Until recently, governmental organizations played a dominant and decisive role in natural resource management. However, an increasing number of studies indicate that this dominant role is developing towards a more facilitating role as equal partner to improve efficiency and create a leaner state. This approach is characterized by complex collaborative relationships between various actors and sectors on multiple levels. To understand this complexity in the field of environmental management, we conducted a social network analysis of floodplain management in the Dutch Rhine delta. We charted the current interorganizational relationships between 43 organizations involved in flood protection (blue network) and nature management (green network) and explored the consequences of abolishing the central actor in these networks. The discontinuation of this actor will decrease the connectedness of actors within the blue and green network and may therefore have a large impact on the exchange of ideas and decision-making processes. Furthermore, our research shows the dependence of non-governmental actors on the main governmental organizations. It seems that the Dutch governmental organizations still have a dominant and controlling role in floodplain management. This challenges the alleged shift from a dominant government towards collaborative governance and calls for detailed analysis of actual governance.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0606-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In the last decades, populations of large carnivores have been making a spectacular return, especially in the USA and Western Europe. These population recoveries result partially from protective legislation and reintroduction programs, but possibly also from land use changes and from large carnivores adapting to human environments. Although public support for large carnivore protection seems to be growing, some stakeholders still have a negative perception of large carnivores because of their alleged negative impacts on livestock and humans. Perceptions of large carnivores are partly determined by underlying visions of nature which differ between stakeholder groups. We therefore examined the relationship between different stakeholder groups' perceptions of nature and the presence of the fox (Vulpes vulpes), and the possible establishment of the wolf (Canis lupus) and lynx (Lynx lynx) in a Dutch riverine landscape. Stakeholder groups comprised the general public, farmers, scientists and nature conservationists. Although perceptions of large carnivores differed significantly across the stakeholder groups, public support for large carnivores was generally higher than expected. Farmers show the most negative perception, especially regarding the wolf and lynx. This is related to their vision 123Biodivers Conserv (2017) 26:1723-1743 DOI 10.1007/s10531-017-1329 of nature, which is more strongly aligned with mastery over nature compared to other stakeholder groups. Scientists, prominent adherers of stewardship of nature, appear to have the most positive perception of large carnivores. Despite these differences in visions of nature, respondents generally adhere to the stewardship of nature relationship. This could be a good starting point to find common ground when disputes arise over large carnivores.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Adapting densely populated deltas to the combined impacts of climate change and socioeconomic developments presents a major challenge for their sustainable development in the 21st century. Decisions for the adaptations require an overview of cost and benefits and the number of stakeholders involved, which can be used in stakeholder discussions. Therefore, we quantified the trade-offs of common measures to compensate for an increase in discharge and sea level rise on the basis of relevant, but inexhaustive, quantitative variables. We modeled the largest delta distributary of the Rhine River with adaptation scenarios driven by (1) the choice of seven measures, (2) the areas owned by the two largest stakeholders (LS) versus all stakeholders (AS) based on a priori stakeholder preferences, and (3) the ecological or hydraulic design principle. We evaluated measures by their efficiency in flood hazard reduction, potential biodiversity, number of stakeholders as a proxy for governance complexity, and measure implementation cost. We found that only floodplain lowering over the whole study area can offset the altered hydrodynamic boundary conditions; for all other measures, additional dike raising is required. LS areas comprise low hanging fruits for water level lowering due to the governance simplicity and hydraulic efficiency. Natural management of meadows (AS), after roughness smoothing and floodplain lowering, represents the optimum combination between potential biodiversity and flood hazard lowering, as it combines a high potential biodiversity with a relatively low hydrodynamic roughness. With this concept, we step up to a multidisciplinary, quantitative multi-parametric, and multi-objective optimization and support the negotiations among stakeholders in the decision-making process.