TY - JOUR
T1 - Collaboration mobilises institutions with scale-dependent comparative advantage in landscape-scale biodiversity conservation
AU - Hill, Rosemary
AU - Davies, Jocelyn
AU - Bohnet, Iris
AU - Robinson, Catherine
AU - Maclean, Kirsten
AU - Pert, Petina
PY - 2015/8
Y1 - 2015/8
N2 - Landscape-scale approaches are emerging as central to ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation globally, triggering the requirement for collaboration between multiple actors and associated risks including knowledge asymmetries; institutional fragmentation; uncertainty; power imbalances; “invisible” slow-changing variables; and entrenched socio-economic inequities. While social science has elucidated some dimensions required for effective collaboration, little is known about how collaboration manages these risks, or of its effects on associated social-ecological linkages. Our analysis of four different Australian contexts of collaboration shows they mobilised institutions matched to addressing environmental threats, at diverse scales across regulatory and non-regulatory domains. The institutions mobilised included national regulatory controls on development that threatened habitat, incentives to farmers for practice-change, and mechanisms that increased resources for on-ground fire and pest management. Knowledge-sharing underpinned effective risk management and was facilitated through the use of boundary objects, enhanced multi-stakeholder peer review processes, interactive spatial platforms, and Aboriginal-driven planning. Institutions mobilised in these collaborations show scale-dependent comparative advantage for addressing environmental threats. The findings confirm the need to shift scientific attention away from theorising about the ideal-scale for governance. We argue instead for a focus on understanding how knowledge-sharing activities across multiple scales can more effectively connect environmental threats with the most capable institution to address these threats.
AB - Landscape-scale approaches are emerging as central to ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation globally, triggering the requirement for collaboration between multiple actors and associated risks including knowledge asymmetries; institutional fragmentation; uncertainty; power imbalances; “invisible” slow-changing variables; and entrenched socio-economic inequities. While social science has elucidated some dimensions required for effective collaboration, little is known about how collaboration manages these risks, or of its effects on associated social-ecological linkages. Our analysis of four different Australian contexts of collaboration shows they mobilised institutions matched to addressing environmental threats, at diverse scales across regulatory and non-regulatory domains. The institutions mobilised included national regulatory controls on development that threatened habitat, incentives to farmers for practice-change, and mechanisms that increased resources for on-ground fire and pest management. Knowledge-sharing underpinned effective risk management and was facilitated through the use of boundary objects, enhanced multi-stakeholder peer review processes, interactive spatial platforms, and Aboriginal-driven planning. Institutions mobilised in these collaborations show scale-dependent comparative advantage for addressing environmental threats. The findings confirm the need to shift scientific attention away from theorising about the ideal-scale for governance. We argue instead for a focus on understanding how knowledge-sharing activities across multiple scales can more effectively connect environmental threats with the most capable institution to address these threats.
U2 - 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.014
DO - 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.014
M3 - Article
SN - 1462-9011
VL - 51
SP - 267
EP - 277
JO - Environmental Science and Policy
JF - Environmental Science and Policy
ER -