Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

Leys, Andrea J.; Vanclay, Jerome K.

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.11.006

Cited by 114 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 64 publications

(121 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This included three preselected subcategories: assessment, i.e., immediate evaluation of performance , Williams 2011; dialogue and oral transfer (Berkes et al 2000, Leys andVanclay 2011); and experimentation and reflection (Walters 1986, Lee 1993, Moore et al 2011.…”

Section: How Learning Took Placementioning

confidence: 99%

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Fabricius¹,

Cundill²

2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Adaptive management is often advocated as a solution to understanding and managing complexity in social-ecological systems. Given the centrality of learning in adaptive management, it remains unclear how learning in adaptive management is understood to occur, who learns, what they learn about, and how they learn. We conducted a systematic review using the Thomson Reuters Web of Science, and searched specifically for examples of the practical implementation of adaptive management between 2011 and 2013, i.e., excluding articles that suggested frameworks, models, or recommendations for future action. This provided a subset of 22 papers that were analyzed using five elements: the aims of adaptive management as stated in each paper; the reported achievements of adaptive management; what was learned; who learned; and how they learned. Our results indicate that, although most published adaptive management initiatives aimed at improvements in biological conservation or ecosystem management, scholars of adaptive management tend to report on learning more about governance and about learning, than about ecosystems or biological conservation. Whereas almost all the papers (91%) listed improvements in biological conservation and ecosystem management as aims, 59% reported these as achievements. Whereas only 27% listed improved governance as an aim, 73% mentioned this as an achievement. Conservation scientists and academics reporting on adaptive management tend to learn among themselves, and very seldom (18%) with external stakeholders. Adaptive ecosystem management is dominated by direct assessment and single-loop learning aimed at improving existing practices (86%), with about 50% engaged in double-loop learning and a similar number in deutero-learning (learning about learning). Some adaptive managers (36%) combined double-and single-loop learning and the majority of these (6/8) reported on conservation achievements. A possible explanation for these findings is that adaptive management is an evolutionary process and in most instances is still in an early pioneering stage, possibly held back by participants' capacity for learning. The constraint of learning capacity may also explain why so few adaptive management initiatives reported on learning with societal stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: How Learning Took Placementioning

confidence: 99%

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Fabricius¹,

Cundill²

2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, social learning could be encouraged by creating platforms where stakeholders from different governance levels could share concerns and solutions (c.f., Leys and Vanclay 2011). This generates a need for various social networks to work together in an integrative fashion (Olsson et al 2007).…”

Section: Possible Ways Towards Overcoming Scale Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity conservation across scales: lessons from a science–policy dialogue

Paloniemi¹,

Apostolopoulou²,

Primmer³

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the core challenges of biodiversity conservation is to better understand the interconnectedness and interactions of scales in ecological and governance processes. These interrelationships constitute not only a complex analytical challenge but they also open up a channel for deliberative discussions and knowledge exchange between and among various societal actors which may themselves be operating at various scales, such as policy makers, land use planners, members of NGOs, and researchers. In this paper, we discuss and integrate the perspectives of various disciplines academics and stakeholders who participated in a workshop on scales of European biodiversity governance organised in Brussels in the autumn of 2010. The 23 participants represented various governmental agencies and NGOs from the European, national, and sub-national levels. The data from the focus group discussions of the workshop were analysed using qualitative content analysis. The core scale-related challenges of biodiversity policy identified by the Short CommuniCAtion Launched to accelerate biodiversity conservation A peer-reviewed open-access journalRiikka Paloniemi et al. / Nature Conservation 2: 7-19 (2012) 8 participants were cross-level and cross-sector limitations as well as ecological, social and social-ecological complexities that potentially lead to a variety of scale-related mismatches. As ways to address these challenges the participants highlighted innovations, and an aim to develop new interdisciplinary approaches to support the processes aiming to solve current scale challenges.

show abstract

“…Processes of social learning make use of the differences between people. These processes also support the development of social capital (Leys and Vanclay, 2011;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007;Sol et al, 2011;Tippett et al, 2005). Boundary organisations are formal or informal organisations founded between different social worlds to enable collaboration, coordination, mediation and exchange (Carr and Wilkinson, 2005;Franks, 2010;Miller, 2001;Parker and Crona, 2012).…”

Section: Boundary Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making a difference : boundary management in spatial governance

Westerink¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

Cited by 114 publications

References 64 publications

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Learning in Adaptive Management: Insights from Published Practice

Biodiversity conservation across scales: lessons from a science–policy dialogue

Making a difference : boundary management in spatial governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About