Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 747–758 | Cite as

Collaborative governance for climate change adaptation in Canada: experimenting with adaptive co-management

Original Article

Abstract

The search for strategies to address ‘super wicked problems’ such as climate change is gaining urgency, and a collaborative governance approach, and adaptive co-management in particular, is increasingly recognized as one such strategy. However, the conditions for adaptive co-management to emerge and the resulting network structures and relational patterns remain unclear in the literature. To address these identified needs, this study examines social relationships from a network perspective while initiating a collaborative multiactor initiative aimed to develop into adaptive co-management for climate change adaptation, an action research project undertaken in the Niagara region of Canada. The project spanned 1 year, and a longitudinal analysis of participants’ networks and level of participation in the process was performed. Evidence of support for climate change adaptation from the process included the development of deliberative and adaptive responses to opportunities presented to the group and the development of a strong subgroup of participants where decision-making was centered. However, the complexity of the challenge of addressing climate change, funding constraints, competing initiatives, and the lack of common views among participants may have contributed to the group, highlighting the finding that beneficial network structural features and relational patterns are necessary but not sufficient condition for the development of an adaptive co-management process. The context of climate change adaptation may require a different social network structure and processes than other contexts for adaptive co-management to occur, and there may be limitations to adaptive co-management for dealing with super wicked problems.

Keywords

Collaborative governance Adaptive co-management Social network analysis Climate change adaptation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants in the action research project associated with this paper. We also are grateful for the insights and contributions of Kerrie Pickering, Brad May, Samantha Morris, and Nicole Klenk. Financial support for the research came from Environment Canada through a Grants and Contributions Agreement with Brock University as well as the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Support was also provided by Mistra through a core grant to the Stockholm Resilience Centre, a cross-faculty research centre at Stockholm University. The third author received financial support from the Strategic Research Programme EkoKlim at Stockholm University.

Supplementary material

10113_2015_790_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (164 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 163 kb)
10113_2015_790_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (238 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 237 kb)
10113_2015_790_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (103 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 102 kb)
10113_2015_790_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (20 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 20 kb)

