Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adaptive co-management: How social networks, deliberation and learning affect legitimacy in carnivore management

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Journal of Wildlife Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Adaptive co-management (ACM) is a key concept in science and an increasingly adopted policy response in conservation, associated with a number of positive outcomes. However, the effects and mechanisms of co-management arrangements, including the conditions under which ACM gives rise to higher levels of internal and external legitimacy, are yet to be explored. This endeavor, in turn, requires theoretically driven models providing assumptions and outlining testable hypotheses. Considering the social challenges of ACM and using an institutional change within the Swedish carnivore management system aimed at achieving legitimacy through co-management as an illustrative example, this article develops a conceptual model that encompasses conditions and possible explanations to ACM outcomes. More specifically, drawing on lessons from social theory, we model the impact of three key factors—social networks, deliberation and learning—on the external and internal legitimacy resulting from ACM arrangements. Based on the model proposed, the popular assumptions of ACM outcomes can thus be empirically scrutinized and the conditions for increased legitimacy through ACM arrangements better comprehended.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyris, C. and D. Schön. (1996) Organizational learning II: theory, method and practice. Reading, Addison-Wesley

  • Armitage D, Plummer R, Berkes F, Arthur RI, Charles A, Davidson-Hunt I, Diduck A (2009) Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Front Ecol Environ 7:95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bäckstrand K, Khan J, Kronsell A, Lövbrand E (eds) (2010) Environmental politics and deliberative democracy: examining the promise of new modes of governance. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch-Mordo S, Breck SW, Wilson KR, Broderick J (2009) A tool box half full: how social science can help solve human-wildlife conflict. HumDimensWildl 14:219–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham D (1991) The legitimation of power. Macmillan Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib S (1996) Toward a deliberative model of democratic legitmacy. In: Benhabib S (ed) Democracy and difference: contesting the boundaries of the political. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, pp 67–94

  • Berkes F (2008) Commons in a multi-level world. Int J Commons 2(1):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (2010) Devolution of environment and resource governance: trends and future. Environ Conserv 37:489–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bill (2008/09:210). En nyrovdjursförvaltning [A new system for carnivore management]. Stockholm. Swedish Parliamentary Record.

  • Black J (2008) Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regul Gov 2:137–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore C (2007) What kinds of knowledge, knowing and learning are required foraddressing resource dilemmas?A theoretical overview. Environ Sci Policy 10:512–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodin Ö, Crona, B (2008) Management of natural resources at the community level: exploring the role of social capital and leadership in a rural fishing community. World Development 36:2763–2778

  • Bodin Ö, Crona, BI (2009) The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference? Glob Environ Chang 19:366–374

  • Bodin O, Prell C (2011) Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman J (1996) Public deliberation: pluralism, complexity, and democracy. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti S, Candace Jones P, Everett MG (1998) Network measures of social capital. Connections 21(2):28–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Burstein P (2003) The impact of public opinion on public policy: a review and an agenda. Polit Stud Quart 56(1):29–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt RS (2000) The network structure of social capital. In: Straw BM, Sutton RI (eds) Research in Organizational Behaviour. JAI Press, Greenwich, pp 345–423

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson L, Berkes F (2005) Co-management: concepts and methodological implications. J Environ Manage 75:65–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson L, Sandström A (2008) Network governance of the commons. Int J Commons 2:33–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Adger W, Berkes F, Garden P, Lebel L, Olsson P, Pritchard L, Young O (2006) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecol Soc 11:8

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1997) Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In: Bohman J and Rehg W (eds) Deliberative democracy. essays on reason and politics. Cambridge and London, MIT Press, pp 67–91

  • Colfer JP (2005) The complex forest. Resources for the Future, Washigton, D.C., USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Colfer JP (2011) Marginalized forest peoples’ perceptions of the legitimacy of governance: an exploration. World Dev 39:2147–2164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe.1979. Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (The Bern Convention 1979). URL: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/104.htm

  • Cundill G, Fabricius C (2009) Monitoring in adaptive co-managment: toward a learning based approach. J Environ Manage 90:3205–3211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cundill G, Fabricius C (2010) Monitoring the governance dimension of natural resource co-management. Ecol Soc 15:15

  • Cundill G, Cumming GS, Biggs D, Fabricius C (2011) Soft systems thinking and social learning for adaptive management. Conserv Biol 26:13–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davies AL, White RM (2012) Collaboration in natural resource governance: reconciling stakeholder expectations in deer management in Scotland. J Environ Manage 112:160–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz T, Ostrom E, Stern PC (2003) The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302:1907–1912

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (2000) Deliberative democracy and beyond: liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (The Habitats Directive). URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31992L0043:EN:NOT

  • Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2003) Synthesis: building resilience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero AM, McAllister RRJ, Corcoran J, Wilson KA (2013) Scale mismatches, conservation planning, and the value of social-network analyses. Conserv Biol 27:35–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1989) The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry AD (2009) The challenge of learning for sustainability. A prolegomenon to theory. Hum Ecol Rev 16:131–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. John Wiley and Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hønneland G (1999) The Stories Fishermen Tell: themes from the Barents Sea Fisheries. Hum Ecol 27(4):621–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs M (1996) The politics of the real world. Earthscan, London

  • Jentoft S (2000) Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management. Mar Policy 2:141–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jentoft S, Chuenpagdee R (2009) Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem. Mar Policy 33:553–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keen M, Mahanty S (2006) Learning in sustainable natural resource management: Challenges and opportunities in the Pacific. Soc Nat Resour 19:497–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoke D (1990) Political networks. The structural perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koontz TM (2005) We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collaborative stakeholder participation on land use policy. Policy Stud J 33:459–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi M (1997) Consent, dissent, and patriotism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lin N (2001) Social capital: a theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lipset SM (1981) Political man: the social bases of politics. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Löf A (2010) Exploring adaptability through learning layers and learning loops. Environ Ed Res 16:529–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matti, S.(2009).Exploring public policy legitimacy: a study of belief-system correspondence in Swedish environmental policy. PhD Diss. Luleå University of Technology

  • Matti S, Sandström A (2011) The rationale determining advocacy coalitions: examining coordination networks and corresponding beliefs. Policy Stud J 39:385–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matti S, Sandström A (2013) The defining elements of advocacy coalitions: continuing the search for explanations to coordination and coalition structure. Rev Policy Res 30:240–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaverty P, Halpin D (2008) Deliberative drift: the emergence of deliberation in the policy process. Int Polit Sci Rev 29:197–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadowcroft J (2004) Deliberative democracy. In: Durant F, Fiorino DJ, O’Leary R (eds) Environmental Governance Reconsidered. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 183–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutimukuru-Maravanyika, T (2010). Can we learn our way to sustainable management? Adaptive Collaborative Management in Mafungautsi State Forest, Zimbabwe. PhD thesis, CERES Research School for Resource Studies for Development, Wageningen University, The Netherlands

  • Ojha H, Hall A, Sulaiman RV (2013) Adaptive collaborative approaches in natural resource governance: rethinking participation, learning and innovation. Earthscan, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004) Adaptive co-management for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Environ Manage 34:75–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2005) Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Page BI, Shapiro RY (1999) The rational public and beyond. In: Elkin SL, Soltan KE (eds) Citizen competence and democratic institutions. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, pp 93–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl. C., M. Craps, A. Dewulf, E. Mostert, D. Tabara and T. Tallieu. (2007). Social learning and water resource management.Ecology and Society 12 [online] URL: http//www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art5/

  • Parkinson J (2003) Legitimacy problems in deliberative democracy. Polit Stud 51:180–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellizzoni L (2001) The myth of the best argument: power, deliberation and reason. Br J Sociol 52:59–86

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peters BG (1986) American public policy: promise and performance, 2nd edn. Chatham House Publishers, Chatham, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R (2009) The adaptive co-management process: an initial synthesis of representative models and influential aspects. Ecol Soc 14:24

    Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R, Armitage D (2007) A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world. Ecol Econ 61:62–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R, FitzGibbon J (2004) Co-Management of natural resources: a proposed framework. Environ Manage 33:876–855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R, Crona B, Armitage DR, Olsson P, Tengö M, Yudina O (2012) Adaptive comanagement: a systematic review and analysis. Ecol Soc 17:11

    Google Scholar 

  • Provan KG, Kenis P (2007) Modes of network governance: structure, management, and effectiveness. J Public Admin Res Theory 18:229–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (2009:1474).Regulation on game management delegations [FörordningomViltförvaltningsdelegationer].Stockholm: Swedish Parliamentary Record.

  • Rosenberg SW (2007) Deliberation, participation and democracy: can the people govern? Palgrave Macmillian, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. and Jenkins-Smith, H. C., editors. (1993). Policy change and learning: an advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press, Boulder, CO

  • Sandström A, Rova C (2010) Adaptive co-management networks: a comparative analysis of two fishery conservation areas in Sweden. Ecol Soc 15:14

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandström C, Pellikka J, Ratamäki O, Sande A (2009) Management of large carnivores in Fennoscandia: new patterns of regional participation. Hum Dimens Wildl 14:37–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf FW (1999) Governing in Europe—effective and democratic? Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skogstad G (2003) Who governs? Who should govern? Political Authority and Legitimacy in Canada in the Twenty-First Century. Can J Polit Sci 36:955–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smoke R (1994) On the importance of policy legitimacy. Polit Psychol 15:97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterling S (2010) Learning for resilience, or the resilient learner? Towards a necessary reconciliation in a paradigm of sustainable education. Environ Edu Res 16:511–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern MJ (2008) Coercion, voluntary compliance, and protest: the role of trust and legitimacy in combating local opposition to protected areas. Environ Cons 35:200–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treves A, Wallace RB, Naughton-Treves L, Morales A (2006) Co-managing human-wildlife conflicts: a review. Hum Dimens Wildl 11:383–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevis A, Karanth U (2003) Human-carnivore conflict and perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conserv Biol 17:1491–1499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler T (1990) Why people obey the law: procedural justice, legitimacy and compliance. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallner J (2008) Legitimacy and public policy: seeing beyond effectiveness, efficiency, and performance. Policy Stud J 36:421–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters C (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. McMillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Young IM (2000) Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Polit Theory 29:670–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zackrisson A (2010) Deliberative democracy and co-management of natural resources: snowmobile regulation in western Sweden. Int J Comm 4:273–292

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been funded by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Viltvårdsfonden, and the Swedish Research Council FORMAS. We gratefully acknowledge the funding bodies for enabling this study. A special thank you to the editor and the reviewers for providing valuable and constructive comments. The paper is a collaborative work in which the authors have contributed in equal parts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Social Sciences, Political Science Unit, Luleå University of Technology, 971-87, Luleå, Sweden

    Carina Lundmark, Simon Matti & Annica Sandström

Authors
  1. Carina Lundmark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon Matti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Annica Sandström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annica Sandström.

Additional information

Communicated by C. Gortázar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lundmark, C., Matti, S. & Sandström, A. Adaptive co-management: How social networks, deliberation and learning affect legitimacy in carnivore management. Eur J Wildl Res 60, 637–644 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-014-0827-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-014-0827-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation