Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:27:55.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the alignment between the bottom-up and top-down objectives of a landscape-scale conservation initiative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2021

Samantha Mc Culloch-Jones Open the ORCID record for Samantha Mc Culloch-Jones [Opens in a new window] ,
Peter Novellie ,
Dirk J Roux  and
Bianca Currie
Samantha Mc Culloch-Jones*
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, George 6530, South Africa
Peter Novellie
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, George 6530, South Africa
Dirk J Roux
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, George 6530, South Africa Scientific Services, South African National Parks, George 6530, South Africa
Bianca Currie
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, George 6530, South Africa
*
Author for correspondence: Samantha Mc Culloch-Jones, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Globally, there is a trend towards conserving biodiversity by promoting co-management with multiple stakeholders at landscape scales. Environmental policies emphasize stakeholder engagement in decision-making, yet landscape conservation is typically a bureaucratic–scientific endeavour. Building trusting relationships with stakeholders is key to negotiations that minimize trade-offs and maximize synergies. Incorporating shared stakeholder objectives improves co-management, as they act as incentives for participation and trust development. We explored the degree of alignment between the bottom-up stakeholder objectives and top-down management objectives of a landscape-scale conservation initiative on the West Coast of South Africa. We categorized stakeholders into six affiliations representing governmental, private and community organizations, and using a social-ecological inventory we identified ten shared objectives. Of these objectives, three were shared between all affiliations, namely biodiversity conservation, socioeconomic development and coordination of the landscape approach. The first two aligned with the top-down landscape management objectives and the latter did not. The importance of coordinating landscape approaches in multi-stakeholder landscape-scale initiatives is crucial to long-term success, and we recommend that it be formally included as a landscape management objective. Exploring the alignment between bottom-up and top-down objectives can highlight overlooked functions of co-management and can reduce the transaction costs of sustaining conservation efforts in the long term.

