scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning.

01 Apr 2009-Journal of Environmental Management (J Environ Manage)-Vol. 90, Iss: 5, pp 1692-1702
TL;DR: Through successive rounds of learning and problem solving, learning networks can incorporate new knowledge to deal with problems at increasingly larger scales, with the result that maturing co- management arrangements become adaptive co-management in time.
About: This article is published in Journal of Environmental Management.The article was published on 2009-04-01. It has received 2040 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Organizational learning & Social learning.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In initiating transformational adaptation focusing events and multiple stresses are important, combined with local leadership, and it seems likely that supportive social contexts and the availability of acceptable options and resources for actions are key enabling factors.
Abstract: All human–environment systems adapt to climate and its natural variation. Adaptation to human-induced change in climate has largely been envisioned as increments of these adaptations intended to avoid disruptions of systems at their current locations. In some places, for some systems, however, vulnerabilities and risks may be so sizeable that they require transformational rather than incremental adaptations. Three classes of transformational adaptations are those that are adopted at a much larger scale, that are truly new to a particular region or resource system, and that transform places and shift locations. We illustrate these with examples drawn from Africa, Europe, and North America. Two conditions set the stage for transformational adaptation to climate change: large vulnerability in certain regions, populations, or resource systems; and severe climate change that overwhelms even robust human use systems. However, anticipatory transformational adaptation may be difficult to implement because of uncertainties about climate change risks and adaptation benefits, the high costs of transformational actions, and institutional and behavioral actions that tend to maintain existing resource systems and policies. Implementing transformational adaptation requires effort to initiate it and then to sustain the effort over time. In initiating transformational adaptation focusing events and multiple stresses are important, combined with local leadership. In sustaining transformational adaptation, it seems likely that supportive social contexts and the availability of acceptable options and resources for actions are key enabling factors. Early steps would include incorporating transformation adaptation into risk management and initiating research to expand the menu of innovative transformational adaptations.

1,028 citations


Cites background from "Evolution of co-management: role of..."

  • ...Supportive social contexts are those that respond to stresses of all types with broad-based participative problem-solving and vulnerability assessment, combining adaptive institutions (62, 63) with supportive public attitudes (64, 65) to facilitate the consideration of a wide variety of risks and responses....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Public Participation in Scientific Research (PPSR) as discussed by the authors ) is a popular term for participatory action research and citizen science, and it has been widely used in the literature.
Abstract: Members of the public participate in scientific research in many different contexts, stemming from traditions as varied as participatory action research and citizen science. Particularly in conservation and natural resource management contexts, where research often addresses complex social-ecological questions, the emphasis on and nature of this participation can significantly affect both the way that projects are designed and the outcomes that projects achieve. We review and integrate recent work in these and other fields, which has converged such that we propose the term public participation in scientific research (PPSR) to discuss initiatives from diverse fields and traditions. We describe three predominant models of PPSR and call upon case studies suggesting that—regardless of the research context—project outcomes are influenced by (1) the degree of public participation in the research process and (2) the quality of public participation as negotiated during project design. To illustrate relationships between the quality of participation and outcomes, we offer a framework that considers how scientific and public interests are negotiated for project design toward multiple, integrated goals. We suggest that this framework and models, used in tandem, can support deliberate design of PPSR efforts that will enhance their outcomes for scientific research, individual participants, and social-ecological systems.

1,016 citations


Cites background from "Evolution of co-management: role of..."

  • ...Both enhanced adaptive management practices, and the social learning process that is embedded in collaborative and participatory monitoring, can contribute to more resilient social–ecological systems (Berkes 2009, Walker and Salt 2006)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that there is no single optimum approach for integrating local and scientific knowledge and a shift in science is encouraged from the development of knowledge integration products to theDevelopment of problem-focussed, knowledge integration processes.

919 citations


Cites background or methods from "Evolution of co-management: role of..."

  • ...This view is reflected in the approaches of adaptive co-management (Folke et al., 2005; Armitage et al., 2007, 2008, 2009; Berkes, 2009), trans-disciplinary planning (Tress et al., 2006), community-based natural resource management (e.g., Kellert et al., 2000; Blaikie, 2006; Robinson, 2006a,b),…...

    [...]

  • ...The adaptive co-management literature emphasises the need for environmental management to be embedded in institutions which are flexible to deal with multiple forms of knowledge, across multiple scales and time horizons (e.g., Armitage et al., 2008; Berkes, 2009)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The central question is whether social and technical innovations can reverse the trends that are challenging critical thresholds and creating tipping points in the earth system, and if not, what conditions are necessary to escape the current lock-in.
Abstract: This article explores the links between agency, institutions, and innovation in navigating shifts and large-scale transformations toward global sustainability. Our central question is whether social and technical innovations can reverse the trends that are challenging critical thresholds and creating tipping points in the earth system, and if not, what conditions are necessary to escape the current lock-in. Large-scale transformations in information technology, nano- and biotechnology, and new energy systems have the potential to significantly improve our lives; but if, in framing them, our globalized society fails to consider the capacity of the biosphere, there is a risk that unsustainable development pathways may be reinforced. Current institutional arrangements, including the lack of incentives for the private sector to innovate for sustainability, and the lags inherent in the path dependent nature of innovation, contribute to lock-in, as does our incapacity to easily grasp the interactions implicit in complex problems, referred to here as the ingenuity gap. Nonetheless, promising social and technical innovations with potential to change unsustainable trajectories need to be nurtured and connected to broad institutional resources and responses. In parallel, institutional entrepreneurs can work to reduce the resilience of dominant institutional systems and position viable shadow alternatives and niche regimes.

767 citations


Cites background from "Evolution of co-management: role of..."

  • ...2006), in many others new integrated management systems, like adaptive co-management and ecosystem-based management, are emerging and being institutionalized around the world (Garaway and Arthur 2004; Armitage et al. 2007; Olsson et al. 2008; Berkes 2009; Cundill and Fabricius 2010)....

    [...]

  • ...…et al. 2006), in many others new integrated management systems, like adaptive co-management and ecosystem-based management, are emerging and being institutionalized around the world (Garaway and Arthur 2004; Armitage et al. 2007; Olsson et al. 2008; Berkes 2009; Cundill and Fabricius 2010)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that many sustainability interventions target highly tangible, but essentially weak, leverage points (i.e. using interventions that are easy, but have limited potential for transformational change), and there is an urgent need to focus on less obvious but potentially far more powerful areas of intervention.
Abstract: Despite substantial focus on sustainability issues in both science and politics, humanity remains on largely unsustainable development trajectories. Partly, this is due to the failure of sustainability science to engage with the root causes of unsustainability. Drawing on ideas by Donella Meadows, we argue that many sustainability interventions target highly tangible, but essentially weak, leverage points (i.e. using interventions that are easy, but have limited potential for transformational change). Thus, there is an urgent need to focus on less obvious but potentially far more powerful areas of intervention. We propose a research agenda inspired by systems thinking that focuses on transformational 'sustainability interventions', centred on three realms of leverage: reconnecting people to nature, restructuring institutions and rethinking how knowledge is created and used in pursuit of sustainability. The notion of leverage points has the potential to act as a boundary object for genuinely transformational sustainability science.

748 citations


Cites background from "Evolution of co-management: role of..."

  • ...Re-think: How knowledge is produced and used The way knowledge is created, shared and used in society crucially influences transformation processes (Berkes 2009), and has the potential to influence system parameters, feedbacks, design and intent....

    [...]

  • ...The way knowledge is created, shared and used in society crucially influences transformation processes (Berkes 2009), and has the potential to influence system parameters, feedbacks, design and intent....

    [...]

References
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1998
TL;DR: Identity in practice, modes of belonging, participation and non-participation, and learning communities: a guide to understanding identity in practice.
Abstract: This book presents a theory of learning that starts with the assumption that engagement in social practice is the fundamental process by which we get to know what we know and by which we become who we are. The primary unit of analysis of this process is neither the individual nor social institutions, but the informal 'communities of practice' that people form as they pursue shared enterprises over time. To give a social account of learning, the theory explores in a systematic way the intersection of issues of community, social practice, meaning, and identity. The result is a broad framework for thinking about learning as a process of social participation. This ambitious but thoroughly accessible framework has relevance for the practitioner as well as the theoretician, presented with all the breadth, depth, and rigor necessary to address such a complex and yet profoundly human topic.

30,397 citations


"Evolution of co-management: role of..." refers background in this paper

  • ...The communities of practice concept, emphasizing learning-as-participation and the importance of shared practices and their concept (Wenger, 1998) is particularly apt for describing what really goes on in evolving co-operation....

    [...]

Book
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: Ostronr as discussed by the authors develops a syntax for institutions by starting from the first principles of deontic logic and makes elegant distinctions between often-confused concepts, such as a strategy determines who achieves what outcomes under which conditions; a norm is a strategy specified with what is permitted, obliged, or forbidden; and a rule is a norm specified with the consequences of not following the norm.
Abstract: Elinor Ostronr s Understanding Institutional Diversity draws an analogy between genetic rules of biological organisms and social rules of communities of humans. Just as natural scientists accumulated knowledge in the human genome project, the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework is presented as the scaffolding for accumulation of knowledge on institutions. It is a framework that many social scientists will appreciate, because of its notion that knowledge about institutions can only be attained in real-life action situations. For Ostrom, social scientists are like engineers facing complex technologies: the recognition of rules does not solve a dilemma but opens up chances for tinkering with the system. Ostrom develops a syntax for institutions by starting from the first principles of deontic logic and makes elegant distinctions between often-confused concepts. For example, a strategy determines who achieves what outcomes under which conditions; a norm is a strategy specified with what is permitted, obliged, or forbidden; and a rule is a norm specified with what are the consequences of not following the norm. These arguments are supported by an impressive pool of empirical work. The focus of empirical analysis is on interaction of participants in action arenas such as a home, a city council, a firm, or an international organisation. It is an appealing focus, because it enables shifting the scale of analysis from local to global and any 'holon' in between a key analytical strength for understanding how nested institutions operate simultaneously at different scales and interact across scales. One fascinating chapter is devoted to controlled laboratory experiments with games. Its findings are used to modify the dominant model of human behaviour: the utility-maximising individual is given its proper role among the other games of life. Bold moves like this are risky. The framework that Ostrom constructs covers a vast territory and is likely to trigger critical questions such as these from other scholars:

5,315 citations


"Evolution of co-management: role of..." refers background in this paper

  • ...local institutions and building on their strengths, or crafting new institutions where the existing ones do not work or are not appropriate (Ostrom, 2005)....

