Stakeholder participation and sustainable fisheries: an integrative framework for assessing adaptive comanagement processes

被引:32
作者
Stohr, Christian [1 ]
Lundholm, Cecilia [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Crona, Beatrice [2 ]
Chabay, Ilan [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Chalmers Univ Technol, Dept Appl IT, S-41296 Gothenburg, Sweden
[2] Stockholm Univ, Stockholm Resilience Ctr, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
[3] Stockholm Univ, Ctr Teaching & Learning Social Sci, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
[4] Stockholm Univ, Dept Educ, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
[5] Inst Adv Sustainabil Studies, Potsdam, Germany
[6] Univ Stuttgart, Helmholtz Alliance Sustainabil & Social Compatibi, Stuttgart, Germany
来源
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY | 2014年 / 19卷 / 03期
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
adaptive comanagement; fisheries; fisheries governance; learning; participation; stakeholder dialogue; Trinity of Voice; MANAGEMENT; GOVERNANCE; KNOWLEDGE; NETWORKS; ORGANIZATIONS; COMMUNITIES; EXPERIENCES; RESILIENCE; LEGITIMACY; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.5751/ES-06638-190314
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Adaptive comanagement (ACM) has been suggested as the way to successfully achieve sustainable environmental governance. Despite excellent research, the field still suffers from underdeveloped frameworks of causality. To address this issue, we suggest a framework that integrates the structural frame of Plummer and Fitzgibbons' "adaptive comanagement" with the specific process characteristics of Senecah's "Trinity of Voice." The resulting conceptual hybrid is used to guide the comparison of two cases of stakeholder participation in fisheries management-the Swedish Co-management Initiative and the Polish Fisheries Roundtable. We examine how different components of preconditions and the process led to the observed outcomes. The analysis shows that despite the different cultural and ecological contexts, the cases developed similar results. Triggered by a crisis, the participating stakeholders were successful in developing trust and better communication and enhanced learning. This can be traced back to a combination of respected leadership, skilled mediation, and a strong focus on deliberative approaches and the creation of respectful dialogue. We also discuss the difficulties of integrating outcomes of the work of such initiatives into the actual decision-making process. Finally, we specify the lessons learned for the cases and the benefits of applying our integrated framework.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 59 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], I DIMENSIONS GLOBAL
  • [2] [Anonymous], DELIBERATE DEMOCRACY
  • [3] Armitage D., 2007, ADAPTIVE COMANAGEMEN, P62
  • [4] Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning
    Armitage, Derek
    Marschke, Melissa
    Plummer, Ryan
    [J]. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2008, 18 (01): : 86 - 98
  • [5] Bennett Andrew., 2010, RETHINKING SOCIAL IN, P207
  • [6] Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning
    Berkes, Fikret
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2009, 90 (05) : 1692 - 1702
  • [7] Burning through organizational boundaries? Examining inter-organizational communication networks in policy-mandated collaborative bushfire planning groups
    Brummel, Rachel F.
    Nelson, Kristen C.
    Jakes, Pamela J.
    [J]. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2012, 22 (02): : 516 - 528
  • [8] Burns TR, 2011, INT J COMMONS, V5, P233
  • [9] Co-management: concepts and methodological implications
    Carlsson, L
    Berkes, F
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2005, 75 (01) : 65 - 76
  • [10] Dasgupta P., 1988, Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations, P49