“…We draw on three types of learning: cognitive, normative, and relational (Table 1), which are cognitive or relational changes, as opposed to changes in behaviour or actions (e.g., new policies, strategies, etc.). As defined by Haug and others [27], cognitive learning can refer either to an individual's gain in knowledge or to greater structuring of existing knowledge. Cognitive learning in experiments includes changes in understanding about feedbacks and key relationships between humans and biophysical systems [15] and the discovery of previously unknown effects [12].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Normative learning is defined as a change in an individual's values, goals, or belief systems, such as a shift in a participant's perspective on the issues surrounding the experiment, or the development of converging goals among participants. Like second-order or conceptual learning, normative learning is considered vital to bring about systemic change [27]. Relational learning refers to the non-cognitive aspects of learning improvements in understanding of other participants' mindsets and an increase in trust and cooperation within the group, which gives a participant a sense of fairness and ownership over the process that in turn may increase acceptance of the new management approach [28,29].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The factors are drawn from several sources [3,5,[18][19][20][21]. This typology has been used in several empirical studies to conceptualise and measure learning in collective settings relevant to environmental governance [3,27,30,31]. The first two learning types resonate strongly with the policy learning literature [27] whereas relational learning reflects the notions of understanding others' roles and capacities, which are developed in the social learning literature [28,32].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This typology has been used in several empirical studies to conceptualise and measure learning in collective settings relevant to environmental governance [3,27,30,31]. The first two learning types resonate strongly with the policy learning literature [27] whereas relational learning reflects the notions of understanding others' roles and capacities, which are developed in the social learning literature [28,32]. We use the typology here because it draws clear distinctions useful for empirical analysis and it separately categorises relational learning, which has previously been subsumed under normative or "higher forms" of learning [32].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
Abstract:Learning from policy experimentation is a promising way to approach the "wicked problem" of climate adaptation, which is characterised by knowledge gaps and contested understandings of future risk. However, although the role of learning in shaping public policy is well understood, and experiments are expected to facilitate learning, little is known about how experiments produce learning, what types of learning, and how they can be designed to enhance learning effects. Using quantitative research methods, we explore how design choices influence the learning experiences of 173 participants in 18 policy experiments conducted in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2016. The experiments are divided into three "ideal types" that are expected to produce different levels and types of learning. The findings show that policy experiments produce cognitive and relational learning effects, but less normative learning, and experiment design influenced three of six measured dimensions of learning, especially the cognitive learning dimensions. This reveals a trade-off between designing for knowledge development and designing for normative or relational changes; choices that experiment designers should make in the context of their adaptation problem. Our findings also show the role leadership plays in building trust.
“…We draw on three types of learning: cognitive, normative, and relational (Table 1), which are cognitive or relational changes, as opposed to changes in behaviour or actions (e.g., new policies, strategies, etc.). As defined by Haug and others [27], cognitive learning can refer either to an individual's gain in knowledge or to greater structuring of existing knowledge. Cognitive learning in experiments includes changes in understanding about feedbacks and key relationships between humans and biophysical systems [15] and the discovery of previously unknown effects [12].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Normative learning is defined as a change in an individual's values, goals, or belief systems, such as a shift in a participant's perspective on the issues surrounding the experiment, or the development of converging goals among participants. Like second-order or conceptual learning, normative learning is considered vital to bring about systemic change [27]. Relational learning refers to the non-cognitive aspects of learning improvements in understanding of other participants' mindsets and an increase in trust and cooperation within the group, which gives a participant a sense of fairness and ownership over the process that in turn may increase acceptance of the new management approach [28,29].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The factors are drawn from several sources [3,5,[18][19][20][21]. This typology has been used in several empirical studies to conceptualise and measure learning in collective settings relevant to environmental governance [3,27,30,31]. The first two learning types resonate strongly with the policy learning literature [27] whereas relational learning reflects the notions of understanding others' roles and capacities, which are developed in the social learning literature [28,32].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This typology has been used in several empirical studies to conceptualise and measure learning in collective settings relevant to environmental governance [3,27,30,31]. The first two learning types resonate strongly with the policy learning literature [27] whereas relational learning reflects the notions of understanding others' roles and capacities, which are developed in the social learning literature [28,32]. We use the typology here because it draws clear distinctions useful for empirical analysis and it separately categorises relational learning, which has previously been subsumed under normative or "higher forms" of learning [32].…”
Section: Definition and Typology Of Policy Learningmentioning
Abstract:Learning from policy experimentation is a promising way to approach the "wicked problem" of climate adaptation, which is characterised by knowledge gaps and contested understandings of future risk. However, although the role of learning in shaping public policy is well understood, and experiments are expected to facilitate learning, little is known about how experiments produce learning, what types of learning, and how they can be designed to enhance learning effects. Using quantitative research methods, we explore how design choices influence the learning experiences of 173 participants in 18 policy experiments conducted in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2016. The experiments are divided into three "ideal types" that are expected to produce different levels and types of learning. The findings show that policy experiments produce cognitive and relational learning effects, but less normative learning, and experiment design influenced three of six measured dimensions of learning, especially the cognitive learning dimensions. This reveals a trade-off between designing for knowledge development and designing for normative or relational changes; choices that experiment designers should make in the context of their adaptation problem. Our findings also show the role leadership plays in building trust.
“…There may be confusion within the concept of normative learning because previous studies similarly have not been able to assess or measure it (Haug et al 2011, Munaretto and Huitema 2012. A question arises of what changes in norms, views, or paradigms are relevant.…”
Section: Adaptive Comanagement (Acm) and Invasive Species Issuesmentioning
ABSTRACT. Invasive species can create economic and safety concerns. Responding to invasive species requires communication of research, localized management, and collaboration across jurisdictional boundaries. We examined the use of adaptive comanagement in three New York counties to mitigate the impacts of emerald ash borer, a wood-boring beetle that causes widespread death of ash trees. We assessed learning along three typologies (cognitive, normative, and relational), linking (through network analysis), and connections of learning and linking to management outcomes. Findings indicate that knowledge networks were built through task forces that brought together local and state government, university, and private stakeholders. In addition, this study suggests types of learning that are needed for stakeholders to respond to invasive species management.
We empirically examine relationships among the conditions that enable learning, learning effects and sustainability outcomes based on experiences in four biosphere reserves in Canada and Sweden. In doing so, we provide a novel approach to measure learning and address an important methodological and empirical challenge in assessments of learning processes in decision-making contexts. Findings from this study highlight the effectiveness of different measures of learning, and how to differentiate the factors that foster learning with the outcomes of learning. Our approach provides a useful reference point for future empirical studies of learning in different environment, resource and sustainability settings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.