Can scenario-planning support community-based natural resource management? Experiences from three countries in latin america

Ecology and Society

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2015, Pages

  Waylen, Kerry A ^a   Martin Ortega, Julia ^a,b   Blackstock, Kirsty L ^a   Brown, Iain ^a   Avendaño Uribe, Bryan E ^c   Basurto Hernández, Saúl ^d,e   Bertoni, María Belén ^f   Bustos, M Lujan ^g,h   Cruz Bayer, Alejandra Xóchitl ^d   Escalante Semerena, Roberto Ivan ^d   Farah Quijano, Maria Adelaida ⁱ   Ferrelli, Federico ^h,j   Fidalgo, Guillermo Luis ^k   Hernández López, Israel ^l   Huamantinco Cisneros, María Andrea ^g   London, Silvia ^h,m   Maya Vélez, Diana L ^c   Ocampo Díaz, Natalia ^c   Ortiz Guerrero, Cesar E ^c   Pascale, Juan Carlos ^h   Perillo, Gerardo M E ^g,h   Piccolo, M Cintia ^g,h   Pinzón Martínez, Lina N ^c   Rojas, Mara L ^h,m   Scordo, Facundo ^g,h   Vitale, Valeria ^h,k   Zilio, Mariana I ^h,n   more..

^a SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD JAVERIANA   (Colombia)

^d UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES   (Argentina)

^g INSTITUTO ARGENTINO DE OCEANOGRAFÍA   (Argentina)

^h UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DEL SUR   (Argentina)

ⁱ PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^j Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas   (Argentina)

^k Fundación AquaMarina   (Argentina)

^l Fundación Aquamarina ^*  (Argentina)

^m Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas and Sociales del Sur   (Argentina)

ⁿ Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas and Sociales del Sur CONICET UNS   (Argentina)

more..

Author keywords

Argentina; Climate change; Colombia; Community based conservation; Futures thinking; Mexico; Participation; Scenario methods; Wicked problems

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; CLIMATE CHANGE; COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; FUTURE PROSPECT; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PLANNING METHOD; POLICY APPROACH;

ARGENTINA; COLOMBIA; LATIN AMERICA; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA];

EID: 84953268624     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5751/ES-07926-200428     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Armitage, D. 2005. Adaptive capacity and community-based natural resource management. Environmental Management 35 (6):703-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0076-z
2. Beach, D. M., and D. A. Clark. 2015. Scenario planning during rapid ecological change: lessons and perspectives from workshops with southwest Yukon wildlife managers. Ecology and Society 20 (1):61. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/es-07379-200161
3. Bengston, D. N., G. H. Kubik, and P. C. Bishop. 2012. Strengthening environmental foresight: potential contributions of futures research. Ecology and Society 17(2):10. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04794-170210
4. Best, A., and B. Holmes. 2010. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice 6(2):145-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426410X502284
5. Börjeson, L., M. Höjer, K.-H. Dreborg, T. Ekvall, and G. Finnveden. 2006. Scenario types and techniques: towards a user’s guide. Futures 38(7):723-739. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2005.12.002
6. Bradfield, R., G. Wright, G. Burt, G. Cairns, and K. Van Der Heijden. 2005. The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. Futures 37(8):795-812. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2005.01.003
7. Checkland, P. 1999. Systems thinking. Pages 45-56 in W. Currie and B. Galliers, editors. Rethinking management information systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
8. Delgado Serrano, M. M., P. Ramos, A. Nekhay, P. Vanwildemeersch, P. Ambrosio, C. Riccioli, R. Navarro, J. Berbel, and J. Icely. 2013. D1.1. Locally-adapted tools for the characterization of social-ecological-systems. Deliverable 1.1 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/COMET-LA%20D1.1.pdf
9. Dressler, W., B. Büscher, M. Schoon, D. Brockington, T. Hayes, C. A. Kull, J. McCarthy, and K. Shrestha. 2010. From hope to crisis and back again? A critical history of the global CBNRM narrative. Environmental Conservation 37(1):5-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0376892910000044
10. Enfors, E. I., L. J. Gordon, G. D. Peterson, and D. Bossio. 2008. Making investments in dryland development work: participatory scenario planning in the Makanya catchment, Tanzania. Ecology and Society 13(2):42. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art42/
11. Escalante Semerena, R. I., S. Basurto Hernández, S. I. Brugger Jakob, Y. Lara Padilla, F. Chapela, and I. Hernández López. 2012. Deliverable D3.1: stakeholders’ vision on the socio-ecological system (SES) situation in Mexico. A case study. Deliverable 3.1 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/D%203.1._Comaltepec.pdf
12. Escalante Semerena, R. I., S. Basurto Hernández, I. Hernández López, and A. R. Marneau Acevedo. 2014. D3.3: stakeholder visions and perspectives on the future from the Santiago Comaltepec case study in Mexico. Deliverable 3.3 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico. [online] URL: http://www. comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/Deli_3.3.pdf
13. Fabricus, C., E. Koch, S. Turner, and H. Magome, editors. 2004. Rights resources and rural development: community-based natural resource management in Southern Africa. Earthscan, London, UK.
14. Farah, M. A., E. Garrido, D. L. Maya, C. Ortiz, and P. Ramos. 2012. Deliverable D2.1: stakeholder vision on the socio-ecological system situation in Colombia case study. Deliverable 2.1 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/D%202.1.stakeholder%20view%20on%20SES%20deliverable%20COLOMBIA%2014%20SEPT%202012%20final.pdf
15. Farah, M. A., D. L. Maya, C. Ortiz, N. Ocampo, B. Avendaño, L. Pinzon, and P. Ramos. 2014. D2.3: stakeholder vision on perspectives for the future in the Colombia case study. Deliverable 2.3 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/Deli_2.3.pdf
16. Farrell, L. A. 2010. Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into urban development: lessons from two South African cities. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
17. Game, E. T., E. Meijaard, D. Sheil, and E. McDonald-Madden. 2014. Conservation in a wicked complex world: challenges and solutions. Conservation Letters 7(3):271-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/conl.12050
18. Godet, M. 2006. Creating futures. Scenario planning as a strategic management tool. Economica, Paris, France
19. Hagmann, J. R., E. Chuma, K. Murwira, M. Connolly, and P. Ficarelli. 2002. Success factors in integrated natural resource management R&D: lessons from practice. Conservation Ecology 5(2): 29. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art29
20. Haller, T., M. Galvin, P. Meroka, J. Alca, and A. Alvarez. 2008. Who gains from community conservation? Intended and unintended costs and benefits of participative approaches in Peru and Tanzania. Journal of Environment & Development 17 (2):118-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1070496508316853
21. Hunt, D. V. L., D. R. Lombardi, S. Atkinson, A. R. G. Barber, M. Barnes, C. T. Boyko, J. Brown, J. Bryson, D. Butler, S. Caputo, M. Caserio, R. Coles, R. F. D. Cooper, R. Farmani, M. Gaterell, J. Hale, C. Hales, C. N. Hewitt, L. Jankovic, I. Jefferson, J. Leach, A. R. MacKenzie, F. A. Memon, J. P. Sadler, C. Weingaertner, J. D. Whyatt, and C. D. F. Rogers. 2012. Scenario archetypes: converging rather than diverging themes. Sustainability 4 (4):740-772. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su4040740
22. Kahane, A., and K. van der Heijden. 2012. Transformative scenario planning: working together to change the future. Berrett- Koehler, San Francisco, California, USA.
23. Lindenmayer, D. B., and G. E. Likens. 2009. Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24(9):482-486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.005
24. London, S., M. Recalde, and M. Rojas. 2012. Stakeholder vision on the social-ecological-system situation in Argentina case study. Deliverable 4.1 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Universidad Nacional del Sur, Bahía Blanca, Argentina. [online] URL: http://comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/D%204.1.DELIVERABLE%20ARGENTINA%20FINAL.pdf
25. Lynam, T., W. De Jong, D. Sheil, T. Kusumanto, and K. Evans. 2007. A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision making in natural resources management. Ecology and Society 12(1):5. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art5/
26. Martin-Ortega, J., K. Waylen, J. P. Martin-del-Molino, K. Blackstock, and I. Brown. 2014. D5.1: participatory report on synthesised scenarios: summary and comparison of the scenario building processes and outcomes in the three case studies. Deliverable 5.1 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, UK. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/Deli_5.1.pdf
27. Méndez-López, M. E., E. García-Frapolli, D. J. Pritchard, M. C. Sánchez González, I. Ruiz-Mallén, L. Porter-Bolland, and V. Reyes-Garcia. 2014. Local participation in biodiversity conservation initiatives: a comparative analysis of different models in South East Mexico. Journal of Environmental Management 145:321-329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.06.028
28. Mietzner, D., and G. Reger. 2004. Scenario approaches - history, differences, advantages and disadvantages. Pages 48-62 in Proceedings of the EU-US Scientific Seminar: New Technology Foresight, Forecasting & Assessment Methods (Seville, Spain, 13-14 May 2004). Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Seville, Spain. [online] URL: http://foresight.jrc.ec.europa.eu/fta/papers/Session%201%20Methodological%20Selection/Scenario%20Approaches.pdf
29. The Millennium Project. 2010. Futures studies around the world: Latin America 2030. In J. C. Glenn, T. J. Gordon, and E. Florescu, editors. 2010 State of future [CD-ROM]. The Millennium Project of the American Council for the United Nations University, Washington, D.C., USA.
30. Mistry, J., C. Tschirhart, C. Verwer, R. Glastra, O. Davis, D. Jafferally, L. Haynes, R. Benjamin, G. Albert, R. Xavier, I. Bovolo, and A. Berardi. 2014. Our common future? Cross-scalar scenario analysis for social-ecological sustainability of the Guiana Shield, South America. Environmental Science & Policy 44:126-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.05.007
31. Moser, S. C. 2010. Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1(1):31-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.11
32. Mwangi, E., and A. Wardell. 2012. Multi-level governance of forest resources (editorial to the special feature). International Journal of the Commons 6(2):79-103.
33. Nakicenovic, N., J. Alcamo, G. Davis, B. de Vries, J. Fenhann, S. Gaffin, K. Gregory, A. Grübler, T. Yong Jung, T. Kram, E. Lebre La Rovere, L. Michaelis, S. Mori, T. Morita, W. Pepper, H. Pitcher, L. Price, K. Riahi, A. Roehrl, H.-H. Rogner, A. Sankovski, M. Schlesinger, P. Shukla, S. Smith, R. Swart, S. van Rooijen, N. Victor, and Z. Dadi. 2000. Special report on emissions scenarios: a special report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
34. Ostrom, E. 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325 (5939):419-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133
35. Ostrom, E., and M. Cox. 2010. Moving beyond panaceas: a multi- tiered diagnostic approach for social-ecological analysis. Environmental Conservation 37(4):451-463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000834
36. Pert, P. L., R. Hill, K. J. Williams, E. K. Harding, T. O’Malley, R. A. Grace, A. P. Dale, I. Bohnet, and J. R. L. A. Butler. 2010. Scenarios for community-based approaches to biodiversity conservation: a case study from the Wet Tropics, Queensland, Australia. Australian Geographer 41:285-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2010.498037
37. Peterson, G. D., G. S. Cumming, and S. R. Carpenter. 2003. Scenario planning: a tool for conservation in an uncertain world. Conservation Biology 17(2):358-366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01491.x
38. Presentan proyecto de reforma a la Ley de Pesca Artesanal que rige en Rio Negro. 2015. Lo Principal. 10 May;Sect. Río Negro. [online] URL: http://www.loprincipal.com.ar/presentan-proyecto-de-reforma-a-la-ley-de-pesca-artesanal-que-rige-en-rio-negro/
39. Reed, M. S. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation 141 (10):2417-2431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014
40. Richards, C., K. Blackstock, and C. Carter. 2007. Practical approaches to participation. SERG Policy Brief No. 1. Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen, UK. [online] URL: http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/ruralsustainability/SERG%20PB1%20final.pdf
41. Rogers, K. H., R. Luton, H. Biggs, R. Biggs, S. Blignaut, A. G. Choles, C. G. Palmer, and P. Tangwe. 2013. Fostering complexity thinking in action research for change in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 18(2):31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05330-180231
42. Rojas, M., M. Zilio, S. London, M. L. Bustos, M. A. Huamantinco Cisneros, F. Scordo, F. Ferrelli, G. M. E. Perillo, M. C. Piccolo, V. Vitale, P. Bordino, L. Berninsone, and J. C. Pascale. 2014. D4.3: stakeholder visions and perspectives on the future from the Argentina case study. Deliverable 4.3 of the project COMET-LA (Community-Based Management of Environmental Challenges in Latin America), Universidad Nacional del Sur, Bahía Blanca, Argentina. [online] URL: http://www.comet-la.eu/images/comet_la/deliverebles/Deli_4.3.pdf
43. Rounsevell, M. D. A., and M. J. Metzger. 2010. Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1 (4):606-619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.63
44. Saunders, F. P. 2014. The promise of common pool resource theory and the reality of commons projects. International Journal of the Commons 8(2):636-656.
45. Scholte, P. 2003. Immigration: a potential time bomb under the integration of conservation and development. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 32(1):58-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447-32.1.58
46. Schreckenberg, K., I. Camargo, K. Withnall, C. Corrigan, P. Franks, D. Roe, L. Scherl, and V. Richardson. 2010. Social assessment of conservation initiatives: a review of rapid methodologies. Natural Resource Issues No. 22. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK. [online] URL: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/14589IIED.pdf
47. Schwerdt, J. I. 2015. La ley de Pesca Artesanal, con nuevo impulso en Diputados. La Neuva (Bahía Blanca, Argentina). 31 May;Sect. The region. [online] URL: http://www.lanueva.com/la-region-impresa/814638/la-ley-de-pesca-artesanal--con-nuevo-impulso-en-diputados.html
48. Shackleton, C. M., T. J. Willis, K. Brown, and N. V. C. Polunin. 2010. Reflecting on the next generation of models for community- based natural resources management. Environmental Conservation 37(1):1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000366
49. Stem, C., R. Margoluis, N. Salafsky, and M. Brown. 2005. Monitoring and evaluation in conservation: a review of trends and approaches. Conservation Biology 19(2):295-309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00594.x
50. van Notten, P. W. F., J. Rotmans, M. B. A. van Asselt, and D. S. Rothman. 2003. An updated scenario typology. Futures 35 (5):423-443. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(02)00090-3
51. Waylen, K. A., A. Fischer, P. J. K. McGowan, and E. J. Milner- Gulland. 2013. Deconstructing community for conservation: why simple assumptions are not sufficient. Human Ecology 41 (4):575-585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9594-8
52. Waylen, K. A., J. Martin Ortega, K. L. Blackstock, and I. Brown. 2014. The COMET-LA scenario-planning methodology. The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, UK. [online] URL: http://www.hutton.ac.uk/sites/default/files/files/projects/COMET-LA%20scenario%20method.pdf
53. Western, D., S. C. Strum, and M. R. Wright, editors. 1994. Natural connections: perspectives in community-based conservation. Island, Washington, D.C., USA.
54. Wollenberg, E., D. Edmunds, and L. Buck. 2000. Using scenarios to make decisions about the future: anticipatory learning for the adaptive co-management of community forests. Landscape and Urban Planning 47(1-2):65-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00071-7
55. Wright, G., and P. Goodwin. 2009. Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability: enhancing the scenario method. International Journal of Forecasting 25(4):813-825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2009.05.019