Keywords

biodiversity conservationco-managementlandscape coordinationshared stakeholder objectivessocial-ecological inventory
Type
Research Paper
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 2021 , pp. 255 - 263
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Foundation for Environmental Conservation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baird, J, Schultz, L, Plummer, R, Armitage, D, Bodin, Ö (2019) Emergence of collaborative environmental governance: what are the causal mechanisms? Environmental Management 63: 16–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnes, ML, Bodin, Ö, Guerrero, AM, McAllister, RRJ, Alexander, SM, Robins, G (2017) The social structural foundations of adaptation and transformation in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 22: 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkes, F (2017) Environmental governance for the Anthropocene? Social-ecological systems, resilience, and collaborative learning. Sustainability 9: 1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bixler, RP, Johnson, S, Emerson, K, Nabatchi, T, Reuling, M, Curtin, C et al. (2016a) Networks and landscapes: a framework for setting goals and evaluating performance at the large landscape scale. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 145–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bixler, RP, McKinney, M, Scarlett, L (2016b) Forging new models of natural resource governance. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bixler, RP, Wald, DM, Ogden, LA, Leong, KM, Johnston, EW, Romolini, M (2016c) Network governance for large-scale natural resource conservation and the challenge of capture. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, BM, Sayer, JA, Walker, B (2010) Navigating trade-offs: working for conservation and development outcomes. Ecology and Society 15: 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlsson, LG, Sandström, AC (2008) Network governance of the commons. International Journal of the Commons 2: 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaffin, BC, Gosnell, H, Cosens, BA (2014) A decade of adaptive governance scholarship: synthesis and future directions. Ecology and Society 19: 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockburn, J, Cundill, G, Shackleton, S, Cele, A, Cornelius, SF, Koopman, V et al. (2020) Relational hubs for collaborative landscape stewardship. Society and Natural Resources 33: 681–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockburn, J, Cundill, G, Shackleton, S, Rouget, M (2018) Towards place-based research to support social-ecological stewardship. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10: 1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, JW (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Creswell, JW, Plano-Clark, VL (2011) Choosing a mixed methods design. Designing and Conducting Mixed Method Research: 53–107.Google Scholar
Cumming, TL, Shackleton, RT, Förster, J, Dini, J, Khan, A, Gumula, M, Kubiszewski, I (2017) Achieving the national development agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through investment in ecological infrastructure: a case study of South Africa. Ecosystem Services 27: 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorse, C, Wood, J, Scott, D, Paterson, A (2019) The Dassenberg Coastal Catchment Partnership: a governance approach to promoting ecosystem-based adaptation and climate-resilient protected area expansion in Cape Town. In: Scott, D, Davies, H, New, M (eds), Mainstreaming Climate Change in Urban Development: Lessons from Cape Town (pp. 260–282). Cape Town, South Africa: UCT Press.Google Scholar
Edmunds, D, Wollenberg, E (2001) A strategic approach to multistakeholder negotiations. Development and Change 32: 231–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estrada-Carmona, N, Hart, AK, DeClerck, FAJ, Harvey, CA, Milder, JC (2014) Integrated landscape management for agriculture, rural livelihoods, and ecosystem conservation: an assessment of experience from Latin America and the Caribbean. Landscape and Urban Planning 129: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricius, C, Koch, E (2004) Rights Resources and Rural Development. London, UK: EarthScan.Google Scholar
Freeman, OE, Duguma, LA, Minang, PA (2015) Operationalizing the integrated landscape approach in practice. Ecology and Society 20: 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GEF (1998) Study of Project Lessons: Summary Report. Washington, DC, USA: The Global Environmental Facility.Google Scholar
Gregory, R (2000) Using stakeholder values to make smarter environmental decisions. Environment 42: 34–44.Google Scholar
Hanleybrown, F, Kania, J, Kramer, M (2012) Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work. Stanford Social Innovation Review [www document]. URL http://www.ssireview.org/pdf/Channeling_Change_PDF.pdf Google Scholar
Holmes, P, Pugnalin, A (2016) The Biodiversity Network for the Cape Town Municipal Area C-Plan & Marxan Analysis: 2016 Methods & Results. Cape Town, South Africa: City of Cape Town.Google Scholar
Lewis, SL, Maslin, MA (2015) Defining the Anthropocene. Nature 519: 171–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lubell, M, Robins, G, Wang, P (2014) Network structure and institutional complexity in an ecology of water management games. Ecology and Society 19: 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShane, TO, Wells, MP (eds) (2004) Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: Towards More Effective Conservation and Development. New York, NY, USA: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milder, JC, Hart, AK, Dobie, P, Minai, J, Zaleski, C (2013) Integrated landscape initiatives for African agriculture, development, and conservation: a region-wide assessment. World Development 54: 68–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, M, Huberman, M (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Musavengane, R, Leonard, L (2019) When race and social equity matters in nature conservation in post-apartheid South Africa. Conservation and Society 17: 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Farrell, PJ, Anderson, PML (2010) Sustainable multifunctional landscapes: a review to implementation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2: 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plummer, R, Baird, J, Armitage, D, Bodin, Ö, Schultz, L (2017) Diagnosing adaptive comanagement across multiple cases. Ecology and Society 22: 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provan, KG, Kenis, P (2008) Modes of network governance: structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18: 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, J, Van Vianen, J, Deakin, EL, Barlow, J, Sunderland, T (2016) Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future. Global Change Biology 22: 2540–2554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SANBI (2014) Factsheet on Biodiversity Stewardship. Pretoria, South Africa: The South African National Biodiversity Institute.Google Scholar
Sayer, J, Sunderland, T, Ghazoul, J, Pfund, J-LJL, Sheil, D, Meijaard, E et al. (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110: 8349–8356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sayer, J, Wells, M (2004) The pathology of projects. In: McShane, TO, Wells, MP (eds), Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: Towards More Effective Conservation and Development (pp. 35–48). New York, NY, USA: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherl, L, Hahn, R (2018) Global Environment Facility–Pacific Alliance for Sustainability (GEF-PAS): Lessons Learned from Five Years of Nature Conservation and Development in South Pacific Islands. Apia, Samoa: FAO.Google Scholar
Schultz, L, Folke, C, Olsson, P (2007) Enhancing ecosystem management through social-ecological inventories: lessons from Kristianstads Vattenrike, Sweden. Environmental Conservation 34: 140–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, L, Plummer, R, Purdy, S (2011) Applying a Social-ecological Inventory: A Workbook for Finding the Key Actors and Engaging Them. Resilience Alliance [www document]. URL https://www.stockholmresilience.org/download/18.1f74f76413071d337c380004085/RA+workbook+final.pdf Google Scholar
Schwartz, MW, Deiner, K, Forrester, T, Grof-Tisza, P, Muir, MJ, Santos, MJ et al. (2012) Perspectives on the open standards for the practice of conservation. Biological Conservation 155: 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stats, SA (2011) Statistics South Africa, 2011 census [www document]. URL www.statssa.gove.za Google Scholar
Stringer, LC, Dougill, AJ, Fraser, E, Hubacek, K, Prell, C, Reed, MS (2006) Unpacking ‘participation’ in the adaptive management of social-ecological systems: a critical review. Ecology and Society 11: 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talbot, M, van den Broeck, D (2016) Shifting from individual to collective action: Living Land’s experience in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa. In: Chabay, I, Frick, M, Helgeson, J (eds), Land Restoration: Reclaiming Landscapes for a Sustainable Future (pp. 521–531). Cambridge, MA, USA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WESGRO (2021) Atlantis Special Economic Zone [www document]. URL www.atlantissez.com Google Scholar
WWF (2018) Living Planet Report – 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M, Almond, REA (eds). Gland, Switzerland: WWF.Google Scholar