The social identity approach to understanding socio-political conflict in environmental and natural resources management

Global Environmental Change

Volumn 34, Issue , 2015, Pages 237-246

  Colvin, R M ^a   Witt, G Bradd ^a   Lacey, Justine ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Citizenry; Deliberation; Disputes; Governance; Public; Stakeholders

Indexed keywords

GOVERNANCE APPROACH; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; NATURAL RESOURCE; NUMERICAL MODEL; POLITICAL CONFLICT; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL CONFLICT; SOCIAL STRUCTURE; STAKEHOLDER; CITIZENSHIP; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CULTURAL IDENTITY; DISPUTE RESOLUTION; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT;

AUSTRALIA;

EID: 84938891445     PISSN: 09593780     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.07.011     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Aanesen M., Armstrong C.W., Bloomfield H.J., Röckmann C. What does stakeholder involvement mean for fisheries management?. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19(4):35. 10.5751/ES-06947-190435.
2. Amason A.C. Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: resolving a paradox for top management teams. Acad. Manage. J. 1996, 39(1):123-148.
3. Beeton R.J.S., Lynch A.J.J. Most of nature: a framework to resolve the twin dilemmas of the decline of nature and rural communities. Environ. Sci. Policy 2012, 23:45-56.
4. Beeton R.J.S., Witt G.B., Witt K., Boonchai C. Environmental Problem Solving: An Adaptive Approach, Environmental Problem Solving (ENVM7512) Course Reference Book 2014, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.
5. Bernauer T., Gampfer R. Effects of civil society involvement on popular legitimacy of global environmental governance. Glob. Environ. Change 2013, 23(2):439-449.
6. Bliuc A., McGarty C., Thomas E.F., Lala G., Berndsen M., Misajon R. Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities. Nat. Clim. Change 2015, 5:226-229.
7. Boulding K. Conflict and Defense: A General Theory 1962, Harper and Row, New York.
8. Boully, L., McCollum, B., Vanderbyl, T., Claydon, G. (2005) Talking until the talking starts: Resolving conflict through dialogue. Paper presented to The International Conference on Engaging Communities, Brisbane, Australia, 14-17 August.
9. Brown G., Raymond C.M. Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape Urban Plan. 2014, 122:196-208.
10. Brummans B., Putnam L., Gray B., Hanke R., Lewicki R., Weithoff C. Making sense of intractable multiparty conflict: A study of framing in four environmental disputes. Commun. Monogr. 2008, 75(1):25-51.
11. Bryan T.A. Aligning Identity: Social Identity and Changing Context in Community-based Environmental Conflict. Ph.D. Thesis 2008, The University of Michigan.
12. Burningham K., Barnett J., Walker G. An array of deficits: unpacking NIMBY discourses in wind energy developers' conceptualizations of their local opponents. Soc. Nat. Res. 2014, 28(3):246-260.
13. Cárcamo P.F., Garay-Flühmann R., Squeo F.A., Gaymer C.F. Using stakeholders' perspective of ecosystem services and biodiversity features to plan a marine protected area. Environ. Sci. Policy 2014, 40:116-131.
14. Carpini D., Cook M.X., Jacobs L.R. Public deliberations, discursive participation and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature. Annu. Rev. Pol. Sci. 2004, 7(1):315-344.
15. Carson L. Deliberative public participation and hexachlorobenzene stockpiles. J. Environ. Manage. 2009, 90:1636-1643.
16. Colvin R.M., Witt G.B., Lacey J. Strange bedfellows or an aligning of values? Exploration of stakeholder values in an alliance of concerned citizens against coal seam gas mining. Land Use Policy 2015, 42:392-399.
17. Compton E., Beeton R.J.S. An accidental outcome: social capital and its implications for landcare and the status quo. J. Rural Stud. 2012, 28(2):149-160.
18. Crane A., Ruebottom T. Stakeholder theory and social identity: rethinking stakeholder identification. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 102:77-87.
19. Devine-Wright P. Think global, act local? The relevance of place attachments and place identities in a climate changed world. Glob. Environ. Change 2013, 23(1):61-69.
20. Dono J., Webb J., Richardson B. The relationship between environmental activism, pro-environmental behaviour and social identity. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30:178-186.
21. Downs, A. (1972) Up and down with ecology-the issue-attention cycle'. Public Interest 28,. 38-50.
22. Fox E., Poncelet E., Connor D., Vasques J., Ugoretz J., McCreary S., Monie D., Harty M., Gleason M. Adapting stakeholder processes to region-specific challenges in marine protected area network planning. Ocean Coastal Manage. 2013, 74:24-33.
23. Freeman R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach 1984, Pitman, Boston, MA.
24. Gale, F. (2013) Tasmanian Forests Agreement: deeply flawed, worth backing. The Conversation, viewed 19 August 2013, . http://https://theconversation.com/tasmanian-forests-agreement-deeply-flawed-worth-backing-14035.
25. Grant F., Hogg M.A. Self-uncertainty, social identity prominence and group identification. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 48:538-542.
26. Gray B. Strong opposition: frame-based resistance to collaboration. J. Commun. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2004, 14:166-176.
27. Green M., Dzidic P. Social science and socialising: adopting causal layered analysis to reveal multi-stakeholder perceptions of natural resource management in Australia. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 2014, 57(12):1782-1801.
28. Grimble R., Wellard K. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agric. Syst. 1997, 55(2):173-193.
29. Haslam S.A. Psychology in Organizations: The Social Identity Approach 2000, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
30. Herath G. The economics and politics of wilderness conservation in Australia. Soc. Nat. Res. 2002, 15(2):147-159.
31. Hogg M.A., Abrams D. Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes 1988, Routledge, London; New York.
32. Hornsey M.J. Social identity theory and self categorization theory: a historical review. Soc. Personality Psychol. Compass 2008, 2(1):204-222.
33. Howard J. Using game theory to explain the behaviour of participants involved in a regional governance process. Rural Soc. 2006, 16(3):254-270.
34. Howard J. Extremes in justice: How arguments are framed by conservation and farmer groups when attempting to influence water policy. Proceedings of the 6th Australian Stream Management Conference 2012, 1-9. J.R. Grove, I.D. Rutherford (Eds.).
35. Hull R.B. Environmental Pluralism. Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy 2009, vol. 1:383-387. Macmillan Reference USA, Detroit.
36. ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) (2013) Reducing the opportunities and incentives for corruption in the state's management of coal resources. ICAC Report, October 2013. Independent Commission Against Corruption, Sydney, New South Wales.
37. Jenkins B., Henley G. Collaborative management: Community engagement process as the decision making process. Paper presented to The Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand (EIANZ) Annual Conference 2013.
38. Jennings S., Moore S. The rhetoric behind regionalization in Australian rural resource management: myth, reality and moving forward. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2000, 2(3):177-191.
39. Kahane D., Lopston K., Herriman J., Hardy M. Stakeholder and citizen roles in public deliberation. J. Public Deliberation 2013, 9(2). Article 2.
40. Kasperson R.E. Rerouting the stakeholder express. Glob. Environ. Change 2006, 16(4):320-322.
41. Kindermann G., Gormally M.J. Stakeholder perceptions of recreational and management impacts on protected coastal dune systems: a comparison of three European countries. Land Use Policy 2013, 31:472-485.
42. Kivits R.A. Three component stakeholder analysis. Int. J. Multiple Res. Approaches 2011, 5(3):318-333.
43. Lane M.B., Morrison T.H. Public interest or private agenda? A mediation on the role of NGOs in environmental policy and management in Australia. J. Rural Stud. 2006, 22:232-242.
44. Lane M.B. Decentralization or privatization of environmental governance? Forest conflict and bioregional assessment in Australia. J. Rural Stud. 2003, 19:283-294.
45. Lane M.B., McDonald G.T., Morrison T.H. Decentralisation and environmental management in Australia: A comment on the prescriptions of The Wentworth Group. Aust. Geogr. Stud. 2004, 42(1):103-115.
46. Lewicki, R.J., Gray, B., Elliott, M. (Eds.) (2003) Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts: Concepts and Cases. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
47. Lockie S., Higgins V. Roll-out neoliberalism and hybrid practices of regulation in Australian agri-environmental governance. J. Rural Stud. 2007, 23(1):1-11.
48. Lockwood M., Davidson J. Environmental governance and the hybrid regime of Australian natural resource management. Geoforum 2010, 41(3):388-398.
49. Lockwood M., Davidson J., Curtis A., Stratford E., Griffith R. Governance principles for natural resource management. Soc. Nat. Res. 2010, 23(10):986-1001.
50. Lute M.L., Gore M.L. Stewardship as a path to cooperation? Exploring the role of identity in intergroup conflict among Michigan wolf stakeholders. Hum. Dimensions Wildl. 2014, 19(3):267-279.
51. Margerum R.D. A typology of collaboration efforts in environmental management. Environ. Manage. 2008, 41:487-500.
52. Mason C.M., Paxton G., Parsons R., Parr J.M., Moffat K. For the benefit of Australians: exploring national expectations of the mining industry. Res. Policy 2014, 41:1-8.
53. McLennan C.J., Becken S., Moyle B.D. Framing in a contested space: media reporting on tourism and mining in Australia. Curr. Issues Tourism 2014, 1. 10.1080/13683500.2014.946893.
54. Miller A. Environmental Problem Solving: Psychosocial Barriers to Adaptive Change 1999, Springer, New York.
55. Moore L. Common Ground on Hostile Turf: Stories from an Environmental Mediator 2013, Island Press, Washington, D.C.
56. Moore E.A., Koontz T.M. Research note a typology of collaborative watershed groups: citizen-based, agency-based, and mixed partnerships. Soc. Nat. Res. 2003, 16(5):451-460.
57. Morrison T.H., Lane M.B. The Rise and Rise of Environmental NGOs: Unforeseen risks to democratic environmental governance in Australia. Paper presented to the Australasian Political Studies Association Conference 2004.
58. Morrison T.H., Lane M.B., Hibbard M. Planning, governance and rural futures in Australia and the USA: revisiting the case for rural regional planning. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 2014, 58(9):1601-1616. 10.1080/09640568.2014.940514.
59. Morrison T.H., McDonald G.T., Lane M.B. Integrating natural resource management for better environmental outcomes. Aust. Geogr. 2004, 35(3):243-258.
60. Mushove P., Vogel C. Heads or tails? Stakeholder analysis as a tool for conservation area management. Glob. Environ. Change 2005, 15(3):184-198.
61. Pondy L.R. Organizational conflict: concepts and models. Adm. Sci. Quarterly 1967, 12(2):296-320.
62. Redpath S.M., Young J., Evely A., Adams W.M., Sutherland W.J., Whitehouse A., Amar A., Lambert R.A., Linnell J.D.C., Watt A., Gutierrez R.J. Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2013, 28(2):100-109.
63. Reed M. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:2417-2431.
64. Reed M., Graves A., Dandy N., Posthumus H., Hubacek K., Morris J., Prell C., Quinn C., Stringer L. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J. Environ. Manage. 2009, 90:1933-1949.
65. Rowley T.J., Moldoveanu M. When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Acad. Manage. J. 2003, 28(2):204-219.
66. Rubin M., Hewstone M. Social identity, system justification, and social dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. Pol. Psychol. 2004, 25(6):823-844.
67. Rydin Y., Pennington M. Public participation and local environmental planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local Environ. 2000, 5(2):153-169.
68. Shmueli D.F. Framing in geographical analysis of environmental conflicts: theory, methodology and three case studies. Geoforum 2008, 39:2048-2061.
69. Shmueli D.F., Elliott M., Kaufman S. Frame changes and the management of intractable conflicts. Conflict Resol. Quarterly 2007, 24(2):207-218.
70. Soma K., Vatn A. Representing the common goods-Stakeholders vs citizens. Land Use Policy 2014, 41:325-333.
71. Stern P., Dietz T., Abel T., Guagnano G., Kalof L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Research in Human Ecology 1999, 6(2):81-97.
72. Stets J., Biga C. Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology. Sociol. Theory 2003, 21(4):398-423.
73. Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, W. (Eds.) 2006. Stakeholder Di alogues in N atural R eso urces 765 M anagement: T heory and P ractice. Springer, New York; Berlin.
74. Tajfel H. Social Identity and Intergroup Relations 1982, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
75. Taylor B.M. Between argument and coercion: Social coordination in rural environmental governance. J. Rural Stud. 2010, 26:383-393.
76. Unsworth K.L., Fielding K.S. It's political: How the salience of one's political identity changes climate change beliefs and policy support. Glob. Environ. Change 2014, 27:131-137.
77. Warman, R. (2014) End of Tasmania's forest peace deal heralds more uncertainty. The Conversation, viewed 7th January 2015, . http://theconversation.com/end-of-tasmanias-forest-peace-deal-heralds-more-uncertainty-31010.
78. Welp M., de la Vega-Leinert A., Stoll-Kleemann S., Jaeger C.C. Science-based stakeholder dialogues: theories and tools. Glob. Environ. Change 2006, 16(2):170-181.
79. Wondolleck J.M., Gray B., Bryan T.A. Us versus Them: how identities and characterizations influence conflict. Environ. Practice 2003, 5:207-213.
80. Yasmi Y., Schanz H., Salim A. Manifestation of conflict escalation in natural resource management. Environ. Sci. Policy 2006, 9:538-546.
81. Zammit C., Cockfield G., Funnell S. An outcomes-based framework for evaluating natural resources management policies and programs. Project report (Project No. USQ3), Social and Institutional Research program 2000.