A holistic framework for participatory conservation approaches

Matarrita‐Cascante, David; Sène-Harper, Aby; Ruyle, Leslie E.

doi:10.1080/13504509.2019.1619105

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Engagement refers to processes where stakeholders are involved in making decisions that affect them. Engagement includes modes of social interaction ranging from oneway interactions (communication and consultation) to two-way collaborations (deliberation and empowerment) driven either from the "bottom-up" (community-led) or the "top-down" (agency or expert-led), all of which depend on institutional mandates and structures as well as stakeholders' authorities, capacities, needs, and wants (Reed et al 2018;Matarrita-Cascante, Sene-Harper, and Ruyle 2019). Our interest with this conceptual framework is to guide research on change resulting from engagement processes, where, in response to threats or opportunities (Beckley et al 2008), new groups consisting of diverse stakeholders including members of established groups convene (Wenger 2000) and engage in deliberation, planning, and decision-making to affect the problem/ opportunity at hand (Muro and Jeffrey 2012).…”

Section: Conceptual Framework For Change Through Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We draw from sociological research on communities to conceptualize these levels (Wilkinson 1991). While consensus on how best to conceptualize community remains elusive, our framework recognizes communities as comprised, in essence, of people (along smaller and larger levels of social organization), physical space (including biophysical environmental conditions), and the institutions that govern their actions (Agrawal and Gibson 1999;Matarrita-Cascante, Sene-Harper, and Ruyle 2019). This progression in levels reflects Giddens' (1984) structuration theory that sees individual actors as embedded within the broader contexts (i.e., rules, resources, biophysical attributes) that they draw from, interpret, and influence in everyday interactions.…”

Section: Conceptual Framework For Change Through Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Conceptual Framework for Social, Behavioral, and Environmental Change through Stakeholder Engagement in Water Resource Management

Eaton

Brasier

Burbach

et al. 2021

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incorporating stakeholder engagement into environmental management may help in the pursuit of novel approaches for addressing complex water resource problems. However, evidence about how and under what circumstances stakeholder engagement enables desirable changes remains elusive. In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework for studying social and environmental changes possible through stakeholder engagement in water resource management, from inception to outcomes. We synthesize concepts from multiple literatures to provide a framework for tracing linkages from contextual conditions, through engagement process design features, to social learning, community capacity building, and behavioral change at individual, group, and group network levels, and ultimately to environmental change. We discuss opportunities to enhance the framework including through empirical applications to delineate scalar and temporal dimensions of social, behavioral, and environmental changes resulting from stakeholder engagement, and the potential for negative outcomes thus far glossed over in research on change through engagement.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Framework For Change Through Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Framework For Change Through Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Conceptual Framework for Social, Behavioral, and Environmental Change through Stakeholder Engagement in Water Resource Management

Eaton

Brasier

Burbach

et al. 2021

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We use the methods of participatory action ethnographic research (participant observation, interviews, surveys, historical and archival analyses, and quantitative analyses using large datasets). In line with Matarrita-Cascante, Sene-Harper, and Ruyle's community-driven program framework [33], we approach our work primarily as research of our community, meaning that the resources are primarily owned by participants. However, understanding the power relations that are involved with our community, specifically the university/non-university divide, we have created various community ties in order to include many non-professional/non-academic voices in our project development and implementation.…”

Section: Data and Knowledge Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, understanding the power relations that are involved with our community, specifically the university/non-university divide, we have created various community ties in order to include many non-professional/non-academic voices in our project development and implementation. We aim to create increased community food security through analysis of access to food and food production itself, as well as a myriad of mechanisms that make such access possible: social capital, trust, capacity, support, and empowerment [33]. Overall, this framework considers the community as an invested partner in research that aims to produces food equity, as well as conserve the land wherein we produce said food.…”

Section: Data and Knowledge Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Networks, Micro-agriculture, and Community Food Security

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The white paper first outlines the state of inequity in food security/sovereignty in our area of focus, taking into account historical context as well as emerging and ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and community and policy responses to it. We then discuss a food acquisition intervention, structured as a longitudinal, collaborative research, and service-learning effort known as Everybody Eats. The white paper provides detailed discussion of competing understandings of agriculture, horticulture, and the social problem of food insecurity; the preliminary data that has led to a current collaborative effort to enhance the skillset of people previously not understood as food producers and provisioners, but only as end-user consumers; and the new iteration of the project wherein specific sets of expertise from diverse disciplines are deployed both to offer a more robust intervention, and bring new methodologies to bear in assessing the ecology of a local foodshed. We propose mobilizing existing resources and expertise of the Land Grant/Cooperative Extension system to act as a regional hub for facilitating full community food security (caloric and nutritional adequacy) and food sovereignty (participatory decision-making regarding living spaces and culturally appropriate foodways). Finally, we illustrate how a nexus of faculty, working from a service-learning advocacy perspective and embedded in a participatory action framework, provides a mechanism for bringing together and sustaining a community of intellectually diverse researchers and stakeholders.

show abstract

“…Much of what we suggest operates within the existing Western scientific framework and established procedures, which fails to give equal weight to non‐academic knowledge. We realise we could go further in our coverage of themes of co‐management, indigenous stewardship and participatory processes, and that inequalities of power run through local communities and processes too and need to be considered (Brondízio et al, 2021; Matarrita‐Cascante et al, 2019; Oteros‐Rozas et al, 2015; Rayne et al, 2020). However, such a review is beyond the scope of the paper, and we have by no means set out to present a blueprint for inclusivity with this piece.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards fairer conservation: Perspectives and ideas from early‐career researchers

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Black Lives Matter Movement, which gained unprecedented global momentum in mid‐2020, triggered critical reflection on systemic discrimination of disadvantaged groups across many domains of society. It prompted us, as early‐career researchers (ECRs) in conservation science, to examine our own awareness of ongoing injustices within our field, the role we play in perpetuating or countering these injustices, and how to move forward. Colonialist ideologies and power dynamics throughout the history of conservation practice and research have left a long‐lasting legacy of inequality and systemic racism. While improvements have been made, these legacies continue to influence teaching and practice today. In this perspective piece, we reflect on the impacts of conservation’s colonial past and how the sector has developed. We then explore how current traditional routes into conservation, and the dominance of these approaches, can leave ECRs underprepared to address modern‐day conservation issues due to a limited understanding of conservation’s history and key theories from other fields. We end by offering a set of suggestions encouraging others to learn and practise fairer and more inclusive conservation practices. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

A holistic framework for participatory conservation approaches

Cited by 14 publications

References 50 publications

A Conceptual Framework for Social, Behavioral, and Environmental Change through Stakeholder Engagement in Water Resource Management

A Conceptual Framework for Social, Behavioral, and Environmental Change through Stakeholder Engagement in Water Resource Management

Urban Networks, Micro-agriculture, and Community Food Security

Towards fairer conservation: Perspectives and ideas from early‐career researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About