Success factors in integrated natural resource management R&D: lessons from practice.

Abstract

This paper analyses integrated natural resource management (INRM) lessons and success factors based on a practical case study over more than 10 years (1988-98) in Zimbabwe. The work was geared toward enhancing the adaptive management capacity of the stakeholders in their resource use systems. One main result was the development and institutionalization of an approach for participatory and INRM research and extension. The INRM approach described is grounded in a learning paradigm and a combination of theories (the constructivist perspective to development, systemic intervention, and learning process approaches). Participatory action research and experiential learning, in which researchers engage themselves as actors rather than neutral analysts in an research and development (R&D) process to explore the livelihood system and develop appropriate solutions together with the resource users, has shown high potential. However, this should be guided by a clear strategy, impact orientation, and high-quality process facilitation at different levels. The case study revealed the importance of a "reflective practitioner" approach by all actors. More effective response to the challenges of increasing complexity in NRM requires a shift in thinking from the linearity of research-extension-farmer to alternative, multiple-actor institutional arrangements and innovation systems. To overcome the weak attribution of research outcomes to actual impact, it also suggests an alternative to conventional impact assessment in INRM R&D interventions.

Social learning: A knowledge and capacity building approach for adaptive co-management of contested landscapes

“…Diduck (2010) supports this view by suggesting greater focus is needed on theory and practice in non-formal education and the need for place-based empirical studies, proposing that relational spaces enhance adaptive capacity. The effectiveness of these participatory learning processes in natural resource management is not only for fostering attitudinal and behavioural changes, highlighted in findings by Buchy (2004) and Hagmann et al (2002), but also the need to promote fundamental changes to value orientations within society, a view shared with Inglehart and Welzel (2002) from political cultural studies.…”

“…While the social learning process helped reduce conflict among stakeholders in response to a convergence in views and attitudes, limitations and challenges also emerged. These included issues surrounding future funding for these types of studies, bridging gaps with community (otherwise referred to in literature as scaling-out, Hagmann et al, 2002) and up-scaling into multi-level governance structures, suggested by Marshall and Stafford Smith (2010) to be critical when landscape-scale transformation is required. The paper develops a critique for social learning as an approach to adaptive co-management within the natural resource governance framework through an exploration of literature.…”

Making the Water–Soil–Waste Nexus Work: Framing the Boundaries of Resource Flows

“…Hagmann et al [11] show how research spanned from the plot level up to the policy sphere. Different agricultural techniques were implemented at the farm level, such as soil fertility and water conservation.…”

“…In general, these approaches aim at optimizing the use of one compartment while considering its effect on related fields. Common to these approaches is a holistic view (e.g., INRM [11], ISWM [10], IWRM [12]) and a systems approach (INRM, IWRM [1], ISWM [10]). …”

Complex Science for a Complex World : Exploring Human Ecosystems with Agents

“…During the late 90s, collective design and other approaches like system thinking or action learning were appropriated and adapted by scientists working on natural resource management (Hagmann et al 2002;Barreteau 2003;D'Aquino et al 2003). Interestingly, most of the cases were characterised by:…”