Elk management and policy in southern Greater Yellowstone: Assessing the constitutive process

Clark, Susan G.; Vernon, Marian E.

doi:10.1007/s11077-016-9268-7

Cited by 4 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This includes understanding the problem perspectives from the people expected to live with large carnivores and implement desired management actions Clark and Slocombe, 2011;Hughes and Nielsen, 2019). Arguably then, the challenges to grizzly bear conservation success are more about decision-making processes and issues of legitimacy, power, trust, and respect rather than people's attitudes toward bears (Clark et al, 2008;Rutherford et al, 2009;Gibeau, 2012;Richie et al, 2012;Clark and Vernon, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A problem-oriented approach is a systematic process to uncover different peoples' perspectives and characterizations on a particular policy problem, in addition to examining the trends and conditions influencing past and present policy trajectories (Laswell, 1971;Nie, 2001;Clark, 2002;Clark et al, 2008Clark et al, , 2014Reed, 2008;Rutherford et al, 2009;Muntifering et al, 2017). This approach has been used in North America with regards to grizzly bears, polar bears, elk and other carnivore conservation challenges (Primm and Clark, 1996;Clark et al, 2008Ebbin, 2011;Richie et al, 2012;Clark and Vernon, 2017). Within this framework, a policy problem is described as the disparity between what people want to happen and what actually does happen (Clark et al, 2014;Redpath et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Part of the policy sciences problem-oriented approach is understanding how different people define and experience the ordinary and constitutive policy problems (Laswell, 1971;Clark, 2002;Clark and Vernon, 2017). Ordinary problems are often technical in nature, dealing with knowledge or information used in the decision process (e.g., related to biology, ecology, or economics), whereas constitutive problems address the normative aspects of decision-making, including values, governance structures or processes, and people involved (Laswell, 1971;Clark and Vernon, 2017). Constitutive problems thus refer to who gets to decide what to decide, reflecting aspects of power dynamics, how decision-making is structured, what procedures are employed or ideologies espoused, and who is invited or excluded in the decision process (Nie, 2001;Robbins, 2012;Clark and Vernon, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ordinary problems are often technical in nature, dealing with knowledge or information used in the decision process (e.g., related to biology, ecology, or economics), whereas constitutive problems address the normative aspects of decision-making, including values, governance structures or processes, and people involved (Laswell, 1971;Clark and Vernon, 2017). Constitutive problems thus refer to who gets to decide what to decide, reflecting aspects of power dynamics, how decision-making is structured, what procedures are employed or ideologies espoused, and who is invited or excluded in the decision process (Nie, 2001;Robbins, 2012;Clark and Vernon, 2017). Often, the constitutive process is overlooked in policy-making, yet is crucial to securing the common interest for conservation success (Brunner and Clark, 1996;Clark and Vernon, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Hughes

Yarmey

Morehouse³

et al. 2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since their threatened species listing in 2010, grizzly bear recovery has been a controversial policy issue in Alberta, Canada particularly because this charismatic carnivore represents a diverse set of values, both positive (e.g., an icon of beauty and the wilderness) and negative (e.g., a safety threat and economic risk to peoples' livelihoods). Previous human dimensions research on grizzly bear conservation has accounted for the values and attitudes different groups of people hold for these bears, as well as their views on conflict mitigation strategies. However, the conservation literature is more limited in assessing the perspectives different people hold for grizzly bear conservation in a policy context. Arguably, understanding the policy landscape in which carnivore conservation occurs is important to achieve desired goals and objectives for species and the people expected to live with them and implement policy action. Using a case study approach between 2012 and 2014 and borrowing from the policy sciences problem-oriented framework, we identify the dominant problem perspectives in Alberta's grizzly bear recovery policy using document review and interviews with participants from government, the natural resource sector, and environmental non-governmental organizations. We identify that ordinary and constitutive problem perspectives share common features across participants in this study, including frustrations with lack of policy clarity, implementation inefficiencies and committed political and financial action, and perhaps even more important, the challenges in policy decision-making and governance. We discuss the importance of meaningful engagement of people who live with large carnivores and the impacts of conservation policy, which is applicable to both a local and global scale, as success in large carnivore conservation must include the people who will ultimately implement conservation action.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Hughes

Yarmey

Morehouse³

et al. 2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Corridor of Conflict

Morse¹,

Clark²

2019

Human–Wildlife Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disconnected dots?: A systematic review of governance challenges for natural resource management

Potts

2019

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As concerns for the ongoing and increasing degradation of the natural environment worldwide, have increased the impetus for action, and development of governance arrangements to support natural resource management. Despite this, issues around governance remain a significant challenge to the success of natural resource management. This study reports the findings of a systematic literature review of 240 papers to better understand how governance challenges manifest spatially, how they change over time, and identify key priority areas for strategic governance reform. This paper reveals that the capacity of natural resource management governance systems internationally is most limited by factors that limit connectivity and collaboration between stakeholders in decision-making processes, and the alignment of vision and objectives across institutions. The paper shows clear spatial disparities and temporal changes in the number of studies and governance challenges of natural resource management identified in developing and developed countries.

show abstract

Elk management and policy in southern Greater Yellowstone: Assessing the constitutive process

Cited by 4 publications

References 24 publications

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Corridor of Conflict

Disconnected dots?: A systematic review of governance challenges for natural resource management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About