Collaboration in natural resource governance: Reconciling stakeholder expectations in deer management in Scotland

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 112, Issue , 2012, Pages 160-169

  Davies, Althea L ^a   White, Rehema M ^b  

^a SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cervus elaphus; Collaborative governance; Participation; Red deer management; Social learning

Indexed keywords

COST REDUCTION; ECOSYSTEMS; NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT; RESOURCE ALLOCATION;

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; CERVUS ELAPHUS; COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCES; DEER MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT; PARTICIPATION; RED DEER MANAGEMENT; SCOTLAND; SOCIAL LEARNING;

DECISION MAKING;

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; DEER; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; LEARNING; NATURAL RESOURCE; PRECIPITATION (CLIMATOLOGY); STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY; WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT;

ARTICLE; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; LAW; NONHUMAN; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; RED DEER; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; RESPONSIBILITY; UNITED KINGDOM;

SCOTLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

CERVIDAE; CERVUS ELAPHUS;

EID: 84864916738     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: 10958630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.07.032     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Allan C., Wilson B.P. Meeting in the middle - desirable but not easy. Environ. Policy Govern. 2009, 19:388-399.
2. Armitage D., Marschke M., Plummer R. Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Glob. Environ. Change 2008, 18:86-98.
3. Armitage D.R., Plummer R., Berkes F., Arthur R.I., Charles A.T., Davidson-Hunt I.J., Diduck A.P., Doubleday N.C., Johnson D.S., Marschke M., McConney P., Pinkerton E.W., Wollenberg E.K. Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7:95-102.
4. Arnstein S.R. A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Planners 1969, 35:216-224.
5. Austin Z., Smart J.C.R., Yearley S., Irvine R.J., White P.C.L. Identifying conflicts and opportunities for collaboration in the management of a wildlife resource: a mixed methods approach. Wildl. Res. 2010, 37:647-657.
6. Barreteau O., Bots P.W., Daniell K.A. A framework for clarifying " participation" in participatory research to prevent its rejection for the wrong reasons. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:1. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art1/.
7. Belton L.R., Jackson-Smith D. Factors influencing success among collaborative sage-grouse management groups in the western United States. Environ. Conserv. 2010, 37:250-260.
8. Berkes F. Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90:1692-1702.
9. Berkes F. Devolution of environment and resources governance: trends and future. Environ. Conserv. 2010, 37:489-500.
10. Bidwell R.D., Ryan C.M. Collaborative partnership design: the implications of organizational affiliation for watershed partnerships. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2006, 19:827-843.
11. Blackstock K.L., Kelly G.J., Horsey B.L. Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 60:726-742.
12. Blackstock K.L., Ingram J., Burton R., Brown K.M., Slee B. Understanding and influencing behaviour change by farmers to improve water quality. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408:5631-5638.
13. Blackstock K.L., Richards C. Evaluating stakeholder involvement in river basin planning: a Scottish case study. Water Policy 2007, 9:493-512.
14. Brummel R.F., Nelson K.C., Souter S.G., Jakes P.J., Williams D.R. Social learning in a policy-mandated collaboration: community wildfire protection planning in the eastern United States. J. Environ. Planning Manag. 2010, 53:681-699.
15. Bullock C.H. Environmental and strategic uncertainty in common property management: the case of Scottish red deer. J. Environ. Planning Manag. 1999, 42:235-252.
16. Burgess J., Clark J., Harrison C.M. Knowledges in action: an actor network analysis of a wetland agri-environment scheme. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 35:119-132.
