A classification of collaborative management methods

dc.contributor.authorBlumenthal, D.en
dc.contributor.authorJannink, J. L.en
dc.contributor.departmentSustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (SANREM) Knowledgebaseen
dc.date.accessioned2016-04-19T19:10:17Zen
dc.date.available2016-04-19T19:10:17Zen
dc.date.issued2000en
dc.description.abstractCollaboration 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.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier1637en
dc.identifier.citationConservation Ecology 4(2): 13en
dc.identifier.issn1195-5449en
dc.identifier.other1637_A_Classification_of_Collaborative_Manage.pdfen
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/66233en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherOttawa, Ont.: Resilience Allianceen
dc.relation.urihttp://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol4/iss2/art13/en
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2000 by The Resilience Allianceen
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectStakeholdersen
dc.subjectEcosystem managementen
dc.subjectEcosystemen
dc.subjectSocial capitalen
dc.subjectLand use planningen
dc.subjectEnvironmental impactsen
dc.subjectBest management practicesen
dc.subjectCommunity participationen
dc.subjectConservation strategyen
dc.subjectConservation planningen
dc.subjectConservationen
dc.subjectSustainabilityen
dc.subjectLocal knowledgeen
dc.subjectResource management toolsen
dc.subjectAgricultural ecosystemsen
dc.subjectNatural resource managementen
dc.subjectLocal governanceen
dc.subjectAdaptive managementen
dc.subjectAgricultureen
dc.subjectAgroecosystem analysisen
dc.subjectCollaborationen
dc.subjectParticipatory rural appraisalen
dc.subjectRapid rural appraisalen
dc.subjectSoft systems analysisen
dc.subjectEcosystemen
dc.titleA classification of collaborative management methodsen
dc.typeArticle - Refereeden
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1637_A_Classification_of_Collaborative_Manage.pdf
Size:
168.42 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format