Re-theorizing social network analysis and environmental governance

Scott, Michael

doi:10.1177/0309132514554322

Cited by 45 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 85 publications

(66 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The case studies deal with issues, ranging from climate policy (Moeliono et al 2014) to water and dryland management (Stein et al 2011, Sundstrom et al 2012, de Villiers et al 2014, Nuno et al 2014, Mannetti et al 2015 and coastal area management (Tompkins et al 2002, Crona and Bodin 2006, Bodin and Crona 2008, Ramirez-Sanchez and Pinkerton 2009, Gelcich et al 2010, Marín and Berkes 2010, Cohen et al 2012, Marín et al 2012, 2015, Cárcamo et al 2014, Pietri et al 2015.…”

Section: Strand (I): Natural Resource Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Common tie characteristics are those of importance, frequency, or intensity. Several studies distinguish between bonding, bridging, and linking ties (Sanginga et al 2007, Bodin and Crona 2008, Ramirez-Sanchez and Pinkerton 2009, Stein et al 2011, Cohen et al 2012, Marín et al 2012, 2015, Sundstrom et al 2012, Cárcamo et al 2014, Apgar et al 2015. Few studies highlight the influence of network context (Tompkins et al 2002, Rico García-Amado et al 2012, Sundstrom et al 2012 or actor characteristics, such as leadership or socioeconomic power (Bodin andCrona 2008, Crona andBodin 2010) to explain agency or lack thereof.…”

Section: Network Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the latter two factors, dense and centralized networks with strong bonding ties are shown to be effective in managing simple tasks (Rico García-Amado et al 2012), while fragmented networks are shown to limit communication and hence adaptive capacity (Cárcamo et al 2014, Mannetti et al 2015. Furthermore, for successful transformation toward sustainable governance, studies indicate the need for decentralized and heterogeneous networks that entail bridging ties between administrative and institutional scales of management (Gelcich et al 2010, Cohen et al 2012, Marín et al 2012, 2015 and, in particular, the need for brokers who facilitate collaboration between these scales (Stein et al 2011, Cárcamo et al 2014, Moeliono et al 2014, Nuno et al 2014, Pietri et al 2015. Studies elaborating on possible reasons for inertia in governance processes reveal homogeneity among centrally positioned opinion-leaders as a potential barrier to collective action (Crona and Bodin 2006, Bodin and Crona 2008, Ramirez-Sanchez and Pinkerton 2009, Moeliono et al 2014, Mannetti et al 2015.…”

Section: Key Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Case studies reviewed include, for example, work on social networks as part of rural livelihood strategies (Kadigi et al 2007, Torkelsson 2007, Nygren and MyattHirvonen 2009, Ekblom 2012, Rindfuss et al 2012, Goulden et al 2013, Baird and Gray 2014, recovery from climate risks (Bosher et al 2007, Rotberg 2010, Islam and Walkerden 2014, 2015, climate-change adaptation (Scheffran et al 2012), and sustainable resource management (Downey 2010, Zimmerer 2014, Abizaid et al 2015, Katikiro et al 2015, Orchard et al 2015.…”

Section: Strand (Iii): Social Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even studies not explicitly addressing resilience share the conceptualization of networks as coping strategy in times of need (Kadigi et al 2007, Torkelsson 2007, Nygren and Myatt-Hirvonen 2009, Rindfuss et al 2012, Gallego and Mendola 2013, Lyle and Smith 2014, Abizaid et al 2015, Katikiro et al 2015 and hence refer to particular aspects of resilience. Unlike studies focusing on governance and innovation, studies on social support more frequently take a community perspective conceiving of social networks as a means for communities to deal with external shocks and risks (Cassidy and Barnes 2012, Ekblom 2012, Baird and Gray 2014, Islam and Walkerden 2014, 2015 (Scheffran et al 2012, Gallego and Mendola 2013, Zimmerer 2014). …”

