Lincoln, Yvonna, and Egon Guba, "Postpositivism and the Naturalist Paradigm," pp. 14-46 in Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.*

This paper reviews the concept of adaptation of human communities to global changes, especially climate change, in the context of adaptive capacity and vulnerability. It focuses on scholarship that contributes to practical implementation of adaptations at the community scale. In numerous social science fields, adaptations are considered as responses to risks associated with the interaction of environmental hazards and human vulnerability or adaptive capacity. In the climate change field, adaptation analyses have been undertaken for several distinct purposes. Impact assessments assume adaptations to estimate damages to longer term climate scenarios with and without adjustments. Evaluations of specified adaptation options aim to identify preferred measures. Vulnerability indices seek to provide relative vulnerability scores for countries, regions or communities. The main purpose of participatory vulnerability assessments is to identify adaptation strategies that are feasible and practical in communities. The distinctive features of adaptation analyses with this purpose are outlined, and common elements of this approach are described. Practical adaptation initiatives tend to focus on risks that are already problematic, climate is considered together with other environmental and social stresses, and adaptations are mostly integrated or mainstreamed into other resource management, disaster preparedness and sustainable development programs. r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

/pdf/adaptation-adaptive-capacity-and-vulnerability-3txg5bpzf9.pdf

Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability

Over the past few decades, a new form of governance has emerged to replace adversarial and managerial modes of policy making and implementation. Collaborative governance, as it has come to be known, brings public and private stakeholders together in collective forums with public agencies to engage in consensus-oriented decision making. In this article, we conduct a meta-analytical study of the existing literature on collaborative governance with the goal of elaborating a contingency model of collaborative governance. After reviewing 137 cases of collaborative governance across a range of policy sectors, we identify critical variables that will influence whether or not this mode of governance will produce successful collaboration. These variables include the prior history of conflict or cooperation, the incentives for stakeholders to participate, power and resources imbalances, leadership, and institutional design. We also identify a series of factors that are crucial within the collaborative process itself. These factors include face-to-face dialogue, trust building, and the development of commitment and shared understanding. We found that a virtuous cycle of collaboration tends to develop when collaborative forums focus on ‘‘small wins’’ that deepen trust, commitment, and shared understanding. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of our contingency model for practitioners and for future research on collaborative governance. Over the last two decades, a new strategy of governing called ‘‘collaborative governance’’ has developed. This mode of governance brings multiple stakeholders together in common forums with public agencies to engage in consensus-oriented decision making. In this article, we conduct a meta-analytical study of the existing literature on collaborative governance with the goal of elaborating a general model of collaborative governance. The ultimate goal is to develop a contingency approach to collaboration that can highlight conditions under which collaborative governance will be more or less effective as an

/pdf/collaborative-governance-in-theory-and-practice-4734b9fqbj.pdf

Collaborative governance in theory and practice

http://portal.nceas.ucsb.edu/working_group/ebm-matrix/pdf-reprints/de%20Groot_2002.pdf/attachment_download/file

A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services

Emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) of free-living wild animals can be classified into three major groups on the basis of key epizootiological criteria: (i) EIDs associated with “spill-over” from domestic animals to wildlife populations living in proximity; (ii) EIDs related directly to human intervention, via host or parasite translocations; and (iii) EIDs with no overt human or domestic animal involvement. These phenomena have two major biological implications: first, many wildlife species are reservoirs of pathogens that threaten domestic animal and human health; second, wildlife EIDs pose a substantial threat to the conservation of global biodiversity.

/pdf/emerging-infectious-diseases-of-wildlife-threats-to-4s3pc5irzv.pdf

Emerging Infectious Diseases of Wildlife-- Threats to Biodiversity and Human Health

A ll ecosystems and human societies depend on a healthy and productive natural environment that contains diverse plant and animal species. The earth's biota is composed of an estimated 10 million species of plants, animals, and microbes (Pimm et al. 1995). In the United States, there are an estimated 750,000 species, of which small organisms, such as arthropods and microbes, make up 95%.1 Although approximately 60% of the world's food supply comes from rice, wheat, and corn (Wilson 1988), as many as 20,000 other plant species have been used by humans as food. Some plants and animals provide humans with essential medicines and other diverse, useful products. For instance, some plants and microbes help to degrade chemical pollutants and organic wastes and recycle nutrients throughout the ecosystem. The rapidly growing world population and increased human activity threaten many of these species. The current extinction rate of species ranges from approximately 1000 to 10,000 times higher than natural extinction rates (Kellert and Wilson

Economic and Environmental Benefits of Biodiversity

Participatory planning and policy analysis has gained increasing attention in recent years because of its potential to improve the knowledge base for policy design (substantive benefits), increase the likelihood of stakeholder compliance and support (instrumental benefits), and strengthen the democratic legitimacy of public policies (normative benefits) Deliberation among stakeholders is considered essential for participatory policy analysis, representing a democratic process for clarifying the particular as well as the collective goals and values as well as the potential impacts of alternative policies This study examines the effects of democratic deliberation on participants' viewpoints of the policy domain (the local food system), based on two-and-a-half day participatory planning events in each of six rural counties in northern New York Participant viewpoints were assessed several weeks before and after these events, using Q methodology The results reveal three major viewpoints, representing concerns for social justice, the viability of conventional agriculture, and the potential environmental and social externalities associated with conventional agriculture The substance of these viewpoints remain unchanged before and after the deliberative events, but the salience of the conventional agriculture viewpoint increased and the salience of the social justice and alternative agriculture viewpoints decreased significantly, even among those participants who most clearly defined the latter two viewpoints These findings, together with an analysis of the action agendas emerging from these planning events, suggest that local deliberative processes may produce outcomes that are neither fair nor efficient and that reflect the values and interests of certain stakeholders more than others, even in the absence of overt conflict Moreover, it appears that such processes may cause some participants to alter their viewpoints in ways that appear contrary to their values and interests as expressed prior to the deliberative event The implications for participatory policy analysis are explored

The shaping of collective values through deliberative democracy: An empirical study from New York's North Country

A community food security movement has begun to address problems of hunger and food insecurity by utilizing a community-based approach. Although various models have been implemented, little empirical research has assessed how power operates within community-based food security initiatives. The purpose of this research was to determine how power influenced participation in decision-making, agenda setting, and the shaping of perceived needs within a community-based food security planning process, with particular reference to disenfranchised stakeholders. Power influenced participation in decision-making, agenda setting, and the shaping of perceived needs through managing 1) problem framing, 2) trust, 3) knowledge, and 4) consent. To overcome these mechanisms of power, practitioners need to address individual-, community-, and institutional-level barriers to participation in community-based food security planning processes. Practitioners and researchers can work with disenfranchised groups to determine which agents have the power to create desired changes by utilizing theory-based methods and strategies that focus on changing external determinants at multiple levels.

Mechanisms of Power Within a Community-Based Food Security Planning Process

SUMMARY This article provides dietetics profes-sionalswithathree-stagecontinuumofevidence-based strategies and activi-ties that applies a food systems ap-proach to building community food se-curity. Stage 1 creates small butsigniﬁcant changes to existing food sys-tems through such strategies as identi-fying food quality and pricing inequi-ties in low-income neighborhoods andeducating consumers regarding boththe need and the possibilities for alter-native food systems. Stage 2 stabilizesand augments change for food systemsin transition by developing social infra-structure through multisector partner-ships and networks and fostering par-ticipatory decision-making and initialpolicy development. Based on thesechanges, stage 3 involves advocacy andintegrated policy instruments to rede-signfoodsystemsforsustainability.Datacollection, monitoring, and evaluationare key components of all stages of thecommunity food security continuum.Support for this article was providedby National Institute of Health grant2R25CA57712-06, Behavioral ScienceEducation Cancer Prevention andControl, National Cancer Institute.The authors thank the following indi-viduals for providing comments on anearlier version of this paper: SarahCollins Couch, PhD, RD; JenniferWilkins, PhD, RD; Caroline BaumWebber, MPH, RD; Rod MacRae,PhD; Trevor Hancock, MB, MHSc,BS; and Ronald Labonte, PhD.

http://www.yrfn.ca/pdf/Building%20Food%20Security.pdf

Evidence-based strategies to build community food security

Values and beliefs regarding communityfood security were investigated among participants in2–3 day participatory planning events related to thelocal food system in six rural counties from oneregion of upstate New York. The results of Qmethodology reveal three distinct viewpoints: a) theSocial Justice viewpoint, which is primarily concernedwith hunger and the potential harm caused by welfarereform; b) the Pragmatist viewpoint, which values thecontributions agriculture makes to local communitiesand is not concerned about environmental or socialexternalities of the dominant food system; and c) theVisionary viewpoint, which also values agriculture inthe community but is very concerned aboutenvironmental and social externalities. After theplanning events, the Pragmatist viewpoint experiencedan 88% increase in members and the other twoviewpoints became less salient. Various categories ofprofessionals (e.g., nutrition, social welfare,agriculture, environmental) tend to express theviewpoints associated with their professions and/orthe client groups they serve. Despite thesedifferences among participants, the planning events inall six counties resulted in a wide range of goals andobjectives centered on a theme of re-localizing avariety of food system activities. These results arediscussed in relation to the desirability ofdeveloping an explicit philosophy of food andagriculture and the ideal processes required to doso.

Christine McCullum

Papers

Economic and Environmental Benefits of Biodiversity

The shaping of collective values through deliberative democracy: An empirical study from New York's North Country

Mechanisms of Power Within a Community-Based Food Security Planning Process

Evidence-based strategies to build community food security

Values, public policy, and community food security