Adaptive co-management for collaborative commercial pest management: the case of industry-driven fruit fly area-wide management

Kruger, Heleen

doi:10.1080/09670874.2016.1206992

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this type, organizational actors included state and local government agencies, private companies, NGOs, and universities, whereas individual actors were typically private landowners. Cooperation could be induced or motivated through diverse mechanisms, such as regulations and litigation (Graham , ), incentives (Ervin & Frisvold ), technical assistance and educational outreach (Kruger , ), and community‐based approaches (Graham , ).…”

Section: Overview Of Invasive Species Collective‐action Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management

Graham

Metcalf

Gill

et al. 2019

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controlling invasive species presents a public‐good dilemma. Although environmental, social, and economic benefits of control accrue to society, costs are borne by only a few individuals and organizations. For decades, policy makers have used incentives and sanctions to encourage or coerce individual actors to contribute to the public good, with limited success. Diverse, subnational efforts to collectively manage invasive plants, insects, and animals provide effective alternatives to traditional command‐and‐control approaches. Despite this work, there has been little systematic evaluation of collective efforts to determine whether there are consistent principles underpinning success. We reviewed 32 studies to identify the extent to which collective‐action theories from related agricultural and environmental fields explain collaborative invasive species management approaches; describe and differentiate emergent invasive species collective‐action efforts; and provide guidance on how to enable more collaborative approaches to invasive species management. We identified 4 types of collective action aimed at invasive species—externally led, community led, comanaged, and organizational coalitions—that provide blueprints for future invasive species management. Existing collective‐action theories could explain the importance attributed to developing shared knowledge of the social‐ecological system and the need for social capital. Yet, collection action on invasive species requires different types of monitoring, sanctions, and boundary definitions. We argue that future government policies can benefit from establishing flexible boundaries that encourage social learning and enable colocated individuals and organizations to identify common goals, pool resources, and coordinate efforts.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of Invasive Species Collective‐action Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management

Graham

Metcalf

Gill

et al. 2019

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This work is a corollary of earlier research about the social and institutional aspects of local industries pursuing industry-driven AWM, involving three case studies of where AWM has been implemented or is attempted. A key finding was that local industries need help to help themselves through an enabling and supportive institutional environment (Kruger, 2016).…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different groups, for example, the then National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee (predecessor of the National Fruit Fly Council) and Cherry Growers Australia (CGA), are developing a toolbox of QFly-management practices that growers can use as part of a systems approach. Local QFly management groups typically form to work with key actors to develop a shared vision and to lead the local industry to strengthened market access (Kruger, 2016). Growers' trust in a management group's ability to capitalise on market access opportunities is essential to achieve local support and cooperation.…”

Section: Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ICA system was generally seen as a big success for domestic market access. Some were hopeful that AWM as part of a systems approach could assist in overcoming the need for costly post-harvest QFly treatments for international trade as is the case for some ICAs (Kruger, 2016).…”

Section: Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Local QFly management groups represent innovation platforms where different knowledge systems meet, e.g. representatives from growers, packhouses, local government, crop consultants and state government (Kruger, 2016). Here they develop coordinated QFly initiatives suitable for the regional context in pursuit of strengthening trade.…”

Section: Instigate and Support Interconnected Innovation Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Helping local industries help themselves in a multi-level biosecurity world – Dealing with the impact of horticultural pests in the trade arena

Kruger

2017

NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many countries the biosecurity system is under financial strain resulting in an on-going push for shared responsibility and greater industry self-reliance. This occurs in an increasing globalised, multi-level trade context. It raises the question of how the broader support system for local industries can be improved to help industries help themselves. This work relates to systems approaches as a phytosanitary measure in horticulture trade to address pest concerns. Specifically, it investigates how to create an enabling environment for local Australian horticulture industries to pursue systems approaches involving area-wide management (AWM) of Queensland Fruit Fly (QFly). A functional-structural analysis is applied to identify issues that prevent local industries pursuing systems approaches and to suggest ways forward. Primary data is derived from semistructured interviews with representatives from three levels of government, industry bodies, consultancies and other key groups, complemented by a grower survey in three case study regions. Systems approaches involving AWM comprise a complex domain as it is situated across multiple levels from the local to the international; it involves various dimensions and many rationally-bounded actors. Key blocking mechanisms to local progress include a lack of clear change pathways for local industries; low connectivity between local industries and the innovation system; currently feasibility signals for systems approaches including AWM are weak; and systems approaches are problematic. Ways forward include supporting and initiating innovation platforms, offering domestic and international market access training; and minimising transaction costs to industry.

show abstract

Meanings, materials and competences of area-wide weed management in cropping systems

Campbell,

Height,

Hawkes

et al. 2023

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adaptive co-management for collaborative commercial pest management: the case of industry-driven fruit fly area-wide management

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management

Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management

Helping local industries help themselves in a multi-level biosecurity world – Dealing with the impact of horticultural pests in the trade arena

Meanings, materials and competences of area-wide weed management in cropping systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About