17. Carlsson L., Berkes F. Co-management: concepts and methodological implications. J. Environ. Manag. 2005, 75:65-76.
18. Cheng A.S., Mattor K.M. Why won't they come? Stakeholder perspectives on collaborative national forest planning by participation level. Environ. Manag. 2006, 38:545-561.
19. Conley A., Moote M.A. Evaluating collaborative natural resource management. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2003, 16:371-386.
20. Côté S.D., Rooney T.P., Tremblay J., Dussault C., Waller D.M. Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. 2004, 35:113-147.
21. Daily G.C., Polasky S., Goldstein J., Kareiva P.M., Mooney H.A., Pejchar L., Ricketts T.H., Salzman J., Shallenberger R. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7:21-28.
22. Dandy N., Ballantyne S., Moseley D., Gill R., Peace A., Quine C. Preferences for wildlife management methods among the peri-urban public in Scotland. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 2011, (available online).
23. Dandy N., van der Wal R. Shared appreciation of woodland landscape by land management professionals and lay people: an exploration through field-based interactive photo-elicitation. Landscape Urb. Planning 2011, 102:43-53.
24. Deer Commission for Scotland Scotland's Wild Deer - a National Approach 2008, Scottish Government, Edinburgh.
25. Ferreyra C., Beard P. Participatory evaluation of collaborative and integrated water management: insights from the field. J. Environ. Planning Manag. 2007, 50:271-296.
26. Fiorini S., Yearley S., Dandy N. Wild deer, multivalence, and institutional adaptation: the " Deer management group" in Britain. Hum. Organ. 2011, 70:179-188.
27. Folke C., Hahn T., Olsson P., Norberg J. Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2005, 30:441-473.
28. Foxon T.J., Reed M.S., Stringer L.C. Governing long-term social-ecological change: what can the adaptive management and transition management approaches learn from each other?. Environ. Policy Govern. 2009, 19:3-20.
29. Genskow K.D. Catalyzing collaboration: Wisconsin's agency-initiated basin partnerships. Environ. Manag. 2009, 43:411-424.
30. Genskow K., Wood D. Improving voluntary environmental management programs: facilitating learning and adaptation. Environ. Manag. 2011, 47:907-916.
31. Gerner J., Heurich M., Günther S., Schraml U. Red deer at a crossroads - an analysis of communication strategies concerning wildlife management in the 'Bayerischer Wald' National Park, Germany. J. Nat. Conserv. 2011, 19:319-326.
32. Glass J.H., Scott A.S., Price M.F. Developing a sustainability assessment tool for upland estates. The Changing Nature of Scotland 2011, 425-428. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh. S.J. Marrs, S. Foster, C. Hendrie, E.C. Mackey, D.B.A. Thompson (Eds.).
33. Gordon I.J., Hester A.J., Festa-Bianchet M. The management of wild large herbivores to meet economic, conservation and environmental objectives. J. Appl. Ecol. 2004, 41:1021-1031.
34. Grant A., Curtis A. Refining evaluation criteria for public participation using stakeholder perspectives of process and outcomes. Rural Soc. 2004, 14:142-162.
35. Gray B. Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Hum. Relat. 1985, 38:911-936.
36. Hanley N., Sumner C. Bargaining over common property resources: applying the Coase theorem to red deer in the Scottish highlands. J. Environ. Manag. 1995, 43:87-95.
37. Huitema D., Cornelisse C., Ottow B. Is the jury still out? Toward greater insight in policy learning in participatory decision processes - the case of Dutch citizens' juries on water management in the Rhine basin. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:16. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art16/.
38. Irvine R.J., Broadmeadow M., Gill R.M.A., Albon S.D. Deer and global warming. Deer 2007, 34-39.
39. Irvine R.J., Fiorini S., Yearley S., McLeod J.E., Turner A., Armstrong H., White P.C.L., van der Wal R. Can managers inform models? Integrating local knowledge into models of red deer habitat use. J. Appl. Ecol. 2009, 46:344-352.
40. Jacobson S.K., Morris J.K., Sanders J.S., Wiley E.N., Brooks M.H., Bennetts R.E., Percival H.F., Marynowski S. Understanding barriers to implementation of an adaptive land management program. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20:1516-1527.
41. Johnston E., Soulsby C. The role of science in environmental policy: an examination of the local context. Land Use Policy 2006, 23:161-169.
42. Keough H.L., Blahna D.J. Achieving integrative, collaborative ecosystem management. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20:1373-1382.
43. Koontz T.M. Collaboration for sustainability? A framework for analyzing government impacts in collaborative environmental management. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2006, 2:15-24.
44. Lamers M., Ottow B., Francois G., von Korff Y. Beyond dry feet? Experiences from a participatory water-management planning case in the Netherlands. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:14. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art14/.
45. Leach W.D., Pelkey N.W., Sabatier P.A. Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 2002, 21:645-670.
46. Lockwood M. Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: a framework, principles and performance outcomes. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91:754-766.
47. Lockwood M., Davidson J., Curtis A., Stratford E., Griffith R. Governance principles for natural resource management. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2010, 23:986-1001.
48. London S. Collaboration and Community 1995, http://www.scottlondon.com.
49. MacMillan D.C., Leitch K., Wightman A., Higgins P. The management and role of highland sporting estates in the early twenty-first century: the owner's view of a unique but contested form of land use. Scottish Geog. J. 2010, 126:24-40.
50. Macmillan D.C., Phillip S. Consumptive and non-consumptive values of wild mammals in Britain. Mammal Rev. 2008, 38:189-204.
51. MacMillan D., Phillip S. Can economic incentives resolve conservation conflict: the case of wild deer management and habitat conservation in the Scottish highlands. Hum. Ecol. 2010, 38:485-493.
52. Margerum R. A typology of collaboration efforts in environmental management. Environ. Manag. 2008, 41:487-500.
53. Marshall K., Blackstock K.L., Dunglinson J. A contextual framework for understanding good practice in integrated catchment management. J. Environ. Planning Manag. 2010, 53:63-89.
54. Marshall K., White R., Fischer A. Conflicts between humans over wildlife management: on the diversity of stakeholder attitudes and implications for conflict management. Biodivers. Conserv. 2007, 16:3129-3146.
55. Mitchell B., McCowan D., Parish T. Performance and population dynamics in relation to management of red deer Cervus elaphus at Glenfeshie, Inverness-shire, Scotland. Biol. Conserv. 1986, 37:237-267.
56. Mostert E., Pahl-Wostl C., Rees Y., Searle B., Tabara D., Tippett J. Social learning in European river-basin management: barriers and fostering mechanisms from 10 river basins. Ecol. Soc. 2007, 12:19. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art19/.
57. Olsson P., Folke C., Berkes F. Adaptive co-management for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Environ. Manag. 2004, 34:75-90.
58. Olsson P., Gunderson L.H., Carpenter S.R., Ryan P., Lebel L., Folke C., Holling C. Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11:18. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art18/.
59. Orr P., Colvin J., King D. Involving stakeholders in integrated river basin planning in England and Wales. Water Resour. Manag. 2007, 21:331-349.
60. Peterson N.M., Allison S.A., Peterson M.J., Peterson T.R., Lopez R.R. A tale of two species: habitat conservation plans as bounded conflict. J. Wildl. Manag. 2004, 68:743-761.
61. Phillip S., Dandy N., Gill R., MacMillan D.C. Is legislation a barrier to the sustainable management of game species? A case study of wild deer in Britain. J. Environ. Planning Manag. 2009, 52:993-1012.
62. Prager K., Reed M., Scott A. Encouraging collaboration for the provision of ecosystem services at a landscape scale - rethinking agri-environmental payments. Land Use Policy 2012, 29:244-249.
63. Prell C., Hubacek K., Quinn C., Reed M.S. 'Who's in the network?' When stakeholders influence data analysis. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 2008, 21:443-458.
64. Prell C., Hubacek K., Reed M. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2009, 22:501-518.
65. Prell C., Reed M., Racin L., Hubacek K. Competing structure, competing views: the role of formal and informal social structures in shaping stakeholder perceptions. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:34. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art34/.
66. Pretty J. Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science 2003, 302:1912-1914.
67. Raik D.B., Decker D.J., Siemer W.F. Dimensions of capacity in community-based suburban deer management: the managers' perspective. Wildl. Soc. B 2003, 31:854-864.
68. Rauschmayer F., Wittmer H., Berghöfer A. Institutional challenges for resolving conflicts between fisheries and endangered species conservation. Mar. Policy 2008, 32:178-188.
69. Raymond C.M., Fazey I., Reed M.S., Stringer L.C., Robinson G.M., Evely A.C. Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91:1766-1777.
70. Redpath S., Thirgood S. Hen harriers and red grouse: moving towards consensus?. J. Appl. Ecol. 2009, 961-963.
71. Reed M.S. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:2417-2431.
72. Reed M.S., Dougill A.J., Baker T.R. Participatory indicator development: what can ecologists and local communities learn from each other?. Ecol. Appl. 2008, 18:1253-1269.
73. Reed M.S., Evely A.C., Cundill G., Fazey I., Glass J., Laing A., Newig J., Parrish B., Prell C., Raymond C., Stringer L.C. What is social learning?. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:1. (online) URL:. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/resp1/.
74. Reed M.S., Graves A., Dandy N., Posthumus H., Hubacek K., Morris J., Prell C., Quinn C.H., Stringer L.C. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90:1933-1949.
75. Rose, R.D., 2010. Sustainable Deer Management: a Case Study Report to the Deer Commission for Scotland, Deer Commission Scotland, Inverness.
76. Sandström C., Moen J., Widmark C., öje D. Progressing toward co-management through collaborative learning: forestry and reindeer husbandry in dialogue. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manag. 2006, 2:326-333.
77. Sandström P., Granqvist Pahlén T., Edenius L., Tømmervik H., Hagner O., Hemberg L., Olsson H., Baer K., Stenlund T., Göran Brandt L., Egberth M. Conflict resolution by participatory management: remote sensing and GIS as tools for communicating land-use needs for reindeer herding in northern Sweden. Ambio 2010, 32:557-567.
78. Schultz L., Folke C., Olsson P. Enhancing ecosystem management through social-ecological inventories: lessons from Kristianstads Vattenrike, Sweden. Environ. Conserv. 2007, 34:140-152.
79. Seddon J. Systems Thinking in the Public Sector: the Failure of the Reform Regime and a Manifesto for a Better Way 2008, Triarchy Press, Axminster, UK.
80. Smart J.C.R., White P.C.L., Termansen M. Modelling conflicting objectives in the management of a mobile ecological resource: red deer in the Scottish highlands. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 64:881-892.
81. Sorice M.G., Haider W., Conner J.R., Ditton R.B. Incentive structure of and private landowner participation in an endangered species conservation program. Conserv. Biol. 2011, 25:587-596.
82. Wagner M.W., Kreuter U.P., Kaiser R.A., Wilkins R.N. Collective action and social capital of wildlife management associations. Hum. Dimensions Wildl. Manag. 2007, 71:1729-1738.
83. Ward A.I. Expanding ranges of wild and feral deer in Great Britain. Mammal Rev. 2005, 35:165-173.
84. Warren C.R., McKee A. The Scottish revolution? Evaluating the impacts of post-devolution land reform. Scottish Geog. J. 2011, 127:17-39.
85. Webler T., Ebler T., Tuler S., Krueger R. What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environ. Manag. 2001, 27:435-450.
86. White P.C.L., Ward A.I. Interdisciplinary approaches for the management of existing and emerging human-wildlife conflicts. Wildl. Res. 2010, 37:623-629.
87. White R.M., Fischer A., Marshall K., Travis J.M.J., Webb T.J., di Falco S., Redpath S.M., van der Wal R. Developing an integrated conceptual framework to understand biodiversity conflicts. Land Use Policy 2009, 26:242-253.
88. Wondolleck J., Yaffee S. Making Collaboration Work 2000, Island Press, Washington, D.C.
89. Young J.C., Marzano M., White R.M., Mccracken D.I., Redpath S.M., Carss D.N., Quine C.P., Watt A.D. The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: characteristics and management strategies. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19:3973-3990.