References

  1. Ansell C, Gash A (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J Public Adm Res Theory 18(4):543–571. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N (2007) Introduction: moving beyond co-management. In: Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N (eds) Adaptive co-management: collaboration, learning and multi-level governance. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  3. Armitage DR, Plummer R, Berkes F, Arthur RI, Davidson-Hunt IJ, Diduck A, Doubleday NC, Johnson DS, Marschke M, McConney P, Pinkerton EW, Wollenberg EK (2009) Adaptive co-management for social–ecological complexity. Front Ecol Environ 6:95–102. doi:10.1890/070089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baird J, Plummer R, Pickering K (2014) Priming the governance system for climate change adaptation: the application of a social ecological inventory (SEI) to engage actors in Niagara, Canada. Ecol Soc 19(1):3. doi:10.5751/ES-06152-190103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balint PJ, Stewart RE, Desai A, Walters LC (2011) Wicked environmental problems: managing uncertainty and conflict. Island Press, WashingtonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manag 90:1692–1702. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkes F, Folke C (eds) (2000) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Berkes F, Armitage D, Doubleday N (2007) Synthesis: adapting, innovating, evolving. In: Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N (eds) Adaptive comanagement: collaboration, learning and multilevel governance. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, pp 308–327Google Scholar
  9. 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. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.05.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bodin Ö, Prell C (eds) (2011) Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Bodin Ö, Crona B, Ernstson H (2006) Social networks in natural resource management: what is there to learn from a structural perspective? Ecol Soc 11(2):r2. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2
  12. Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) Ucinet for Windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, HarvardGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown VA, Harris JA, Russell JY (2010) Tackling wicked problems: through the transdisciplinary imagination. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Colfer C (2005) The complex forest. Resources for the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  16. Crona B, Bodin Ö (2006) What you know is who you know? Communication patterns among resource users as a prerequisite for co-management. Ecol Soc 11(2):7. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art7/
  17. Crona B, Bodin Ö (2010) Power asymmetries in small-scale fisheries: a barrier to governance transformability? Ecol Soc 15(4):32. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art32/
  18. Fabricius C, Folke C, Cundill G, Schultz L (2007) Powerless spectators, coping actors, and adaptive co-managers: a synthesis of the role of communities in ecosystem management. Ecol Soc 12(1):29. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art29/
  19. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS, Walker B, Bengtsson J, Berkes F, Colding J, Danell K, Falkenmark M, Moberg M, Gordon L, Kaspersson R, Kautsky N, Kinzig A, Levin SA, Mäler K-G, Ohlsson L, Olsson P, Ostrom E, Reid W, Rockstöm J, Savenije S, Svedin U (2002) Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Report for the Swedish Environmental Advisory Council. Ministry of the Environment, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  20. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greenwood D, Levin M (2000) Reconstructing relationships between universities and society through action research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) The handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 85–106Google Scholar
  22. Gunderson L, Light SS (2006) Adaptive management and adaptive governance in the everglades ecosystem. Policy Sci 39:323–334. doi:10.1007/s11077-006-9027-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hahn T, Olsson P, Folke C, Johansson K (2006) Trust-building, knowledge generation and organizational innovations: the role of a bridging organization for adaptive comanagement of a wetland landscape around Kristianstad, Sweden. Hum Ecol 34:573–592. doi:10.1007/s10745-006-9035-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanneman RA, Riddle M (2005) Introduction to social network methods. University of California, RiversideGoogle Scholar
  25. Kemmis S, McTaggart R (2000) Participatory action research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  26. Lazarus RJ (2009) Super wicked problems and climate change: restraining the present to liberate the future. Cornel Law Rev 94(5):1153–1233. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1302623
  27. Leischow SJ, Provan K, Beagles J, Bonito J, Ruppel E, Moor G, Saul J (2012) Mapping tobacco quitlines in North America: signaling pathways to improve treatment. Am J Public Health 102(11):2123–2128. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lincoln YS, Guba EG (2000) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging conflicts. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 97–128Google Scholar
  29. Locatelli B, Kanninen M, Brockhaus M, Pierce Colfer CJ, Murdiyarso D, Santoso H (2008) Facing an uncertain future: how forests and people can adapt to climate change. Forest Perspectives No. 5. Center for International Forestry Research, BogorGoogle Scholar
  30. Lockwood M, Davidson J, Curtis A, Stratford E, Griffith R (2010) Governance principles for natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 23(10):986–1001. doi:10.1080/08941920802178214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lubell M, Henry AD, McCoy M (2010) Collaborative institutions in an ecology of games. Am J Polit Sci 54:287–300. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00431.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ludwig D (2001) The era of management is over. Ecosystems 4(8):758–764. doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0044-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marsden PV (1990) Network data and measurement. Annu Rev Sociol 16:435–463. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.002251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. May B, Plummer R (2011) Accommodating the challenges of climate change adaptation and governance in conventional risk management: adaptive collaborative risk management (ACRM). Ecol Soc 16(1):47. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art47/
  35. Moore M-L, Westley F (2011) Surmountable chasms: networks and social innovation for resilient systems. Ecol Soc 16:5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art5/
  36. Newig J, Günther D, Pahl-Wostl C (2010) Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecol Soc 15(4):24. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art24/
  37. Newman L, Dale A (2005) Network structure, diversity, and proactive resilience building: a response to Tompkins and Adger. Ecol Soc 10(1):r2. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/resp2/
