Adaptive Management of Forest Ecosystems: Did Some Rubber Hit the Road?

Bormann, Bernard T.; Haynes, Richard W.; Martin, Jon R.

doi:10.1641/b570213

Cited by 89 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Limitations to the time frame in this study proved a challenge and prevented long-term monitoring of the uptake and impacts from implementing recommended practice changes. This has been suggested as important for providing robust evaluations of participatory processes by Bormann et al (2007). Plummer and Armitage (2007) provide a useful evaluation framework for adaptive comanagement based on three main components operating at different spatial and temporal scales: ecological, economics for sustainable livelihoods, and institutional and power processes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This helped target participant goals, ensured effective use of time (Conley and Moote, 2003) and provided a democratic and legitimate framework for exploring issues of controversy (Laurian and Shaw, 2009). It is important to note that one of the roles of the facilitator was to encourage shared leadership rather than directive leadership, a commonality found in research by Head (2007) and Bormann et al (2007). Guidelines were presented as a set of systematic methodologies (Table 1) to allow replication of this type of study in communities experiencing conflict over natural resource allocation and management where collaborative learning and problem solving could be beneficial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adaptive co-management requires a systematic and iterative approach for improving resource practices through learning from past management experiences (experiential learning, Bormann et al, 2007) and exploring new alternatives (experimental learning). This has been considered useful in situations of change and uncertainty such as forestry that typically have long term production cycles (Larsen and Nielsen, 2007).…”

Section: Adaptive Co-management To Overcome Deficiencies In Traditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has been considered useful in situations of change and uncertainty such as forestry that typically have long term production cycles (Larsen and Nielsen, 2007). It has been suggested that processes of social learning in problematic natural resource settings need to move beyond relationship and knowledge building towards adaptive coordination that fosters concerted action (Bormann et al, 2007;Steyaert and Jiggins, 2007). As such adaptive co-management can assist in the development of localised context specific diagnostic frameworks that challenge legitimacy, power relationships and identities within communities (Gaddis et al, 2009).…”

Section: Adaptive Co-management To Overcome Deficiencies In Traditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adaptive Co-management To Overcome Deficiencies In Traditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adaptive Co-management To Overcome Deficiencies In Traditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Organizational conditions have an impact on outcomes from an adaptive management paradigm. In an assessment of the Northwest Forest Plan, a large-scale environmental management project that included adaptive management, Bormann et al (2007) concluded that adaptive management can be effective if: (1) collaboration Ecology and Society 18(1): 9 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art9/ exists between scientists and managers; and (2) adaptive management is formalized as core agency business. Doremus (2001) contends that it may be possible to combine finality and flexibility via incremental decisions that can be revisited after monitoring for a period of time appropriate to the environmental resource of interest.…”

Section: Adaptive Management and Adaptive Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Resilience-based Governance of Social-Ecological Systems

Garmestani¹,

Benson²

2013

E&S

221

150

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Panarchy provides a heuristic to characterize the cross-scale dynamics of social-ecological systems and a framework for how governance institutions should behave to be compatible with the ecosystems they manage. Managing for resilience will likely require reform of law to account for the dynamics of social-ecological systems and achieve a substantive mandate that accommodates the need for adaptation. In this paper, we suggest expansive legal reform by identifying the principles of reflexive law as a possible mechanism for achieving a shift to resilience-based governance and leveraging cross-scale dynamics to provide resilience-based responses to increasingly challenging environmental conditions.

show abstract

Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management

Hessburg

Prichard

Hagmann

et al. 2021

Ecological Applications

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest landscapes across western North America (wNA) have experienced extensive changes over the last two centuries, while climatic warming has become a global reality over the last 4 decades. Resulting interactions between historical increases in forested area and density and recent rapid warming, increasing insect mortality, and wildfire burned areas, are now leading to substantial abrupt landscape alterations. These outcomes are forcing forest planners and managers to identify strategies that can modify future outcomes that are ecologically and/or socially undesirable. Past forest management, including widespread harvest of fire-and climate-tolerant large old trees and old forests, fire exclusion (both Indigenous and lightning ignitions), and highly effective wildfire suppression have contributed to the current state of wNA forests. These practices were successful at meeting short-term demands, but they match poorly to modern realities. Hagmann et al. (in press) review a century of observations and multi-scale, multi-proxy research evidence that details widespread changes in forested landscapes and wildfire regimes since the influx of European colonists. Over the preceding 10 millennia, large areas of wNA were already settled and proactively managed with intentional burning by Indigenous tribes. Prichard et al. (in press) then review the research on management practices historically applied by Indigenous tribes and currently applied by some managers to intentionally manage forests for resilient conditions. They address ten questions surrounding the application and relevance of these management practices. Here, we highlight the main findings of both papers and offer recommendations for management. We discuss progress paralysis that often occurs with strict adherence to the precautionary principle; offer insights for dealing with the common problem of irreducible uncertainty and suggestions for reframing management and policy direction; and identify key knowledge gaps and research needs.

show abstract

Adaptive Management of Forest Ecosystems: Did Some Rubber Hit the Road?

Cited by 89 publications

References 11 publications

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

A Framework for Resilience-based Governance of Social-Ecological Systems

Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About