Section: Network Conceptualizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Social networks and the resilience of rural communities in the Global South: a critical review and conceptual reflections

Rockenbauch¹,

Sakdapolrak²

2017

E&S

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In the last decades, a growing scholarship has outlined the crucial role of social networks as a source of resilience. However, with regard to the Global South, the role of social networks for the resilience of rural communities remains an underresearched and underconceptualized issue, because research remains scattered between different strands and has rarely been integrated from a resilience perspective. To provide common ground for the exchange between disciplines and to identify steps towards a more comprehensive social network perspective on the resilience of rural communities in the Global South, we present a systematic review of contemporary case studies from three strands of research: (i) natural resource management, (ii) agricultural innovation, and (iii) social support. Although studies in each strand have their own particular strengths and weaknesses in addressing aspects of the resilience of rural communities in the Global South, they all share a static view of the outcomes of social networks, tend to emphasize structure over agency, and neglect spatial dimensions of social relations. To address these challenges, we propose a translocal social network perspective on resilience that views rural communities as being embedded in social networks that connect people and facilitate the flow of resources, information, and knowledge between places.

show abstract

Section: Strand (I): Natural Resource Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Network Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Key Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strand (Iii): Social Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Network Conceptualizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social networks and the resilience of rural communities in the Global South: a critical review and conceptual reflections

Rockenbauch¹,

Sakdapolrak²

2017

E&S

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Two Sustainability Epistemologies in the Marketization of a Natural Resource

Säwe

Hultman

2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The normative implications of sustainable development mean that different understandings of how sustainability should be achieved will either facilitate or put at risk different values associated with economic, environmental and social aspects of sustainability. By a qualitative analysis of Swedish fishery legislation documents, we analyse and outline the consequences of two different and competing sustainability epistemologies: a top‐down system understanding and a bottom‐up experiential understanding. To define these two epistemologies, the case study adopts discourse analysis on one fishery law and one fishery regulation proposal, and the remittance answers to these documents. We demonstrate how a top‐down system approach shapes social reality according to its own logic of efficiency, and that pre‐defined principles of economic optimization prevail over social experience and continuity. We conclude that qualitative analysis holds promise to expand the understanding of the premises and consequences of alternative environmental governance trajectories due to its ability to uncover social constructions of meaning. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Welfare enhancement or environment improvement: How does China's rural revitalization assistance policy work? Evidence from China

Huang,

Zhao,

Zhuang

2024

Land Degrad Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of sustainable development, the greatest challenge facing society today is to improve welfare of the disadvantaged while preserving the environment. This paper constructed a theoretical framework of “policy‐welfare‐environment,” explored the effects in terms of individual welfare enhancement and village environment improvement, and conduct empirical tests on a sample of 1208 rural households in China. The results show that: (1) The assistance policy can significantly improve the overall welfare of the disadvantaged groups, and meanwhile, it can improve different dimensions of welfare, with the degree from high to low was a social opportunity, spiritual feeling, and economic situation. (2) The assistance policy can increase the probability of adopting environmental protection behavior, which in turn can significantly improve the village environment. (3) Welfare improvements in social opportunities mediate between the assistance policy and village environment improvements, while improvements in spiritual feelings and economic status do not. In addition, there is age heterogeneity in the welfare enhancement effect of the policy in the economic status dimension and the spiritual feeling dimension. The conclusions provide valuable policy enlightenment for assistance policy formulation and environmental governance, and can protect the ecological environment while improving public welfare, which is in line with the trend of sustainable development.

show abstract

Re-theorizing social network analysis and environmental governance

Cited by 45 publications

References 85 publications

Social networks and the resilience of rural communities in the Global South: a critical review and conceptual reflections

Social networks and the resilience of rural communities in the Global South: a critical review and conceptual reflections

Two Sustainability Epistemologies in the Marketization of a Natural Resource

Welfare enhancement or environment improvement: How does China's rural revitalization assistance policy work? Evidence from China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About