  38. Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004a) Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social–ecological systems. Environ Manag 34:75–90. doi:10.1007/s00267-003-0101-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Olsson P, Folke C, Hahn T (2004b) Social–ecological transformation for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in southern Sweden. Ecol Soc 9(4):2. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss4/art2
  40. Olsson P, Gunderson LH, Carpenter SR, Ryan P, Lebel L, Folke C, Holling CS (2006) Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):18. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art18/
  41. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pelling M, High C, Dearing J, Smith D (2008) Shadow spaces for social learning: a relational understanding of adaptive capacity to climate change within organizations. Environ Plan A 40(4):867–884. doi:10.1068/a39148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Plummer R (2009) The adaptive co-management process: an initial synthesis of representative models and influential variables. Ecol Soc 14(2):24. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art24/
  44. Plummer R (2010) Looking forward from the nexus of research and practice: learning from issues emerging with adaptive co-management. In: Forrester J, Swartling Å (eds) Overcoming the Challenges of ‘Doing Participation’ in Environment and Development: workshop summary of lessons learned and ways forward. Stockholm Environmental Institute, Working Paper—2010, pp 21–27Google Scholar
  45. Plummer R (2013) Fostering governance and building capacity for climate change adaptation: can adaptive co-management help? Ecol Soc 18(4):2. doi:10.5751/ES-05699-180402 Google Scholar
  46. Plummer R, FitzGibbon JE (2007) Connecting adaptive co-management, social learning and social capital through theory and practice. In: Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N (eds) Adaptive co-management: collaboration, learning and multi-level governance. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, pp 38–61Google Scholar
  47. Plummer R, Crona B, Armitage D, Olsson P, Tengö M, Yudina O (2012) Adaptive co-management: a systematic review and analysis. Ecol Soc 17(3):11. doi:10.5751/ES-04952-170311 Google Scholar
  48. Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M (2009) Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 22(6):501–518. doi:10.1080/08941920802199202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169. doi:10.1007/BF01405730 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ruitenbeek J, Cartier C (2001) The invisible wand: adaptive co-management as an emergent strategy in complex bio-economic systems. Occasional Paper No. 34. Center for International Forestry Research, BogorGoogle Scholar
  51. Sandström A (2011) Social networks, joint image building and adaptability: the case of local fishery management. In: Bodin Ö, Prell C (eds) Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 288–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sandström A, Carlsson L (2008) The performance of policy networks: the relation between network structure and network performance. Policy Stud J 36(4):497–524. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00281.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sandström A, Rova C (2010) Adaptive co-management networks: a comparative analysis of two fishery conservations areas in Sweden. Ecol Soc 15(3):14. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/issues/article.php/3531
  54. Schneider M, Scholz J, Lubell M, Mindruta D, Edwardsen M (2003) Building consensual institutions: networks and the National Estuary Program. Am J Polit Sci 47(1):143–158. doi:10.1111/1540-5907.00010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Scholz JT, Stiftel B (2005) Adaptive governance and water conflict: new institutions for collaborative planning. Resources for the Future Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  56. Schultz L (2009) Nurturing resilience in social–ecological systems. Dissertation. Stockholm University, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  57. Schultz L, Fazey I (2009) Effective leadership for adaptive management. In: Allan C, Stankey GH (eds) Adaptive environmental management: a practitioner’s guide. Springer, Dortrecht, pp 295–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schultz L, Folke C, Olsson P (2007) Enhancing ecosystem management through social–ecological inventories: lessons from Kristianstads Vattenrike, Sweden. Environ Conserv 34(2):140–152. doi:10.1017/S0376892907003876 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schultz L, Duit A, Folke C (2011) Participation, adaptive co-management and management performance in the world network of biosphere reserves. World Dev 39:662–666. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.09.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schusler TM, Decker DJ, Pfeffer MJ (2003) Social learning for collaborative natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 15(3):309–326. doi:10.1080/08941920390178874 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Seawright J, Gerring J (2008) Case selection techniques in case study research. Polit Res Q 61(2):294–308. doi:10.1177/1065912907313077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Shore J, Bernstein E, Lazer D (2014) Facts and figuring: an experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Harvard Business School Organizational Behaviour Unit Working Paper No. 14-075. 1 June 2014. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2412492
  63. Snijders TAB, van de Bunt GG, Steglich CEG (2010) Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc Netw 32:44–60. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2009.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stake RE (2000) Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 443–466Google Scholar
  65. Stoecker R (1999) Are academics irrelevant? Roles for scholars in participatory research. Am Behav Sci 42(5):840–854. doi:10.1177/00027649921954561 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Trimble M, Berkes F (2013) Participatory research towards co-management: lessons from artisanal fisheries in coastal Uruguay. J Environ Manag 128:768–778. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.06.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Weiss K, Hamann M, Kinney M, Marsh H (2012) Knowledge exchange and policy influence in a marine resource governance network. Glob Environ Chang 22(1):178–188. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Westley F, Tjornbo O, Schultz L, Olsson P, Folke C, Crona B, Bodin Ö (2013) A theory of transformative agency in linked social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 18(3):27. doi:10.5751/ES-05072-180327 Google Scholar
  69. Yin R (1994) Case study research: design and methods, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Yin R (2003) Case study research: design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Sustainability Research CentreBrock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada
  2. 2.Stockholm Resilience CentreStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations