Environmental learning and the social construction of an exurban landscape in Fremont County, Colorado

Larsen, Soren C.; Foulkes, Matt; Sorenson, Curtis J.; Thompson, Amy

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.10.003

Cited by 25 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed they felt that they now had the ability to positively influence the system. Thus similarly to previous studies, these findings demonstrate the importance of building knowledge and awareness (Carlsson and Berkes, 2005;Armitage et al, 2009;Bodin and Crona, 2009), as well as motivation (Kilgore et al, 2007;Larsen et al, 2011;Meadows et al, 2014), to enhance stakeholder networks. Indeed, it looks even more important in the absence of the driver for improvement constituted by the local legislation (Wilson, 2007).…”

Section: About the Case Studysupporting

confidence: 88%

“…For example, such networks have been shown to lead to more sustainable management of land resources, increased knowledge and motivation amongst stakeholders (Kilgore et al, 2007;Larsen et al, 2011;Meadows et al, 2014), as well as enhanced engagement with marine protection areas (Heck and Dearden, 2012;Lopes et al, 2013;Cárcamo et al, 2014), and mobilization and allocation of resources (Carlsson and Berkes, 2005;Newman and Dale, 2007). Indeed, some argue that social networks are more important than formal governance structures for the effective enforcement and compliance with environmental regulations (Scholz and Wang, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding the perceptions, roles and interactions of stakeholder networks managing health-care waste: A case study of the Gaza Strip

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainable management of waste requires a holistic approach involving a range of stakeholders. What can often be difficult is to understand the manner in which different types of stakeholder networks are composed and work, and how best to enhance their effectiveness. Using social network analysis and stakeholder analysis of healthcare waste management stakeholders in the case study region of the Gaza Strip, this study aimed to understand and examine the manner in which the networks functioned. The Ministry of Health was found to be the most important stakeholder, followed by municipalities and solid waste management councils. Some international agencies were also mentioned, with specific roles, while other local institutions had a limited influence. Finally while health-care facilities had a strong interest in waste management, they were generally poorly informed and had limited links to each other. The manner in which the networks operated was complicated and influenced by differences in perception, sharing of information, access to finance and levels of awareness. The lack of a clear legal framework generated various mistakes about roles and responsibilities in the system, and evidently regulation was not an effective driver for improvement. Finally stakeholders had different priorities according to the waste management issues they were involved with, however segregation at the source was identified as a key requirement by most. Areas for improving the effectiveness of the networks are suggested. The analysis utilized an innovative methodology, which involved a large number of stakeholders. Such an approach served to raise interest and awareness at different levels (public authorities, health providers, supporting actors, others), stimulate the discussion about the adoption of specific policies, and identify the effective way forward.

show abstract

Section: About the Case Studysupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the perceptions, roles and interactions of stakeholder networks managing health-care waste: A case study of the Gaza Strip

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, the significance of personal contacts, and of neighbours for lifestylers, once again brings in critical focus concerns about the character of social fragmentation in landscapes (Epanchin-Niell et al 2010; including by us, Klepeis, Gill, and Chisholm 2009) and suggests that diverse landholders do interact with each other about land management issues. The extent to which this is leading to deeper engagement where they learn to collectively negotiate changed circumstances and develop new norms and institutions, as found by Larsen et al (2011), is beyond our data but a significant question for land management in regional Australia and elsewhere. Further, the reliance on neighbours suggests that lifestylers interact with, and learn from, a range of landholders, probably including neighbours who are farmers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Similarly, in socially diverse landscapes in NSW and Victoria relationships among landowners were central to effective collective invasive plant management (Graham 2013). Long term work in Colorado has further highlighted the role of interpersonal and collaborative learning and action among landowners in 'exurban' landscapes (Larsen et al 2011;Larsen et al 2007). Through a diverse range of interactions in a variety of settingsincluding informal social gatherings, group settings convened to address particular issues, discussions between neighbours, phone trees, seeking advice from experienced landowners, and groups formed around shared hobbies and interests -landowners learnt about land management issues, adjusted their own practices, and learnt about and formed the land and resource management institutions and norms of their area.…”

Section: Reaching Lifestylersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Same but different: sources of natural resource management advice for lifestyle oriented rural landholders

Ikutegbe

Gill

Klepeis

2014

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amenity migration to attractive and accessible non-metropolitan areas changes social and environmental relations with consequences for natural resource management and landscape composition and trajectories. Lifestyler oriented rural landholders are often cast as a problem for land management and extension. Managers and some researchers see them as a cause of landscape and social fragmentation and report difficulties in engaging such landowners on natural resource management issues and responsibilities. In contrast, limited existing research indicates that lifestylers do join and form networks of personal and other contacts for advice and support in land management. We contribute to this research with a survey of rural landholders in southeastern New South Wales (NSW). We explicitly compare the sources of advice for land management for lifestylers with those of farmers. We focus on the types of sources available to rural landholders in Australian regions and their relative importance to these two landholder groups. We find that lifestylers and farmers are different in their sources of advice but that both prefer personal sources rather than sources such as agencies. We reflect on the significance of the differences for engagement with lifestyle oriented rural landowners and for understanding landscape change. AbstractAmenity migration to attractive and accessible non-metropolitan areas changes social and environmental relations with consequences for natural resource management and landscape composition and trajectories. Lifestyler-oriented rural landholders are often cast as a problem for land management and extension. Manager and some researchers see them as a cause of landscape and social fragmentation and report difficulties in engaging such landowners on natural resource management issues and responsibilities. In contrast, limited existing research indicates that lifestylers do join and form networks of personal and other contacts for advice and support in land management. We contribute to this research with a survey of rural landholders in south-eastern NSW. We explicitly compare the sources of advice for land management for lifestylers with those of farmers. We focus on the types of sources available to rural landholders in Australian regions and their relative importance to these two landholder groups. We find that lifestylers and farmers are different in their sources of advice but that both prefer personal sources rather than sources such as agencies. We reflect on the significance of the differences for engagement with lifestyle-oriented rural landowners and for understanding landscape change.

show abstract

“…Opportunities exist for enhanced cooperation among them (Larsen, Foulkes, Sorenson, & Thompson, 2011). Both rely on similar sources of information and advice, and both groups are worried about invasive weeds (Ikutegbe et al, 2014).…”

Section: Shifting Socio-ecologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Paradox of Engagement: Land Stewardship and Invasive Weeds in Amenity Landscapes

Klepeis

Gill

2016

A Comparative Political Ecology of Exurbia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In New South Wales, Australia, rural landscapes are undergoing profound change as a result of exurbanization. Newcomers-amenity migrants-are drawn to the scenic beaches, forests, and open landscape character of this part of Australia near Sydney and they join existing communities of long-term residents, notably ranchers involved in dairy, beef, and other types of primary agricultural production. The rural to exurban transition is stimulating both intended and unintended socio-ecological changes, especially the proliferation of invasive weeds, which are considered to be a top national priority as they threaten Australia's agricultural economy. Drawing on interview and survey research from three case studies in New South Wales, locations where an influx of exurbanites has led to mixed landscapes of production and consumption, we explore landowners' diverse environmental ideologies, the degree to which they collaborate with one another, and their specific land-use practices. Results show that an overwhelming majority of both exurbanites and ranchers express concerns about weeds, but there is a marked lack of coordinated engagement on invasive species between the two types of groups. This chapter is an example of social disengagement over land-use and land-cover change, rather than competition or cooperation, and contributes to a political ecological understanding of the coconstruction of social relations and land management regimes.

show abstract

Environmental learning and the social construction of an exurban landscape in Fremont County, Colorado

Cited by 25 publications

References 38 publications

Understanding the perceptions, roles and interactions of stakeholder networks managing health-care waste: A case study of the Gaza Strip

Understanding the perceptions, roles and interactions of stakeholder networks managing health-care waste: A case study of the Gaza Strip

Same but different: sources of natural resource management advice for lifestyle oriented rural landholders

The Paradox of Engagement: Land Stewardship and Invasive Weeds in Amenity Landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About