A classification of collaborative management methods
MetadataShow full item record
Collaboration among multiple stakeholders can be crucial to the success of natural resource management. In recent years, a wide variety of methods have been developed to facilitate such collaboration. Because these methods are relatively new and come from different disciplines, little attention has been paid to drawing comparisons among them. Thus, it is very difficult for potential users to sort through the increasingly large literature regarding such methods. We suggest the use of a consistent framework for comparing collaborative management methods, and develop such a framework based on five criteria: participation, institutional analysis, simplification of the natural resource, spatial scale, and stages in the process of natural resource management. We then apply this framework to six of the more commonly cited methods: soft systems analysis, adaptive management, ecosystem management, agroecosystem analysis, rapid rural appraisal and participatory rural appraisal. Important differences among methods were found in prescriptions for stakeholder participation, institutional analysis, and simplification of complex natural resources. Despite such differences, the methods are surprisingly similar overall. All methods are applicable at the scale of a watershed. Most of the methods include techniques for understanding complex natural resources, but not complex social institutions, and most include monitoring and assessment as well as planning. Our comparisons suggest that, although much work has been done to improve collaborative management of natural resources, both in the development of collaborative methods and in related social science disciplines, the results have not been shared among disciplines. Further organization and classification of this work is therefore necessary to make it more accessible to both practitioners and students of collaborative management.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Scholes, M. (Pretoria, South Africa: South African Institute of Forestry, 2002)This paper discusses the use of an ecosystems approach in the management of plantations and the concept of plantations in providing goods and services. Ecological indicators are compared for the CIFOR and South African ...
Kamwenda, G.J. (Washington, D.C.: Information Service of F.A.O., 2002)Environmental degradation resulting from extensive grazing and haphazard exploitation of rangeland forestry resources is a severe problem for the agropastoralists of Shinyanga, a northeastern region of the United Republic ...
Loh, J. (ed.); Wackernagel, M. (ed.) (Gland, Switzerland: WWF, 2004)The Living Planet Report is WWF's periodic update on the state of the world's ecosystems. This is measured using 2 main indicators. The first indicator is the fact that the Living Planet Index is derived from trends over ...