    [...]

  • ...Others have concentrated on identifying appropriate local institutions and building on their strengths, or crafting new institutions where the existing ones do not work or are not appropriate (Ostrom, 2005)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore the social dimension that enables adaptive ecosystem-based management, focusing on experiences of adaptive governance of social-ecological systems during periods of abrupt change and investigates social sources of renewal and reorganization.
Abstract: ▪ Abstract We explore the social dimension that enables adaptive ecosystem-based management. The review concentrates on experiences of adaptive governance of social-ecological systems during periods of abrupt change (crisis) and investigates social sources of renewal and reorganization. Such governance connects individuals, organizations, agencies, and institutions at multiple organizational levels. Key persons provide leadership, trust, vision, meaning, and they help transform management organizations toward a learning environment. Adaptive governance systems often self-organize as social networks with teams and actor groups that draw on various knowledge systems and experiences for the development of a common understanding and policies. The emergence of “bridging organizations” seem to lower the costs of collaboration and conflict resolution, and enabling legislation and governmental policies can support self-organization while framing creativity for adaptive comanagement efforts. A resilient social-eco...

4,495 citations


"Evolution of co-management: role of..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Bridging organizations can respond to opportunities, serve as catalysts and facilitators between different levels of governance, and across resource and knowledge systems (Folke et al., 2005)....

    [...]

  • ...All three theories are related to self-organized learning processes that have emerged as a major theme for collaboration, joint decisionmaking, and co-management in the social–ecological systems literature (Folke et al., 2005)....

    [...]

  • ...Based on the Swedish experience in particular, networks or ‘‘nodes’’ within the larger network of co-managers seem to be the main vehicle by which learning-by-doing occurs (Folke et al., 2005)....

    [...]

  • ...Such a decision-making structure contributes to the creation of an institutional dynamic appropriate for adaptive co-management and more broadly, for adaptive governance (Folke et al., 2005)....

    [...]

Book
01 Sep 2005
TL;DR: In this article, various methods of environmental impact assessment as a guide to design of new environmental development and management projects are discussed. But the authors do not reject the concept of the environmental impact analysis but rather stress the need for fundamental understanding of the structure and dynamics of ecosystems.
Abstract: This book is on the various methods of environmental impact assessment as a guide to design of new environmental development and management projects. This approach surveys the features of the environment likely to be affected by the developments under consideration, analyses the information collected, tries to predict the impact of these developments and lays down guidelines or rules for their management. This book is concerned with practical problems, e.g. development in Canada, the management of fisheries, pest control, etc. It is devoted to a general understanding of environmental systems through methods that have worked in the real world with its many uncertainties. It does not reject the concept of environmental impact analysis but rather stresses the need for fundamental understanding of the structure and dynamics of ecosystems.

3,437 citations

Book
01 Apr 2008
TL;DR: In this paper, the role of local ecological knowledge in ecosystem management is explored, and the strategy of the commons is used to build resilience in local management systems in a lagoon fishery.
Abstract: 1. Introduction Fikret Berkes, Johan Colding and Carl Folke Part I. Perspectives on Resilience: 2. Adaptive dancing Lance Gunderson 3. Nature and society through the lens of resilience Iain J. Davidson-Hunt and Fikret Berkes 4. Redundancy and diversity Bobbi Low, Elinor Ostrom, Carl Simon and James Wilson Part II. Building Resilience in Local Management Systems: 5. The strategy of the commons Lars Carlsson 6. Management practices for building adaptive capacity Maria Tengo and Monica Hammer 7. Living with disturbance Johan Colding, Per Olsson and Thomas Elmqvist Part III. Social-ecological Learning and Adaption: 8. Exploring the role of local ecological knowledge in ecosystem management Madhav Gadgil, Per Olsson, Fikret Berkes and Carl Folke 9. Facing the adaptive challenge Kristen Blann, Steve Light and Jo Ann Musumeci 10. Caribou co-management in northern Canada Anne Kendrick Part IV. Cross-scale Institutional Response to Change: 11. Dynamics of social-ecological changes in a lagoon fishery in southern Brazil Cristiana Seixas and Fikret Berkes 12. Keeping ecological resilience afloat in cross-scale turbulence Janis Alcorn, John Bamba, Stefanus Masiun, Ita Natalia and Antoinette Royo 13. Policy transformations in the US Forest Sector, 1970-2000 Ronald L. Trosper 14. Synthesis Carl Folke, Johan Colding and Fikret Berkes.

3,208 citations