Understanding the context of multifaceted collaborations for social-ecological sustainability: A methodology for cross-case analysis
- Cockburn, Jessica J, Schoon, Michael, Cundill, Georgina, Robinson, Cathy, Aburto, Jamie A, Alexander, Steve M, Baggio, Jacopo A, Barnaud, Cecile, Chapman, Mollie, Llorente, Marina G, Garcia-Lopez, Gustavo A, Hill, Rosemary, Speranza, Chinwe I, Lee, Jean, Meek, Chanda L, Rosenberg, Eureta, Schultz, Lisen, Thondhlana, Gladman
- Authors: Cockburn, Jessica J , Schoon, Michael , Cundill, Georgina , Robinson, Cathy , Aburto, Jamie A , Alexander, Steve M , Baggio, Jacopo A , Barnaud, Cecile , Chapman, Mollie , Llorente, Marina G , Garcia-Lopez, Gustavo A , Hill, Rosemary , Speranza, Chinwe I , Lee, Jean , Meek, Chanda L , Rosenberg, Eureta , Schultz, Lisen , Thondhlana, Gladman
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/370725 , vital:66371 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11527-250307"
- Description: There are limited approaches available that enable researchers and practitioners to conduct multiple case study comparisons of complex cases of collaboration in natural resource management and conservation. The absence of such tools is felt despite the fact that over the past several years a great deal of literature has reviewed the state of the science regarding collaboration. Much of this work is based on case studies of collaboration and highlights the importance of contextual variables, further complicating efforts to compare outcomes across case-study areas and the likely failure of approaches based on one size fits all generalizations. We expand on the standard overview of the field by identifying some of the challenges associated with managing complex systems with multiple resources, multiple stakeholder groups with diverse knowledges/understandings, and multiple objectives across multiple scales, i.e., multifaceted collaborative initiatives. We then elucidate how a realist methodology, within a critical realist framing, can support efforts to compare multiple case studies of such multifaceted initiatives. The methodology we propose considers the importance and impact of context for the origins, purpose, and success of multifaceted collaborative natural resource management and conservation initiatives in social-ecological systems.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- Authors: Cockburn, Jessica J , Schoon, Michael , Cundill, Georgina , Robinson, Cathy , Aburto, Jamie A , Alexander, Steve M , Baggio, Jacopo A , Barnaud, Cecile , Chapman, Mollie , Llorente, Marina G , Garcia-Lopez, Gustavo A , Hill, Rosemary , Speranza, Chinwe I , Lee, Jean , Meek, Chanda L , Rosenberg, Eureta , Schultz, Lisen , Thondhlana, Gladman
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/370725 , vital:66371 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11527-250307"
- Description: There are limited approaches available that enable researchers and practitioners to conduct multiple case study comparisons of complex cases of collaboration in natural resource management and conservation. The absence of such tools is felt despite the fact that over the past several years a great deal of literature has reviewed the state of the science regarding collaboration. Much of this work is based on case studies of collaboration and highlights the importance of contextual variables, further complicating efforts to compare outcomes across case-study areas and the likely failure of approaches based on one size fits all generalizations. We expand on the standard overview of the field by identifying some of the challenges associated with managing complex systems with multiple resources, multiple stakeholder groups with diverse knowledges/understandings, and multiple objectives across multiple scales, i.e., multifaceted collaborative initiatives. We then elucidate how a realist methodology, within a critical realist framing, can support efforts to compare multiple case studies of such multifaceted initiatives. The methodology we propose considers the importance and impact of context for the origins, purpose, and success of multifaceted collaborative natural resource management and conservation initiatives in social-ecological systems.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
Land claims and the pursuit of co-management on four protected areas in South Africa
- Cundill, Georgina, Thondhlana, Gladman, Sisitka, Lawrence, Shackleton, Sheona E, Blorea, M
- Authors: Cundill, Georgina , Thondhlana, Gladman , Sisitka, Lawrence , Shackleton, Sheona E , Blorea, M
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/391223 , vital:68632 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.016"
- Description: Successful land claims on protected areas by previously disenfranchised communities often result in co-management agreements between claimant communities and state conservation agencies. South Africa, in particular, has pursued co-management as the desired outcome of land claims on its protected areas. We review four cases of co-management on protected areas in South Africa, and reflect on the appropriateness of the pursuit of co-management as the preferred outcome of land claims. Despite promises of pro-poor, democratically informed management, the practical experience of co-management has seen the continuation of the status quo in terms of conservation, with very few material benefits for claimant communities and limited sharing of responsibilities and decision-making functions. The findings underscore two deep challenges facing co-management in cases of land claims worldwide. First, during land claims negotiations in cases involving protected areas, the state cannot be expected to represent the best interests of its citizens (the land claimants), while simultaneously seeking to meet national and international obligations for protected area coverage. Second, the concept of democratic co-management may sit uncomfortably beside the realities of managing loss-making protected areas with ever-shrinking conservation budgets. Where co-management agreements have already been signed, ensuring that new landowners do indeed have a say in management should form the driving focus for co-management practice going forward.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Cundill, Georgina , Thondhlana, Gladman , Sisitka, Lawrence , Shackleton, Sheona E , Blorea, M
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/391223 , vital:68632 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.016"
- Description: Successful land claims on protected areas by previously disenfranchised communities often result in co-management agreements between claimant communities and state conservation agencies. South Africa, in particular, has pursued co-management as the desired outcome of land claims on its protected areas. We review four cases of co-management on protected areas in South Africa, and reflect on the appropriateness of the pursuit of co-management as the preferred outcome of land claims. Despite promises of pro-poor, democratically informed management, the practical experience of co-management has seen the continuation of the status quo in terms of conservation, with very few material benefits for claimant communities and limited sharing of responsibilities and decision-making functions. The findings underscore two deep challenges facing co-management in cases of land claims worldwide. First, during land claims negotiations in cases involving protected areas, the state cannot be expected to represent the best interests of its citizens (the land claimants), while simultaneously seeking to meet national and international obligations for protected area coverage. Second, the concept of democratic co-management may sit uncomfortably beside the realities of managing loss-making protected areas with ever-shrinking conservation budgets. Where co-management agreements have already been signed, ensuring that new landowners do indeed have a say in management should form the driving focus for co-management practice going forward.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »