that human activities was one of the main drivers of climate change (Hogan, 2007).In the beginning, these attempts encompassed multiple methodological approaches tohuman phenomena in formulating a research agenda as the frameworks for conductinghuman dimensions research have been developed by different organizations andscholars with various training, experience and agendas (Urich et al., 2005).

International research on human dimensions of global environmentalchangeThere has been a remarkable high level of scientific activity in the arena of GEC andrelative success on its human dimension (Pachauri, 2008; Urich et al., 2005; Hogan,2007). Examples are the IGBP, the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) andthe IPCC, programs that have involved a great degree of international cooperationamong researchers in the atmospheric, Earth and biological sciences (Pachauri, 2008;Miller, 2002). From the early days of scientific concern about global warming andozone depletion there has also been some interest in the social implications of theseprocesses because people are seen as both the cause of the effects and the subjects oftheir consequences (Wilbanks and Kates, 1999).

There was an early attempt in 1990 by the International Social Science Council todevelop a Human Dimensions Programme (HDP) to parallel the IGBP and the WCRPthat only had limited success. More recently there has been renewed interest and a newversion of HDP has been established to build upon the work of the original organizationin 1996, the IHDP. As well, the IPCC has become more aware of the need to consider

Globalenvironmental

change

269

human dimensions in its assessment reports, as is the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme for the preparation of its Global Environment Outlook report (Urichet al., 2005).

According to Hogan (2007, p. 162), there have been two related initiatives that havebeen important in establishing the scientific agenda, promoting exchange anddisseminating results of human dimensions research. The first one is the Open Meetingof the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Research Community[5].The second one is the participation of the national academies of science. In manycountries these academies have established national committees and created specificfinancial support programs (Hogan and Tolmasquim, 2001). Together, these twoinitiatives are responsible for most part of the significant work on human dimensionsthat is available so far, particularly in Latin America.

Human dimensions of global environmental change in Latin AmericaAlthough social science concerned with the environment have evolved in differentways across Latin America, it was around the 1960s when social scientists started togive attention to environmental problems and it spread rapidly to other societaldomains. The institutionalization of the research field on environment and society inLatin America begins between the years of 1980s and 1990s (Ferreira, 1997) andassessments on the intellectual production of the region show the adoption of differenttheoretical and methodological approaches (Ferreira et al., 2006b).

Hogan (2007, 2009) states that although many social scientists have begun to studythe social aspects and consequences of environmental change, they were “unprepared”to incorporate global challenges in the scope of their work. A possible reason is thatconsequences of GEC such as the sea-level rise among other aspects of environmentalchange take place in temporal and spatial scales that are not reflected in the researchparadigms of social sciences in general (Miller, 2002).

It is clear that the scales that direct work in the social sciences are different thanthose applied for the natural sciences and from those at which GECs can be observedand analyzed (Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). Much of the work carried out byenvironmental social scientists in Latin America is still attempting to understandhistorical changes and how it shapes contemporary societies (Hogan and Tolmasquim,2001, p. 10).

Bertero et al. (1998), based on Kuhn’s explanations of the so-called “normal” orincremental science argue that a scientific subject needs paradigms to consolidate it asa field of research. For these authors the paradigm allows the construction and thedevelopment of a scientific protocol in the area of research (Gallopın et al., 2001; Berteroet al., 1998). In Latin America, contrasting with the experience of many scientific fields,the social sciences have not come to study the environment through the gradualdevelopment of their major paradigms; it was the emergence of environmentalgrassroots movements combined with serious environmental problems that placed theenvironment on the social science agenda (Hogan, 2007).

When reviewing the environmental social science literature in the region it is clearthat most attention is given to environmental problems at the local and regional and howit interacts with national level policies and institutional frameworks. Topics relatedto GEC or even climate change are far from being considered as a priority for socialscientists. However, it is possible to identify an increase in number and relevance

IJCCSM2,3

270

of studies focusing on that in the recent years as the issue is getting more attention fromthe media and spreading rapidly into the policy realm (Hogan and Marandola, 2009).

