During the first decade and a half of the development of the systems ecology paradigm (SEP) most research efforts were placed on learning about how the biophysical realms of ecosystems function and how simulation models could aid gaining that understanding. Missing from that research were the obvious connections of humans as components of ecosystems, not simply as controllers. In 1981 the US National Science Foundation (NSF) Programs Ecosystems Studies and Anthropology funded the South Turkana Ecosystem Project. It was the first time that an ecosystem study had included the human component as a full actor in an ecosystem. The NSF has since created the Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems program, the sole purpose of which is to fund these types of projects. The human side of SEP has grown in other directions as well including, agro-ecosystem ecology, understanding ecosystem services and effects of land fragmentation, Citizen Science, and providing guidance to the management of natural and human-dominated systems and the improvement of human welfare. Ongoing research has led to the realization that the human residents of the ecosystems under study can engage with research scientists to co-create knowledge about the operation of their own systems.

The evolution of ecosystem science and systems ecology as legitimate branches of science has occurred since the late 1960s. They have flourished because of their essential contributions to understanding and management of natural resources and the environment. Scientific knowledge about the structure and functioning of ecosystems, the services ecosystems provide to people, and the roles people play therein, have become commonplace. Scientists know what challenges face Earth’s environments and they know many of the solutions available to resolve them. But scientific knowledge alone is insufficient to implement change. Knowledge transfer to people who manage our lands, waters, and other natural resources is essential and they must become engaged in implementing solutions to major natural resource and environmental challenges. Adoption of new concepts and technologies is critical. Overcoming the barriers to adoption of best management practices is critically needed. Many of the barriers are created by adherence to dogmatic cultural norms and ideologies by landowners, managers, and policy makers. Behavioral, organizational, learning, and marketing professionals study behavioral change. The systems ecology paradigm must incorporate behavioral, organizational, learning, and marketing professionals as partners in implementing concepts of adoption cycles and community-based social marketing to solve wicked problems.

The Structured Analysis Methodology (SAM) is an application of the systems ecology paradigm (SEP). SAM was built as a “tutorial” to guide community-based, collaborative stakeholder groups through analysis and resolution (decision-making) of complicated and complex natural resource, environmental, and societal challenges. Stakeholders are scientists, managers, policy decision-makers, and citizen leaders. SAM was initially created to address landscape- to regional-scale ecosystem management challenges, but it can be applied to many other complex problems. During the problem analysis phase of SAM several critical steps must be accomplished (e.g., SAM requires precise, transparent, and agreed-upon statements of problems and goals; detailed descriptions of associated space, time, and institutional dimensions of the problem must be made; SAM demands inclusion of important stakeholders; and as the problem analysis develops, the stakeholder group initiates and refines conceptual models of how the defined ecosystem functions and behaves). Conceptual models often require systems or simulation modeling for further analysis and clarification. Following the analysis phase, the stakeholder group develops management options (e.g., ecosystem management), chooses among them (decision-making), and implements one or more. The implemented plans must be monitored and if they are not working make adaptations. Adaptation may require reiteration of part or all of the SAM.

National and international agencies and organizations have published reports outlining critical natural resource, environmental, and societal challenges facing global inhabitants. These reports include the UN Sustainability Goals, Future Earth, Global Land Project, and the Resilience Alliance. Recognizing many of the topics listed in these reports are broad and aspirational, the authors of this chapter have disaggregated many topics into research and management challenges for which the systems ecology paradigm is well suited. Disaggregation is based on challenges at different spatial hierarchical scales: organisms/populations; ecological sites; landscapes; small regions/watersheds; regions/nations; continents; and the globe. Emphasis is placed on research needs at landscape and larger hierarchical levels. Biophysical knowledge acquired during the past 50 years about organism/population and ecological site levels is available now to better manage ecosystems and natural resources. However, research blending the ecosystem knowledge base with behavioral, learning, organizational, and marketing sciences is vitally needed to affect management practice change at scales where people manage land and waters. The goal is to engage managers, policy makers, thought leaders, and concerned citizens to resolve critical problems and adopt best management practices to meet current and future environmental challenges (e.g., provision of ecosystem services and climate change effects on ecosystem).