Using social network analysis to identify key stakeholders in agricultural biodiversity governance and related land-use decisions at regional and local level

Ecology and Society

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2016, Pages

  Hauck, Jennifer ^a,b   Schmidt, Jenny ^a   Werner, Anja ^c,d  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^b CoKnow Consulting Coproducing Knowledge for Sustainability ^*  (Germany)

^c Ökolöwe Umweltbund Leipzig e V   (Germany)

^d Grüne Liga Sachsen e V   (Germany)

Author keywords

Actor analysis; Common agricultural policy; Coproduction of knowledge; Green infrastructure; Net map; Stakeholder analysis

Indexed keywords

AGROECOLOGY; BIODIVERSITY; COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; EUROPEAN COMMISSION; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; LAND USE PLANNING; LOCAL PLANNING; NETWORK ANALYSIS; REGIONAL PLANNING; SOCIAL NETWORK; STAKEHOLDER;

EID: 84976603083     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5751/ES-08596-210249     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aberman, N.-L., M. Johnson, K. Droppelmann, E. Schiffer, R. Birner, and P. Gaff. 2012. Mapping the contemporary fertilizer policy landscape in Malawi. A guide for policy researchers. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01204. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.
2. Beilin, R., N. T. Reichelt, B. J. King, A. Long, and S. Cam. 2013. Transition landscapes and social networks: examining on-gound community resilience and its implications for policy settings in multiscalar systems. Ecology and Society 18(2):30. http://dx.doi. org/10.5751/es-05360-180230
3. Bell, A. R., N.-L. Aberman, F. Zaidi, and B. Wielgosz. 2013. Progress of constitutional change and irrigation management transfer in Pakistan: insights from a net-map exercise. Water International 38:515-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2013.827893
4. Bellotti, E. 2015. Qualitative networks: mixed methods in sociological research. Routledge, London, UK.
5. Borg, R., A. Toikka, and E. Primmer. 2015. Social capital and governance: a social network analysis of forest biodiversity collaboration in Central Finland. Forest Policy and Economics 50:90-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.06.008
6. Brandes, U., and D. Wagner. 2004. Analysis and visualization of social networks. Pages 321-340 in M. Jünger and P. Mutzel, editors. Graph drawing software. Springer, Berlin, Germany. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18638-7_15
7. Bryson, J. M. 2004. What to do when stakeholders matter. Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review 6(1):21-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719030410001675722
8. Calvet-Mir, L., S. Maestre-Andrés, J. L. Molina, and J. van den Bergh. 2015. Participation in protected areas: a social network case study in Catalonia, Spain. Ecology and Society 20(4):45. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/es-07989-200445
9. Campbell, N., E. Schiffer, A. Buxbaum, E. McLean, C. Perry, and T. M. Sullivan. 2014. Taking knowledge for health the extra mile: participatory evaluation of a mobile phone intervention for community health workers in Malawi. Global Health: Science and Practice 2(1):23-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/ghsp-d-13-00141
10. Cash, D. W., W. Adger, F. Berkes, P. Garden, L. Lebel, P. Olsson, L. Pritchard, and O. Young. 2006. Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society 11(2):8. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol11/iss2/art8/
11. European Commission (EC). 2013a. Technical information on green infrastructure (GI). Commission staff working document. Accompanying the document. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Green Infrastructure (GI)-Enhancing Europe's Natural Capital. COM(2013) 249 final. EC, Brussels, Belgium. [online] URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/ PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013SC0155&from=EN
12. European Commission (EC). 2013b. Green infrastructure (GI)-enhancing Europe's natural capital. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2013) 249 final. EC, Brussels, Belgium. [online] URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar: d41348f2-01d5-4abe-b817-4c73e6f1b2df.0014.03/DOC_1&format= PDF
13. Fuhse, J., and S. Mützel. 2011. Tackling connections, structure, and meaning in networks: quantitative and qualitative methods in sociological network research. Quality & Quantity 45:1067-1089. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9492-3
14. Gamper, M., M. Schönhuth, and M. Kronenwett. 2012. Bringing qualitative and quantitative data together: collecting network data with the help of the software tool VennMaker. Pages 193-214 in M. Safar, and K. A. Mahdi, editors. Social networking and community behavior modeling: qualitative and quantitative measures. IGI Global, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA. http://dx. doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61350-444-4.ch011
15. Hauck, J. 2010. Managing social-ecological systems for resilience: fisheries in the small reservoirs of northern Ghana. ZEF-Ecology and Development Series No. 75. Bonn, Germany.
16. Hauck, J., C. Stein, E. Schiffer, and M. Vandewalle. 2015. Seeing the forest and the trees: facilitating participatory network planning in environmental governance. Global Environmental Change 35:400-410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.022
17. Hermans, L. M. 2008. Exploring the promise of actor analysis for environmental policy analysis: lessons from four cases in water resources management. Ecology and Society 13(1):21. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art21/
18. Herz, A., L. Peters, and I. Truschkat. 2015. How to do qualitative strukturale Analyse? Die qualitative Interpretation von Netzwerkkarten und erzählgenerierenden Interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 16(1):9. [online] URL: http://www. qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2092/3746
19. Ingold, K. 2014. How involved are they really? A comparative network analysis of the institutional drivers of local actor inclusion. Land Use Policy 39:376-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.landusepol.2014.01.013
20. Kettunen, M., E. Apostolopoulou, D. Bormpoudakis, J. Cent, A. Letourneau, M. Koivulehto, R. Paloniemi, M. Grodzińska-Jurczak, R. Mathevet, A. Scott, and S. Borgström. 2014. EU green infrastructure: opportunities and the need for addressing scales. in K. Henle, S. Potts, W. Kunin, Y. Matsinos, J. Simila, J. Pantis, V. Grobelnik, L. Penev, and J. Settele, editors. Scaling in ecology and biodiversity conservation. Advanced Books. Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria. http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/ab.e1169
21. Kok, K., and T. A. Veldkamp. 2011. Scale and governance: conceptual considerations and practical implications. Ecology and Society 16(2):23. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol16/iss2/art23/
22. Lastra-Bravo, X. B., C. Hubbard, G. Garrod, and A. Tolón-Becerra. 2015. What drives farmers' participation in EU agrienvironmental schemes?: results from a qualitative meta-analysis. Environmental Science & Policy 54:1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envsci.2015.06.002
23. Lienert, J., F. Schnetzer, and K. Ingold. 2013. Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. Journal of Environmental Management 125:134-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvman.2013.03.052
24. Newig, J., D. Günther, and C. Pahl-Wostl. 2010. Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecology and Society 15(4):24. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/ art24/
25. Prager, K., and U. J. Nagel. 2008. Participatory decision making on agri-environmental programmes: a case study from Sachsen-Anhalt (Germany). Land Use Policy 25(1):106-115. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2007.03.003
26. Prell, C. 2012. Social network analysis: history, theory and methodology. Sage, London, UK.
27. Prell, C., K. Hubacek, C. Quinn, and M. Reed. 2008. Who's in the social network? When stakeholders influence data analysis. Systemic Practice and Action Research 21(6):443-458. http://dx. doi.org/10.1007/s11213-008-9105-9
28. Prell, C., K. Hubacek, and M. Reed. 2009. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 22(6):501-518. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/08941920802199202
29. Prell, C., M. Reed, and K. Hubacek. 2011. Social network analysis for stakeholder selection and the links to social learning and adaptive co-management. Pages 95-118 in Ö. Bodin, and C. Prell, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/cbo9780511894985.006
30. Primmer, E., R. Paloniemi, R. Mathevet, E. Apostolopoulou, J. Tzanopoulos, I. Ring, M. Kettunen, J. Similä, J. Cent, M. Grodzińska-Jurczak, T. Koellner, P. Antunes, J. D. Pantis, S. G. Potts, and R. Santos. 2014. An approach to analysing scalesensitivity and scale-effectiveness of governance in biodiversity conservation. Pages 241-262 in F. Padt, P. Opdam, N. Polman, and C. Termeer, editors. Scale-sensitive governance of the environment. John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, UK. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/9781118567135.ch15
31. 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
32. Reed, M. S., A. Graves, N. Dandy, H. Posthumus, K. Hubacek, J. Morris, C. Prell, C. H. Quinn, and L. C. Stringer. 2009. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management 90(5):1933-1949. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2009.01.001
33. Repohl, M., J. Schmidt, J. Hauck, and S. Weiland. 2015. Analyse des Politikintegrationspotentials der EU-Strategie für Grüne Infrastruktur-untersucht am Beispiel der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik der EU. UFZ-Diskussionspapier 10/2015. Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung-UFZ, Leipzig, Germany. [online] URL: http://www.ufz.de/index.php?de=14487
34. Schiffer, E., and J. Hauck. 2010. Net-Map: collecting social network data and facilitating network learning through participatory influence network mapping. Field Methods 22 (3):231-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822x10374798
35. Scott, J. 2000. Social network analysis: a handbook. Sage, London, UK.
36. Steen-Adams, M. M., N. Langston, M. D. O. Adams, and D. J. Mladenoff. 2015. Historical framework to explain long-term coupled human and natural system feedbacks: application to a multiple-ownership forest landscape in the northern Great Lakes region, USA. Ecology and Society 20(1):28. http://dx.doi. org/10.5751/es-06930-200128
37. Stein, C., J. Barron, L. Nigussie, B. Gedif, T. Amsalu, and S. Langan. 2014. Advancing the water-energy-food nexus: social networks and institutional interplay in the Blue Nile. WLE Research for Development (R4D) Learning Series 2. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. [online] URL: https://www.sei-international.org/publications? pid=2573 http://dx.doi.org/10.5337/2014.223
38. Sutherland, L.-A., D. Gabriel, L. Hathaway-Jenkins, U. Pascual, U. Schmutz, D. Rigby, R. Godwin, S. M. Sait, R. Sakrabani, W. E. Kunin, T. G. Benton, and S. Stagl. 2012. The "neighbourhood effect": a multidisciplinary assessment of the case for farmer coordination in agri-environmental programmes. Land Use Policy 29(3):502-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.09.003
39. Wasserman, S., and K. Faust. 1994. Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511815478
40. Welp, M., A. de la Vega-Leinert, S. Stoll-Kleemann, and C. C. Jaeger. 2006. Science-based stakeholder dialogues: theories and tools. Global Environmental Change 16(2):170-181. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.12.002
41. Wood, B. A., H. T. Blair, D. I. Gray, P. D. Kemp, P. R. Kenyon, S. T. Morris, and A. M. Sewell. 2014. Agricultural science in the wild: a social network analysis of farmer knowledge exchange. PLoS ONE 9(8):e105203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0105203
42. Young, J. C., A. Jordan, K. R. Searle, A. Butler, D. S. Chapman, P. Simmons, and A. D. Watt. 2013. Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation? Biological Conservation 158:359-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.018
43. Young, J., A. Watt, P. Nowicki, D. Alard, J. Clitherow, K. Henle, R. Johnson, E. Laczko, D. McCracken, S. Matouch, J. Niemela, and C. Richards. 2005. Towards sustainable land use: identifying and managing the conflicts between human activities and biodiversity conservation in Europe. Biodiversity and Conservation 14(7):1641-1661. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0536-z