In this context, HDGEC as a research field has not been a priority for socialscientists concerned with environmental issues in Latin America and social scienceslack behind when compared to the natural and exact sciences (Hogan, 2009, 2007).In many cases the frameworks for HDGEC research sit uncomfortably within thedominant research traditions of social science academia (Hogan, 2007; Miller, 2002) andhigh quality examples of fully implemented and successful[6] application of theseframeworks are scarce (Grant et al., 2002).

The creation of graduate interdisciplinary programs focusing on environment andsociety can be considered relatively new in the region and some countries are moreadvanced than others. Although it has been growing over the last decade or so, thereare few research programs trying to link the environmental social science with GEC.The same happens when analyzing the number of dedicated journals and relevantacademic conferences where GEC appears to be a less-explored theme (Hogan, 2007).

Looking backOur compilation over HDGEC in Latin America has dealt with slightly more than50 documents that included papers in national, regional and international journals,and some books. All of them have a clear focus on HDGEC and present at least onescholar affiliated within a Latin American organization.

In terms of geographic distribution, Brazil, Mexico, Chile and Argentina are thecountries where we could found more documents[7]. Other countries like Bolivia andVenezuela have been contemplated in our quest although they just present one documenteach (Figure 1). Apart from Mexico, we have not found any published paper from CentralAmerica and the Caribbean with clear focus on HDGEC in the selected databases(Table II).

The analysis of the dataset shows that the topics explored by human dimensionresearchers in Latin American countries vary considerably and take into accountspecificities of each country and/or region (Ferreira et al., 2006a, b). It includes a widerange of topics and the work is carried out by a number of disciplines within socialsciences, including geography, demography, anthropology, sociology, political sciences,international relations and economics among some others. Table III[8] below provides apicture of what we have found in the analysis of our compilation.

Previous assessments on HDGEC research have shown that it is easier and moreeffective to engage the environmental social science communities taking as startingpoints topics that are already object of research rather than introducing new subjectsor new research areas (Hogan, 2007; Urich et al., 2005; Hogan and Tolmasquim, 2001;Miller, 2002). The environmental social sciences in Latin America are familiar withmost of the human dimensions research agenda and most of them have been alreadyobject of extensive research in the region (Ferreira, 2006; Ferreira et al., 2006a, b;2007a, b). However, these topics have not been researched under the frameworks of theGEC research communities (Hogan, 2007, 2009).

On the other hand, it is possible to identify that a considerable share of the work hasbeen undertaken in partnership with or connected to international research communitiesfrom the developed countries especially in the USA and Europe. We were not able toidentify collaboration with other regions of the world that could share the same

Globalenvironmental

change

271

developing challenges (e.g. Africa or Asia). Even when looking at collaboration amongLatin American researchers, evidence from our compilation shows equivalent tiesbetween Latin American and American or European research communities incomparison with HDGEC research communities in Latin America.

This is likely related to funding opportunities. Funding plays a significant rolein setting agendas and shaping research communities. The international experienceshows that a proactive role on the part of funding agencies is crucial for fostering

Figure 1.Geographic distributionof documents

Source: The authors

Countries Documents

Brazil 20Mexico 16Chile 8Argentina 6Bolivia 1Venezuela 1Total 52

Source: The authors

Table II.Distribution ofdocuments by countries

IJCCSM2,3

272

and engaging the environmental social science communities in the GECs discussions(Nobre et al., 2008; Hogan, 2007; Lahsen and Oberg, 2006). Many Latin Americancountries lack from resources to invest in new and interdisciplinary areas of research.And when they do, the experience shows that funding for GEC research is traditionallychanneled for the natural sciences that have a long history in dealing with these issues.Without funding incentives, natural scientists only engage with social scientists on acase-by-case basis.

So far, there are many ongoing projects that could be linked to HDGEC research invarious Latin American countries where it is possible to identify a growing body ofscholarship, scientific and intellectual production (Ferreira et al., 2007a, b). Nevertheless,these research communities are not aware of the international efforts that have beentaken on a global scale and most of the time lack from the institutional incentives to do so(Nobre et al., 2008). On the other hand, it is also recurrent that the research communitiesengaged in the GEC related issues is not within the human dimensions frameworks.

In an interdisciplinary and complex field such as the human dimension of GEC,international cooperation is very important (Nobre et al., 2008; Urich et al., 2005).As stated before, it takes time and resources to engage the environmental social sciencecommunity that are already familiar with environmental change within the frameworksof HDGEC research. Insights from international research programs such as the IHDPindicate lines in the same direction[9].

Moving forwardIt is common knowledge that the world is highly complex and dynamic. Its environmentand social systems are changing fast. Water, land and ecological systems interactwith current and future climate change and variability and new patterns of population

Topics explored by HDGEC communityin Latin America Adaptation and water management

Cities and climate change mitigationClimate change adaptationClimate change and agricultureClimate change and biofuelsClimate change and healthClimate change and water resourcesClimate change adaptation and small farmersEconomic instruments for GHGs mitigationEnergy use and impacts on carbon cycleEnergy use in urban citiesFood security and climate changeInternational climate regimeKyoto protocol and clean development mechanismLand use and loss in biodiversitySocial perception of climate change among farmersSustainable developmentUrban air pollutionUrbanizationVulnerability to climate change

Source: The authors

Table III.Topics explored

by HDGEC communityin Latin America

Globalenvironmental

change

273

growth, urbanization and market relationships (Leach et al., 2007). All these raises majorpolicy, research and development challenges in Latin America. Conventionalapproaches to these issues in the region have often been attached to disciplinaryboundaries and there has been little dialogue between the natural and social sciences(Hogan, 2007).

This section seeks to call for greater Latin American social science involvement inhuman dimensions research. In doing so, we contribute by addressing some keychallenges for the research on HDGEC in the region. By challenges we mean areas thatneed to be better explored and that should receive greater attention from researchers inthe area of environment and society. For the purpose of this paper, we identified fourmain elements[10].

(1) Sustainability researchResearch on GEC has significantly improved the understanding of the structureand function of the biosphere and the impact of human activities (NRC, 1999a, b;Pachauri, 2008). The so-called “sustainability science” seeks to understand the human-environment interaction in order to meet the needs of society while sustaining the lifesupport systems of the planet (Kates et al., 2001). These objectives, in turn, requireimproved dialogue between science and decision making (Nobre et al., 2008; Lahsenand Nobre, 2007).

Therefore, it is now crucial to explore new forms of engagement and understandhow to use new knowledge in decision-making processes and policy formulation atmultilevels (national, regional or global). In order to succeed in this task, it is necessaryto deepen the understanding on how societies can be more resilient to climate variationand extreme weather events (Adger et al., 2005, 2009). It requires a thoroughnessrepresentation of the future, for instance, constructing scenario, finding new ways topresent the future that take into account reflexivity of society (societal learning) andbuilding on existing research activities (Kates et al., 2001). It has to improve theunderstanding of problems and issues that the scientific community is already familiarto (Hogan, 2007). The research agenda should move social sciences to the context of thecomplexity of climate change.

(2) Scales and cross-scalesThe issue of scales is very important. Experience shows that recognition andsuccessful exploitation of cross-scale opportunities has been important for improvingwell-being in different areas such as public health and education, agriculture,environmental policies and management strategies (Cash et al., 2006). Scales can bethe spatial, temporal, quantitative or analytical dimensions used to measure and studyany phenomenon, and “levels” as the units of analysis that are located at differentpositions on a scale (Gibson et al., 2000). The challenge lays in address a particularproblem in the appropriate scale(s) (Miller, 2002). Many global environmental problemsare not merely larger versions of local problems and local-scale solutions cannot simplybe scaled-up to higher levels (Adger et al., 2005).

Nowadays, there are many tools and approaches to analyze scale and scale-relatedphenomena. However, there is still relatively little understanding of the dominantmechanisms of cross-scale interaction, especially when analyses go beyond the more

IJCCSM2,3

274

conventionally studied spatial, temporal and jurisdictional scales (Cash et al., 2006).Researchers should be aware of the dynamics between scales in order to avoid:

[. . .] failure to recognize important scale and level interactions altogether, the persistence ofmismatches between levels and scales in human-environment systems, and the failure torecognize heterogeneity in the way that scales are perceived and valued by different actors,even at the same level.

Cash et al. (2006) called these the scale challenges of “ignorance”, “mismatch” and“plurality”[11].

(3) Development and climate changeIn Latin America, it is essential to identify the linkage between development and climatechange at its different levels and scales. Many drivers of global change such as landuse change are strongly connected to development activities (Brondizio and Moran,2008; NRC, 1999a, b). This is not easy. It happens in complex and dynamic systemsand there are many feedback mechanisms between society, economy and ecosystems(Kates et al., 2001; Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). The research should focus on whatinstruments of governance are needed (and are possible and accepted) to addressthe problem and at what scale/level should they be applied (Adger et al., 2005, 2009).

(4) Governance and environmental justiceLatin America is the region with the widest gap between rich and poor (UN, 2007).Therefore, it is important to recognize that ethical and social justice aspects areimportant and must be considered for new institutional arrangements and responses toenvironmental problems (Adger et al., 2006). The role of institutions and governancestructures that provide policy learning are examples of research questions that canlead to better policies and development pathways for the region (Nobre et al., 2008).

ConclusionThis paper provided an overview of the state of the art of the human dimensions researchin Latina America and its development over the last two decades. Our analysis didnot intend to provide an exhaustive comprehension of the human dimension of GECresearch in Latin America but to provide an overview of its development in the region.

The evidence from our compilation has shown that this body of work is fragmentedbringing difficulties for the homogenization of criteria for analysis and assessment.There have been also few attempts to describe or analyze the HDGEC in the region;and its contribution in the scope of environment and society studies is still limited.Scholars from many different disciplines and academic training including geography,demography, anthropology, sociology, political science, economics, internationalrelations, political ecology and other interdisciplinary fields such as environmentalsciences perform the study on HDGEC in Latin America.

We found that HDGEC research in the region is not yet institutionalized as aresearch field. Although there is a growing body of scholarship around environmentand society issues, environmental social science communities are still focusing andpreoccupied with pressing environmental issues at the local and regional level. One canargue that there is an apparent inertia as researchers that could be linking their workwith the global human dimensions community and applying HDGEC frameworks keephaving their common and traditional set of issues to work on. A possible explanation is

Globalenvironmental

change

275

that these researchers are already involved in other national and international researchnetworks that are not yet connected to the HDGEC community and they tend to workon topics that they are already familiar with.

Our finding suggests some interesting aspects that can be explored and developedin further research activities. We argue that the Latin American human dimensionsresearch has accompanied the international debate on HDGEC worldwide. We can alsonote that some regional specificity such as poverty, traditional and indigenouspopulations, biodiversity, social inequality and social vulnerability are contemplated inthe research works that have been analyzed so far. Topics like Amazonian studies,social conflicts, protected areas and international regimes and negotiations are goodexamples of that.

Considerable amount of the work that has been analyzed is undertaken connected tointernational research programs or American and European research centers.Collaboration with other regions such as Asia and Africa was not identified in our quest.

Funding seems to play a key role in shaping research communities and settingresearch agendas particularly in the area of HDGEC. The international experienceshows that a proactive role on the part of funding agencies is crucial for engagingthe social science communities in human dimensions research. Also, it is possible toidentify that funding is still largely performed separately between the natural andsocial sciences when related to GEC. Without clear funding guidelines in the directionof interdisciplinary approach between these two main areas, systemic collaborationbetween social and natural sciences will simply not happen.

We identified four main challenges to be explored by the research on HDGECin Latin America: sustainability research, scales and cross-scales, development andclimate change and governance and environmental justice. Finally, our research raisessome questions that might be subject of future studies, like what are the disciplinarybiases in an interdisciplinary field like the HDGEC? These, among many otherquestions might be useful for further research.

Notes

1. In this paper the term social sciences covers a broad range of research activities usuallyassociated with disciplines such as economics, sociology, political science, psychology,anthropology, geography and history and interdisciplinary fields such as environmentalscience, human ecology, administration and management.

2. One example is the World Bank Exploring the Social Dimensions of Climate Changeprogram.

3. The project is looking at the theoretical, methodological and institutional frameworksapplied in these interdisciplinary environmental studies.

4. It included universities, research centers, research programs and projects.

5. It was first organized at Duke University in 1995. Then, it was followed by meetings inAustria (1997), Japan (1999), Brazil (2001), Canada (2003) and Germany (2005, 2009).

6. In this context, successful refers to articles published in peer-reviewed journals.

7. It is important to highlight that the authors of this paper are affiliated to a university inBrazil and it might have brought a bias to this study, as it is easier to gather information onBrazil. So, it does not necessarily mean that Brazil has more scientific production on HDGECthan the other countries.

IJCCSM2,3

276

8. The table only presents topics that have been identified in our compilation.

9. These insights came from personal communication with IHDP core-project members.For more information about the IHDP, visit www.ihdp.org. For a brief review of theinternational experience and a portrait of the Brazilian case, see Hogan (2007).

10. There are many more elements that could be explored and considered as challenges whenlooking ahead but for the purpose of this paper we identified four challenges to be consideredas the most important for the future of HDGEC research in Latin America.

11. For a review on scales and cross-scales and examples, Cash et al. (2006).

References

Adger, W.N., Brown, K. and Hulme, M. (2005), “Redefining global environmental change”,Global Environmental Change, Vol. 15, pp. 1-4.

Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I. and O’Brien, K.L. (Eds) (2009), Adapting to Climate Change:Thresholds, Values, Governance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Adger, W.N., Paavola, J., Huq, S. and Mace, M.J. (2006), Fairness in Adaptation to ClimateChange, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Alonso, A. and Costa, V. (2002), “Ciencias Sociais e Meio Ambiente no Brasil: um balancobibliografico”, BIB – Revista Brasileira de Informacoes Bibliograficas em Ciencias Sociais,Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 35-78.

Bertero, C.O., Caldas, M.P. and Wood, T. Jr (1998), “Producao Cientıfica em Administracao deEmpresas: Provocacoes, Insinuacoes e Contribuicoes para um Debate Local”, XXIIEncontro da Associacao Nacional de Pos-graduacao e Pesquisa em Administracao(ENANPAD), Foz do Iguacu.

Bicknell, J., Dodman, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (Eds) (2009), Adapting Cities to Climate Change:Understanding and Addressing the Development Challenges, Earthscan, London.

Biermann, F., Betsill, M.M., Gupta, J., Kanie, N., Lebel, L., Liverman, D., Schroeder, H. andSiebenhuner, B. (2008), “Earth system governance: people, places and the planet”,Science and Implementation Plan of the Earth System Governance Project, Amsterdam.

Brondizio, E. and Moran, E.F. (2008), “Human dimensions of climate change: the vulnerability ofsmall farmers in the Amazon”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, Vol. 363,pp. 1803-9.

Brunn, S.D. and O’Lear, S.R. (1999), “Research and communication in the ‘invisible college’ of thehuman dimensions of global change”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 9, pp. 285-301.

Buttel, F.H. (1987), “New directions in environmental sociology”, Annual Review of Sociology,Vol. 13, pp. 465-88.

Buttel, F.H. (1996), “Environmental and resource sociology: theoretical issues and opportunitiesfor synthesis”, Rural Sociology, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 56-66.

Buttel, F.H. (1997), “Social institutions and environmental change”, in Redclift, M. (Ed.),The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham,pp. 44-54.

Cash, D.W., Adger, N.W., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L. and Young, O.(2006), “Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevelworld”, Ecology and Society, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 8-32.

Dunlap, R.E. (1997), “The evolution of environmental sociology: a brief history and assessment ofthe American experience”, in Redclift, M. and Woodgate, G. (Eds), The InternationalHandbook of Environmental Sociology, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 21-39.

Globalenvironmental

change

277

Dunlap, R.E. and Catton, W. Jr (1979), “Environmental sociology”, Annual Review of Sociology,Vol. 5, pp. 25-43.

Ferreira, L.C. (1997), A Sociologia no Horizonte do Seculo XXI, Ed. Boitempo, Sao Paulo.

Ferreira, L.C. (2006), Ideias para uma sociologia da questao ambiental no Brasil, Ed. Annablume,Sao Paulo.

Ferreira, L.C., Barbosa, S.R.C.S., Hoefel, J.L.M., Floriani, D., Guimaraes, R. and Giesbreschet, M.O.(2006a), “A Questao Ambiental, Interdisciplinaridade, Teoria Social e Producao Intelectualna America Latina”, III Encontro da Associacao Nacional de Pos Graduacao e Pesquisa emAmbiente e Sociedade (ANPPAS), Brasilia.

Ferreira, L.C., Barbosa, S.R.C.S., Hoefel, J.L.M., Guimaraes, R., Floriani, D. and Tavolaro, S.B.F.(2006b), “Environmental issues, interdisciplinary, social theory and intellectual productionin Latin America”, Ambiente & Sociedade, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 9-24.

Ferreira, L.C., Batata, A.G.R. and Martins, R.D.A. (2007a), “Environmental issues,interdisciplinary, social theory and intellectual production in Latin American”, paperpresented at XXVII International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association2007 (LASA), Montreal.

Ferreira, L.C., Giesbreschet, M.O. and Guimaraes, R. (2007b), “Resultados parciais da pesquisaQuestoes Ambientais, Interdisciplinaridade, Teoria Social e Producao Intelectual naAmerica Latina – O Banco de Dados”, paper presented at XXVI Congreso AsociacionLatinoamericana de Sociologia (ALAS), Guadalajara.

Gallopın, G.C., Funtowicz, S., O’Connor, M. and Ravetz, J. (2001), “Science for the twenty-firstcentury: from social contract to the scientific core”, International Social Science Journal,Vol. 168, pp. 219-29.

Gibson, C., Ostrom, E. and Ahn, T.-K. (2000), “The concept of scale and the human dimensions ofglobal change: a survey”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 32, pp. 217-39.

Giddens, A. (2008), The Politics of Climate Change, Policy Network, London.

Giddens, A. (2009), The Politics of Climate Change, Polity Press, Cambridge.

Grant, W.E., Peterson, T.R. and Peterson, M.J. (2002), “Quantitative modelling of couplednatural/human systems: simulation of societal constraints on environmental actiondrawing on Luhmann’s social theory”, Ecological Modelling, Vol. 158, pp. 143-65.

Hannigan, J.A. (1995), Environmental Sociology: A Social Constructionist Perspective, Routledge,London.

Hogan, D.J. (2007), “Human dimensions of global environmental change”, Ambiente & Sociedade,Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 161-6.

Hogan, D.J. (2009), “Populacao e mudancas ambientais globais”, in Hogan, D.J. andMarandola, E. Jr (Eds), Populacao e mudanca climatica: Dimensoes humanas dasmudancas ambientais globais, Ed. Unicamp, Campinas, pp. 11-24.

Hogan, D.J. and Marandola, E. Jr (Eds) (2009), “Populacao e mudanca climatica: Dimensoeshumanas das mudancas ambientais globais”, Ed. Unicamp, Campinas, Brazil.

Hogan, D.J. and Tolmasquim, M.T. (Eds) (2001), Human Dimensions of Global EnvironmentalChange: Brazilian Perspectives, Academia Brasileira de Ciencias, Rio de Janeiro.

IGBP (2001), “Global change and the Earth system: a planet under pressure”, IGBP Science No. 4,International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm.

IHDP (2007), Strategic Plan 2007-2015: Framing Worldwide Research on the Human Dimensionsof Global Environmental Change, International Human Dimensions Programme on GlobalEnvironmental Change, Bonn.

IJCCSM2,3

278

Janssen, M.A. (2007), “An update on the scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability, andadaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change”, Ecology andSociety, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 9-19.

Janssen, M.A., Schoon, M.L., Ke, W. and Borner, K. (2006), “Scholarly networks on resilience,vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmentalchange”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 16, pp. 240-52.

Kates, R.W., Clark, W.C., Corell, R., Hall, J.M., Jaeger, C.C., Lowe, I., McCarthy, J.J.,Schellenhuber, H.J., Bolin, B., Dickson, N.M., Faucheux, S., Gallopin, G.C., Grubler, A.,Huntley, B., Jager, J., Jodha, N.S., Kasperson, R.E., Mabogunje, A., Matson, P., Mooney, H.,Moore, B. III, O’Riordan, T. and Svedin, U. (2001), “Environment and development:sustainability”, Science, Vol. 292 No. 5517, pp. 641-2.

Lahsen, M. and Nobre, C. (2007), “Challenges of connecting international science and local levelsustainability efforts: the case of the large-scale biosphere-atmosphere experiment inAmazonia”, Environmental Science and Policy, Vol. 10, pp. 62-74.

Lahsen, M. and Oberg, G. (2006), The Role of Unstated Mistrust and Disparities in ScientificCapacity, The Swedish Institute for Climate Science and Policy Research, LinkobingUniversity, Linkobing, available at: www.cspr.se (accessed 10 January 2008).

Leach, M., Scoones, I. and Stirling, A. (2007), “Pathways to sustainability: an overview of theSTEPS Centre approach”, STEPS Approach Paper, Brighton.

Lima, G.F.C. and Portilho, M.F.F. (2001), “A sociologia ambiental no contexto academiconorte-americano: formacao, dilemas e perspectivas”, Teoria & Sociedade, Vol. 7, pp. 241-76.

Lowe, P. and Rudig, W. (1986), “Political ecology and the social sciences – the state of the art”,British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 16, pp. 513-50.

Miller, R.B. (2002), “Social science and challenge of global environmental change”, InternationalSocial Science Journal, Vol. 50 No. 157, pp. 447-54.

Mol, A.P.J. and Spaargaren, G. (2000), “Ecological modernisation theory in debate: a review”,Environmental Politics, Vol. 9, pp. 17-50.

Nobre, C., Lahsen, M. and Ometto, J.P.B. (2008), “Global environmental change research:empowering developing countries”, Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias, Vol. 80No. 3, pp. 523-9.

NRC (1999a), Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade, NationalAcademy Press, Washington, DC.

NRC (1999b), Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for theNext Decade, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Pachauri, R. (2008), “Climate change and sustainability science”, Sustainability Science, Vol. 3,pp. 1-3.

Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J. and Hanson, C.E. (Eds) (2007),“Report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change”, Climate Change 2007:Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the FourthAssessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Pulido, L. (1996), “A critical review of the methodology of environmental Racism research”,Antipode, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 142-59.

Redclift, M. and Woodgate, G. (1997), The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology,Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

UN (2007), Local Governments’ International Mid Term Evaluation Conference on the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs), United Nations, Rome, available at: www.cities-localgovernments.org (accessed 20 May 2009).

Globalenvironmental

change

279

Urich, P., Campbell, J., Gillespie, A. and Scrimgeour, F. (2005), Human Dimensions of GlobalEnvironmental Change: A Review of Frameworks and Research Gaps, The CLIMPACTSProgramme, IGCI Report for FRST, Hamilton.

Wilbanks, T.J. and Kates, R.W. (1999), “Global change in local places: how scales matters”,Climatic Change, Vol. 43, pp. 601-28.

Further reading

Picou, J.S. (1999), “Theoretical trends in environmental sociology: implications for resourcemanagement in the modern world”, paper presented at Social and Economic PlanningConference, Park City, UT.

About the authorsRafael D’Almeida Martins is a PhD candidate in Environment and Society at the Centerfor Environmental Studies (NEPAM), University of Campinas (UNICAMP) in Brazil.He co-coordinates the Earth System Governance Research Network and was a visitingresearch fellow at the Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam,The Netherlands in 2008-2009. He has also received a scholarship from the Canadian Bureau forInternational Education through the emerging leaders in the Americas Program to visit theDepartment of Public Administration and Politics at Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada in theSpring of 2010. Rafael D’Almeida Martins is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:rafael@cepps.org.br

Leila da Costa Ferreira is a Professor of Environmental Sociology at the University ofUNICAMP and senior research fellow at the NEPAM. She was the President of the BrazilianNational Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Environment and Society during2004-2008 and she is an Associate Faculty of the Earth System Governance Project. She has beenpublishing on environmental sociology and sustainability in Brazil and Latin America for morethan 15 years.

IJCCSM2,3

280

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints