CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,254Sustainability and Climate Change GovernanceLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesCoastal and Marine Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in a Multilevel World

Open access
Cash, David W., Adger, W. Neil, Berkes, Fikret, Garden, Po, Lebel, Louis, Olsson, Per, Pritchard, Lowell, Young, Oran·2006·Ecology and Society
DOI 10.5751/es-01759-110208
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cash, D. W., W. Adger, F. Berkes, P. Garden, L. Lebel, P. Olsson, L. Pritchard, and O. Young. 2006. Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society 11(2): 8. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01759-110208

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5751/es-01759-110208

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Schematic illustrations of different scales and levels that arre critical in understanding and responding to human-environment interactions.
Fig. 1 Schematic illustrations of different scales and levels that arre critical in understanding and responding to human-environment interactions.CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 2 Schematic illustrations of cross-level, cross-scale, multilevel and multiscale interactions.
Fig. 2 Schematic illustrations of cross-level, cross-scale, multilevel and multiscale interactions.CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 3 Schematic example of interaction across spatial, organizational, and temporal scales and levels. This schematic diagram can be used to illustrate the spatial and temporal dimensions of biogeophysical phenomena (the climate-related system represented as a solid line) and the interaction of two human domains: climate research (the long hashed line) and water management (hash-dotted lines). In this case, gaps exist in the human systems across levels within domains, e.g., international climate research does not link with national or subnational research or forecasting, and national water policy does not link with local water management) and across scales. This diagram is based on an original figure by Clark (1987) with recent additions by Lebel.
Fig. 3 Schematic example of interaction across spatial, organizational, and temporal scales and levels. This schematic diagram can be used to illustrate the spatial and temporal dimensions of biogeophysical phenomena (the climate-related system represented as a solid line) and the interaction of two human domains: climate research (the long hashed line) and water management (hash-dotted lines). In this case, gaps exist in the human systems across levels within domains, e.g., international climate research does not link with national or subnational research or forecasting, and national water policy does not link with local water management) and across scales. This diagram is based on an original figure by Clark (1987) with recent additions by Lebel.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Ecology and Society 11(2): 8 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art8/ through the Environment, Science and Development Program for the Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development Project. LITERATURE CITED
  2. Berkes, F., and C. Folke. 2002. Back to the future: ecosystems dynamics and local knowledge. Pages 121-146 in L. H. Gunderson, and C. S. Holling, editors. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  3. Gibson, C., E. Ostrom, and T.-K. Ahn. 1997. Scaling issues in the social sciences: a report for the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change. International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Ecology and Society 11(2): 8 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art8/ Environmental Change, Bonn, Germany.
  4. Holling, C. S. 1995. Sustainability: the cross-scale dimension. Pages 65-75 in M. Munasinghe and W. Shearer, editors. Defining and measuring sustainability: the biogeophysical foundations. United Nations University/World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA.
  5. Lebel, L., P. Garden, and M. Imamura. 2005. The politics of scale, position and place in the management of water resources in the Mekong region. Ecology and Society 10(2): 18. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/ art18.
  6. Ostrom, E., T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P. C. Stern, S. Stonich, and E. U. Weber, editors. 2002. The drama of the commons. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  7. Polsky, C., and D. W. Cash. 2005. Drought, climate change, and vulnerability: the role of science and technology in a multi-scale, multi-stressor world. Pages 215-245 in D. Wilhite, editor. Drought and water crises: science, technology, and management issues. Marcel Dekker, New York, New York, USA.
  8. Young, O. 2006. Vertical interplay among scale- dependent resource regimes. Ecology and Society 11(1): 27. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandso ciety.org/vol11/iss1/art27.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 601–700 of 1,001

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cash, D. W., Adger, W. N., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L., & Young, O.
Affiliations
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
  • University of Manitoba (CA)
  • Chiang Mai University (TH)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • National Wildlife Federation (US)
  • University of California System (US)
ORCID
Venue
Ecology and Society
Publisher
Resilience Alliance, Inc.
Published
2006
Volume
11
Issue
2
ISSN
1708-3087 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5751/es-01759-110208
OpenAlex
W1768791706
Cited by
2,254
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 113 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 97 · 2023: 119 · 2022: 113 · 2021: 142 · 2020: 172 · 2019: 162 · 2018: 158 · 2017: 148 · 2016: 127 · 2015: 129 · 2014: 185 · 2013: 113 · 2012: 107
FWCI
37.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Ecology and Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Climate Program Office
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
Keywords
scale, cross-scale dynamics, multi-level governance, information flow, environmental governance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review