An evaluation of environmental, institutional and socio-economic factors explaining successful conservation plan implementation in the north-central United States

Carter, Sarah K.; Januchowski‐Hartley, Stephanie R.; Pohlman, John; Bergeson, Tara L.; Pidgeon, Anna M.; Radeloff, Volker C.

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.09.013

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the evaluation of the three stakeholder engagement statements, engagement between state and non-state stakeholders was not only positive, but crucial for implementing the water quality plan, particularly because it allowed sharing information about ways to achieve the water quality outcomes. This links with the findings by Carter et al (2015) and Ulabarri (2015), who found that engagement and joint action had a positive impact on environmental outcomes. In this regard, it is important to stress that the engagement that was crucial for the 2009 Reef Plan implementation occurred at the regional and local levels.…”

Section: Positive Neutral Negativesupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Among the results presented, only six studies relied on numeric data about the ecological condition of the natural resource examined (Biddle and Koontz, 2014;Carter et al 2015;Daley, 2007;Kim et al, 2015;Meyer and Konisky, 2007;and Scott, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the stakeholder engagement category, Carter et al (2015) found that collaborating was key to implementing effective land conservation. They added that having clear targets and goals has a positive effect as it helps organisations to know what they want to achieve.…”

Section: Collaborative Governance and Environmental Outcomes: A Mixedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The impact of governance on environmental outcomes in Australian natural resource planning and management

Garcia¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study addresses the general research question of how collaborative governance has impacted on environmental outcomes in Australian natural resource planning and management. The thesis argues that the discrepancy between theoretical expectations and practical results of collaboration lies in the implementation arrangements of collaborative governance. Within these arrangements, collaboration does not occur in a 'pure' form but rather, it is mixed with other governance approaches, such as hierarchy and markets. Collaborative governance not only is 'impure', but also inconsistent, as it occurs within a multi-level setting of governing centres. This mix of governance approaches and levels lead to a range of tensions within the overall collaborative framework. As a consequence, collaborative governance fails to coordinate the different actors and levels of governance involved in environmental policy and planning to achieve improved natural resource conditions. In practice, some actors are excluded, authority or power-sharing is limited, responsibility sharing is not properly defined, and mixed implementation instruments generate conflict. This thesis focuses on the regional level of governance −represented by a set of Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions− in its interaction with federal and state levels of 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School.

show abstract

Section: Positive Neutral Negativesupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of governance on environmental outcomes in Australian natural resource planning and management

Garcia¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2014) (e.g., the success of conservation plan implementation may be spatially related to existing policy and past conservation actions [Carter et al. 2015]). Areas of success (bridges) can be stepping stones for building connectivity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping legal authority for terrestrial conservation corridors along streams

Stahl

Fremier

Cosens³

2020

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wildlife corridors aim to promote species' persistence by connecting habitat patches across fragmented landscapes. Their implementation is limited by patterns of land ownership and complicated by differences in the jurisdictional and regulatory authorities under which lands are managed. Terrestrial corridor conservation requires coordination across jurisdictions and sectors subject to site-specific overlapping sources of legal authority. Mapping spatial patterns of legal authority concurrent with habitat condition can illustrate opportunities to build or leverage capacity for connectivity conservation. Streamside areas provide pragmatic opportunities to leverage existing policy mechanisms for riverine and terrestrial habitat connectivity across boundaries. Conservation planners and practitioners can make use of these opportunities by harmonizing actions for multiple conservation outcomes. We formulated an integrative, data-driven method for mapping multiple sources of legal authority weighted by capacity for coordinating terrestrial habitat conservation along streams. We generated a map of capacity to coordinate streamside corridor protections across a wildlife habitat gap to demonstrate this approach. We combined values representing coordination capacity and naturalness to generate an integrated legal-ecological resistance map for connectivity modeling. We then computed least-cost corridors across the integrated map, masking the terrestrial landscape to focus on streamside areas. Streamside least-cost corridors in the integrated, local-scale model diverged (ß25 km) from national-scale least-cost corridors based on naturalness. Spatial categories comparing legal-and naturalness-based resistance values by stream reach highlighted potential locations for building or leveraging existing capacity through spatial coordination of policy mechanisms or restoration actions. Agencies or nongovernmental organizations intending to restore or maintain habitat connectivity across fragmented landscapes can use this approach to inform spatial prioritization and build coordination capacity.

show abstract

“…Incorporating these ecological or landscape changes may be particularly important to maintain connectivity across the landscape matrix, the substantial portion of the landscape that extends beyond designated core areas, where changes are most likely to arise [7,8]. In addition to these ecological dynamics, connectivity will be impacted by changes in institutional and planning dimensions [9] as plans, regulations and policies are also likely to change over time [10]. Although planners and resource managers recognize that ecological and institutional conditions will change, relatively little attention has been given to develop adaptive approaches to maintain and improve connectivity over long-term planning and implementation efforts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting Adaptive Connectivity in Dynamic Landscapes

Jennings

Zeller

Lewison

2020

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central tenet of landscape conservation planning is that natural communities can be supported by a connected landscape network that supports many species and habitat types. However, as the planning environment, ecological conditions, and risks and stressors change over time, the areas needed to support landscape connectivity may also shift. We demonstrate an approach designed to assess functional and structural connectivity of an established protected area network that has experienced landscape and planning changes over time. Here we present an approach designed to inform adaptive planning for connectivity with a complementary suite of analytical techniques. Using existing occurrence, movement, and genetic data for six focal species, we create a spatially explicit connectivity assessment based on landscape resistance, paired with a landscape feature geodiversity analysis. Although factors such as cost, conservation goals, and land management strategies must be taken into account, this approach provides a template for leveraging available empirical data and robust analyses to evaluate and adapt planning for protected area networks that can preserve and promote both functional and structural connectivity in dynamic landscapes.

show abstract

An evaluation of environmental, institutional and socio-economic factors explaining successful conservation plan implementation in the north-central United States

Cited by 10 publications

References 41 publications

The impact of governance on environmental outcomes in Australian natural resource planning and management

The impact of governance on environmental outcomes in Australian natural resource planning and management

Mapping legal authority for terrestrial conservation corridors along streams

Supporting Adaptive Connectivity in Dynamic Landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About