Emergence of Collaborative Environmental Governance: What are the Causal Mechanisms?

Environmental Management volume 63, pages 16–31 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

Conflict in environmental governance is common, and bringing together stakeholders with diverse perspectives in situations of conflict is extremely difficult. However, case studies of how diverse stakeholders form self-organized coalitions under these circumstances exist and provide invaluable opportunities to understand the causal mechanisms that operate in the process. We focus on the case of the Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve nomination process, which unfolded over several years and moved the region from a series of serious conflicts to one where stakeholders came together to support a Biosphere Reserve nomination. Causal mechanisms identified from the literature and considered most relevant to the case were confirmed in it, using an 'explaining outcomes' process tracing methodology. Perceived severity of the problem, institutional emulation, and institutional entrepreneurship all played an important role in the coalition-building process. The fear of marginalization was identified as a potential causal mechanism that requires further study. The findings here contribute to filling an important gap in the literature related to causal mechanisms for self-organized coalition-building under conflict, and contribute to practice with important considerations when building a coalition for natural resource management and governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Adams WM, Brockington D, Dyson J, Vira B (2003) Managing tragedies: Understanding conflict over common pool resources. Science 302:1915–1920

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Agrawal A (2001) Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Dev 29(10):1649–1672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Agrawal A, Chhatre A (2006) Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Dev 34(1):134–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ansell C, Gash A (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J Public Adm Res Theory 18(4):543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Armitage D, Plummer R, Berkes F, Arthur R, Charles AT, Davidson-Hunt IJ, Diduck AP, Doubleday NC, Johnson DS, Marschke M, McConney P, Pinkerton EW, Wollenberg EK (2009) Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Front Ecol Environ 7(2):95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Armitage, D, Plummer R, Baird J, Dzyundzyak A, Schultz L, Armitage D, Bodin Ö (2017) Learning and adaptive co-management. Environ Policy Gov. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.1781/full

  7. Baird J, Velaniškis J, Plummer R, FitzGibbon J (2014) Political legitimacy and collaborative water governance: An exploratory case study. Itnl J Water Gov 2:61–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barki H, Hartwick J (2004) Conceptualizing the construct of interpersonal conflict. Int J Confl Manag 15(3):216–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Beach D, Pedersen RB (2013) Process-tracing methods. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Biesbroek GR, Termeer CJAM, Klostermann JEM, Kabat P (2014) Rethinking barriers to adaptation: Mechanism-based explanation of impasses in the governance of an innovative adaptation measure. Glob Environ Change 26:108–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Biggs R, Westley FR, Carpenter SR (2010) Navigating the back loop: Fostering social innovation and transformation in ecosystem management Ecol and Soc. 15(2):9. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art9/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bodin Ö, Crona BI (2008) Management of natural resources at the community level: Exploring the role of social capital and leadership in a rural fishing community World Dev 36(12):2763–2779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bodin Ö (2017) Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social-ecological systems. Science 357(6352):eaan1114. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1114

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Booher DE, Innes JE (2010) Governance for resilience: CALFED as a complex adaptive network for resource management. Ecol Soc 15(3):35, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art35/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Buckles D (Ed) (1999) Cultivating peace: Conflict and collaboration in natural resource management. International Development Research Centre and The World Bank, Ottawa, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  16. Butler JRA, Young JC, McMyn IAG, Leyshon B, Graham IM, Walker I, Baxterg JM, Doddh J, Warburton C (2015) Evaluating adaptive co-management as conservation conflict resolution: Learning from seals and salmon. J Environ Manag 160:212–225

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674312265

  18. Daniels SE, Walker GB (2001) Working through environmental conflict: The collaborative learning approach. Praeger Publishers, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  19. De Jong M, Lalenis K, Mamadouh V (2002) The theory and practice of institutional transplantation. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Dolowitz D, Marsh D (1996) Who learns what from whom: A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Stud 44(2):343–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00334.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ernstson H, Sörlin S, Elmqvist T (2008) Social movements and ecosystem services—the role of social network structure in protecting and managing urban green areas in Stockholm. Ecol Soc 13(2):39, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art39/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Environment Canada (n.d.) Science and monitoring synthesis for South-Eastern Georgian Bay. Environ Canada. https://georgianbay.civicweb.net/document/118759

  23. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS, Walker B (2002) Resilience and sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio 31(5):437–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Res 30:441–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Flanigan AJ, Stohl C, Bimber B (2006) Modeling the structure of collective action. Commun Monogr 73(1):29–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fulmer CA, Gelfand MJ (2012) At what level (and in whom) we trust: Trust across multiple organizational levels. J Manag 38(4):1167–1230

    Google Scholar 

  27. GBBR (n.d.) History and achievements. Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve http://www.gbbr.ca/about-us/history-and-achievements/

  28. Geels FW (2004) From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theor. Res Policy 33:897–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. George C, Reed MG (2016) Building institutional capacity for environmental governance through social entrepreneurship: Lessons from Canadian biosphere reserves. Ecol Soc 21(1):18. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08229-210118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve Inc. (2004) Nomination Submission from Canada for the Georgian Bay Littoral Biosphere Reserve. Greater Bay Area Foundation and the Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve Inc. https://www.gbbr.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/GBLBR-nomination-document1.pdf

  31. Georgian Bay (Township) v. Skidmore, 1992 CanLii 8597 (ON SCDC)

  32. Gerring John (2007) Case study research—principles and practices. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gruber A (2004) Navigating diverse identities: Building coalitions through redistribution of academic capital-An exercise in praxis. Seton Hall L. Rev. 35:1201

    Google Scholar 

  34. Häge FM (2013) Coalition building and consensus in the Council of the European Union. Br J Political Sci 43(3):481–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 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(4):573–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Heikkila T, Gerlak AK (2005) The formation of large‐scale collaborative resource management institutions: Clarifying the roles of stakeholders science and institutions. Policy Stud J 33(4):583–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00134.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hurrell A (1992) Latin America in the New World Order: A regional bloc of the Americas? Intl Affairs 68(1):121–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Joshi M (2013) Inclusive institutions and stability of transition toward democracy in Post-Civil War. Democratization 20(4):743–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.666067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Karch A (2007) Emerging issues and future directions in state policy diffusion research. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 7(1):54–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244000700700104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kingdon JW (1995) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York: Addison-Wesley Educational Pulishers, Inc

  41. Kroesen O, De Jong M, Waaub JP (2007) Cross-national transfer of policy models to developing countries: Epilogue. Knowl Technol Policy 19(4):137–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lebel L, Anderies JM, Campbell B, Folke C, Hatfield-Dodds S, Hughes TP, