Adaptive governance, ecosystem management, and natural capital

Schultz, Lisen; Folke, Carl; Österblom, Henrik; Olsson, Per

doi:10.1073/pnas.1406493112

Cited by 272 publications

(219 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

186

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1). By way of schematic comparison, we think of adaptive governance as a complex adaptive systems approach (Levin 1999, Schultz et al 2015 in contrast to critical institutionalism, which we instead label a complex embedded systems approach (Peters 1987, Cleaver 2012.…”

Section: Two Evolving Schools Of Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding process, power, and meaning in adaptive governance: a critical institutional reading

Cleaver¹,

Whaley²

2018

E&S

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Adaptive governance continues to attract considerable interest in academic and policy circles. This is with good reason, given its increasing relevance in a globalized and changing world. At the same time, adaptive governance is the subject of a growing body of critical literature concerned with the ways in which it theorizes the social world. In this paper, we respond to these critiques, which we see as broadly concerning the process, power, and meaning dimensions of environmental and natural resource governance. We argue that adaptive governance theory would benefit from engaging constructively with critical institutionalism, a school of thought that, like adaptive governance, has one foot in commons scholarship. Critical institutionalism conceives of institutional change as a process of bricolage, where those involved piece together new arrangements from the resources to hand. This approach highlights the interplay of structure and agency, and illuminates how new governance arrangements form and come to be seen as natural in dynamic relation to the wider social and cultural landscape. We consider how these arrangements tend to reflect dominant power relations, whilst the plural nature of social life also provides scope for adaptation and transformative change.

show abstract

Section: Two Evolving Schools Of Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding process, power, and meaning in adaptive governance: a critical institutional reading

Cleaver¹,

Whaley²

2018

E&S

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The second day focused on opportunities and started with a scientific and empirically based understanding of how policy entrepreneurs can navigate processes of change associated with ecosystem management (21), with a particular focus on how industry actors in seafood had reduced illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing in the Southern Ocean (21). Presentations from advisors followed, and included information on key innovations in the industry, market trends, and policy developments, and a discussion about corporate sustainability leadership in other sectors.…”

Section: The First Dialogue: Collaborative Learning In Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Emergence of a global science–business initiative for ocean stewardship

Österblom

Jouffray

Folke

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ocean represents a fundamental source of micronutrients and protein for a growing world population. Seafood is a highly traded and sought after commodity on international markets, and is critically dependent on healthy marine ecosystems. A global trend of wild stocks being overfished and in decline, as well as multiple sustainability challenges associated with a rapid growth of aquaculture, represent key concerns in relation to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Existing efforts aimed to improve the sustainability of seafood production have generated important progress, primarily at the local and national levels, but have yet to effectively address the global challenges associated with the ocean. This study highlights the importance of transnational corporations in enabling transformative change, and thereby contributes to advancing the limited understanding of large-scale private actors within the sustainability science literature. We describe how we engaged with large seafood producers to coproduce a global science-business initiative for ocean stewardship. We suggest that this initiative is improving the prospects for transformative change by providing novel links between science and business, between wild-capture fisheries and aquaculture, and across geographical space. We argue that scientists can play an important role in facilitating change by connecting knowledge to action among global actors, while recognizing risks associated with such engagement. The methods developed through this case study contribute to identifying key competences in sustainability science and hold promises for other sectors as well.coproduction | governance | learning | resilience | transformation S ustainability science is becoming a mainstream scientific approach for understanding and addressing the global and interconnected challenges currently facing humanity (1, 2). A key component of sustainability science is to collaborate with actors outside of academia to codesign and codevelop an understanding of the challenges and their corresponding solutions (2, 3). Local and regional examples illustrate how sustainability scientists have engaged with society as change agents (4, 5) and the challenges associated with such engagement (3,4,6,7). In this context, however, there has been limited attention devoted to large-scale private actors (8). Existing studies primarily focus on how major brands invest in-and benefit from-sustainability initiatives (9), or analyze how and when voluntary commitments to sustainability may influence corporate behavior (10, 11). Little is known about how scientists can engage with corporations and how knowledge can be transferred from science to action by the private sector.In the following, we present our experience from a coproduction process with large transnational seafood corporations, aimed at stimulating transformative change in the seafood industry, and the subsequent emergence of a global initiative for ocean stewardship. Here, ocean stewardship is viewed as an adaptive and lear...

show abstract

“…It is important to understand the central role of human behavior and collective action in determining societal outcomes, paying special attention to the inherent conflict, or social dilemma(s), involved in human governance . The fundamental problem, from a collective action standpoint, is creating governance systems that enable otherwise self-interested actors, e.g., political factions and citizens, to cooperatively solve societal problems, despite differences of opinion, societal standing, and Ecology and Society 22(1): 32 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss1/art32/ ability (e.g., Schultz et al 2015). Rather than look solely to the centralized government, Ostrom Institutional Analysis seeks to understand human capacity for self-organization, in complex governance systems: communities (Ostrom 1990(Ostrom , 1998, municipalities (Ostrom 2000), and federations (Ostrom 1971, see also, Schlager et al 2011.…”

Section: Institutional Design Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal and institutional foundations of adaptive environmental governance

DeCaro¹,

Chaffin²,

Schlager³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Legal and institutional structures fundamentally shape opportunities for adaptive governance of environmental resources at multiple ecological and societal scales. Properties of adaptive governance are widely studied. However, these studies have not resulted in consolidated frameworks for legal and institutional design, limiting our ability to promote adaptation and social-ecological resilience. We develop an overarching framework that describes the current and potential role of law in enabling adaptation. We apply this framework to different social-ecological settings, centers of activity, and scales, illustrating the multidimensional and polycentric nature of water governance. Adaptation typically emerges organically among multiple centers of agency and authority in society as a relatively self-organized or autonomous process marked by innovation, social learning, and political deliberation. This self-directed and emergent process is difficult to create in an exogenous, top-down fashion. However, traditional centers of authority may establish enabling conditions for adaptation using a suite of legal, economic, and democratic tools to legitimize and facilitate self-organization, coordination, and collaboration across scales. The principles outlined here provide preliminary legal and institutional foundations for adaptive environmental governance, which may inform institutional design and guide future scholarship.

show abstract

Adaptive governance, ecosystem management, and natural capital

Cited by 272 publications

References 56 publications

Understanding process, power, and meaning in adaptive governance: a critical institutional reading

Understanding process, power, and meaning in adaptive governance: a critical institutional reading

Emergence of a global science–business initiative for ocean stewardship

Legal and institutional foundations of adaptive environmental governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About