Research on the adoption of rural innovations is reviewed and interpreted through a cross-disciplinary lens to provide practical guidance for research, extension and policy relating to conservation practices. Adoption of innovations by landholders is presented as a dynamic learning process. Adoption depends on a range of personal, social, cultural and economic factors, as well as on characteristics of the innovation itself. Adoption occurs when the landholder perceives that the innovation in question will enhance the achievement of their personal goals. A range of goals is identifiable among landholders, including economic, social and environmental goals. Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they have a high ‘relative advantage’ (perceived superiority to the idea or practice that it supersedes), and when they are readily trialable (easy to test and learn about before adoption). Non-adoption or low adoption of a number of conservation practices is readily explicable in terms of their failure to provide a relative advantage (particularly in economic terms) or a range of difficulties that landholders may have in trialing them.

No abstract

Adaptive management is an approach to managing natural resources that emphasizes learning from the implementation of policies and strategies. Adaptive management appears to offer a solution to the management gridlock caused by increasing complexity and uncertainty. The concept of adaptive management has been embraced by natural resource managers worldwide, but there are relatively few published examples of adaptive management in use. In this article, we explore two watershed management projects in southeastern Australia to better understand the potential of adaptive management in regional scale programs through qualitative, case study-based investigation. The program logic of one case implies the use of passive adaptive management, whereas the second case claims to be based on active adaptive management. Data were created using participant observation, semistructured interviews with individuals and groups, and document review. Using thematic content and metaphor analysis to explore the case data, we found that each case was successful as an implementation project. However, the use of both passive and active adaptive management was constrained by deeply entrenched social norms and institutional frameworks. We identified seven "imperatives" that guided the behavior of project stakeholders, and that have consequences for the use of adaptive management. Reference to recent evaluations of the Adaptive Management Areas of the Pacific Northwest of the United States suggests that some of these imperatives and their consequences have broad applicability. The implications of our findings are discussed, and suggestions for improving the outcomes of regional scale adaptive management are provided.

No abstract

Environmental modelling is transitioning from the traditional paradigm that focuses on the model and its quantitative performance to a more holistic paradigm that recognises successful model-based outcomes are closely tied to undertaking modelling as a social process, not just as a technical procedure. This paper redefines evaluation as a multi-dimensional and multi-perspective concept, and proposes a more complete framework for identifying and measuring the effectiveness of modelling that serves the new paradigm. Under this framework, evaluation considers a broader set of success criteria, and emphasises the importance of contextual factors in determining the relevance and outcome of the criteria. These evaluation criteria are grouped into eight categories: project efficiency, model accessibility, credibility, saliency, legitimacy, satisfaction, application, and impact. Evaluation should be part of an iterative and adaptive process that attempts to improve model-based outcomes and foster pathways to better futures.

No abstract

The region has become a significant scale of governance for the implementation of public policy, including natural resource management (NRM). A community-based regional NRM governance model has been adopted by the Australian government in partnership with Australian state and territory governments. There have been persuasive advocates of this approach both within community organisations and government. Proponents point to advantages such as the capacity to integrate across social, environmental and economic issues; improved investment efficiency; ability to establish appropriate power-sharing and partnership arrangements; better conversion of planning products into on-ground outcomes; and community learning and capacity building. However, concerns have also been raised in the academic literature regarding insufficient devolution of power, lack of downward accountability, exclusion of some stakeholders from decision making, and inadequate vertical and horizontal integration. We interviewed representatives from each of the governance levels (national, state, regional) to examine these concerns, and in doing so identify the strengths and challenges of the Australian experiment with devolved NRM governance. We synthesise the interview data with insights from the literature and make observations on the current state of Australian NRM governance. From this analysis, we identify lessons from the Australian experience to inform the development of multi-level environmental governance systems.

No abstract