Key considerations and challenges in the application of social‐network research for environmental decision making

Abstract

Attempts to better understand the social context in which conservation and environmental decisions are made has led to increased interest in human social networks. To improve the use of social-network analysis in conservation, we reviewed recent studies in the literature in which such methods were applied. In our review, we looked for problems in research design and analysis that limit the utility of network analysis. Nineteen of 55 exhibited at least 1 of the following problems: application of analytical methods inadequate or sensitive to incomplete network data; application of statistical approaches that ignore dependency in the network; or lack of connection between the theoretical base, research question, and choice of analytical techniques. By drawing attention to these specific areas of concern and highlighting research frontiers and challenges, including causality, network dynamics, and new approaches, we responded to calls for increasing the rigorous application of social science in conservation.

Fundamental insights on when social network data are most critical for conservation planning

“…2014; Guerrero et al. 2020). For example, it has been used in spatial conservation planning to identify areas where actors are highly connected because that is where conservation interventions should be most successful (Mills et al.…”

“…In natural resource management, it has been applied to understand management success and to show that priority interventions depend on the structure and nature of social networks (Barnes et al 2016;Bodin 2017;Matous & Wang 2019). In the conservation literature, social network analysis is an emerging approach for integrating social data into conservation planning (Mills et al 2014;Guerrero et al 2020). For example, it has been used in spatial conservation planning to identify areas where actors are highly connected because that is where conservation interventions should be most successful (Mills et al 2014).…”

“…When these network connections are important for maximizing the success of conservation interventions, social network information and analysis (Borgatti et al 2009) could be key to designing effective conservation programs. Consequently, there is growing interest in the use of social network data in conservation decision making (Mills et al 2014;Guerrero et al 2020).…”

Using knowledge mapping to rethink the gap between science and action

“…2017; Guerrero et al. 2020). Conversely, knowledge mapping has been proposed as a process to survey knowledge and its connections in a system such that the mapping itself also creates additional knowledge (Vail III 1999; Wexler 2001).…”

“…Literature on social network analysis in the context of environmental management has been increasingly fruitful over the last 2 decades (e.g., Prell et al 2009;Guerrero et al 2013;Wood et al 2014). By investigating relationships between stakeholders, social-network analysis can provide insights, such as how frequently interactions between actors are taking place and for what purpose (Morgans et al 2017;Guerrero et al 2020). Conversely, knowledge mapping has been proposed as a process to survey knowledge and its connections in a system such that the mapping itself also creates additional knowledge (Vail III 1999;Wexler 2001).…”