Matching Ecosystem Functions with Adaptive Ecosystem Management: Decision Pathways to Overcome Institutional Barriers

Abstract

Environmental management strategies aim to protect or repair ecological assets (ecosystems, species) so that their ecological and social values can be preserved. However, creating an effective strategy is difficult because multiple government departments are involved and because water and land use legislation and policy instruments are often fragmented. A key obstacle that is often overlooked is the spatial mismatch between ecological processes and institutional organisation (i.e., legislative framework and government departments). Successful management depends on the ability to cultivate resilient ecosystems through institutional reforms that take into account the complexity of ecosystems while supporting cross-sectoral and scale-dependent decision-making within the science-policy interface. Here, we use a case study approach to illustrate how collective strategic decisions can be made to manage a valued ecosystem situated within an urban matrix. We used a three-step framework to guide our approach and commenced by identifying a range of adaptation measures (i.e., management interventions) and the actors responsible. For each adaptation measure, we then investigated (i) mismatches among ecosystem and institution scales and levels; (ii) institutional barriers; and (iii) the role of actors in decision making. We use this information to identify 'decision pathways': i.e., a flexible decision-making platform that assists stakeholders to make strategic short-and long-term decisions. Key insights included the discussion of policy and practical experiences for ecosystem management at different levels and the necessary conditions to provide better alignment between jurisdictional an ecosystem scale to guide decision makers accordingly. We detail the institutional and jurisdictional changes that must be implemented across all levels of governance to protect and support the resilience of environmental assets. 'Short-term' decision pathways were preferred among actors and cross-level cooperation at jurisdictional level provided an adequate fit with the ecosystem scale. 'Long-term' decisions require substantial change of the institutional framework to enable the implementation of adaptive management. Although challenges at institutional and jurisdictional scales remain, decision pathways promote adaptive ecosystem management through a better fit of jurisdictional and institutional roles/policy and ecosystem-scale processes.

Tools for adaptive governance for complex social-ecological systems: a review of role-playing-games as serious games at the community-policy interface

“…Other games attempted to encourage greater participation, interaction and coordination between stakeholders ( Blanchard and Buchs 2015). However, Morardet et al (2012) highlighted that even within the inclusive embrace of RPGs, power differentials and organisational problems exist, and can and do lead to the exclusion of stakeholders.…”

“…The majority of the games were focused at a single actor or geographic scale, usually local communities or across two levels of scale, usually household and local community or local community and regional/ provincial scales (see Bernardo and Sanders 1993, Barreteau et al 2001, Boissau and Castella 2006, Ducrot 2008, Castella 2009, Susskind 2010, Morardet et al 2012. Blanchard and Buchs' (2015) RPG was played solely at the international scale, but across a number of different sectors, which could be considered 'issue' scales.…”

“…Social capital is developed through stakeholders getting to know each other, step-by-step negotiating through conflict (Etienne 2003), collective action (see Morardet et al 2012), and improved exchanges between stakeholders (Ducrot et al 2007). Barnaud et al (2010) look to equalise power relationships, derive more equitable impacts and address social inequalities, all which can contribute to building social capital.…”

“…To enhance their relevance for applied problemsolving and support decision-making, a number of RPGS seek to reflect participants' reality as closely as possible (Dionnet et al 2008, Dung et al 2009. Many of the games relied on community-based participatory action research, working with participants to diagnose problems and assess and analyse relationships between actors and environments (Ducrot 2008, Souchère et al 2010, Morardet et al 2012, Hertzog et al 2014, Speelman et al 2014. While potentially labourintensive and time-consuming, a community-based approach has the dual benefit of targeted bottom-up knowledge production and enhancing a game's legitimacy by engaging community members in the research process sooner rather than later.…”

“…A number of the games specifically promoted learning about negotiation and communication, for example to facilitate bridging cultural divides (see Bernardo and Sanders 1993, Farolfi et al 2004, Barreteau et al 2007, Barnaud et al 2010, Speelman et al 2014, Rumore et al 2016, Villamor and Badmos 2016. Morardet et al (2012), Rumore et al (2016) and Bernardo and Sanders (1993) describe RPGs as helping make sense of different stakeholder positions and, for example, global factors, economics and policy, which are often poorly understood. However, Ducrot et al (2014) found that social learning and skill acquisition attained from their RPG was not able to be sustained over a longer period of time.…”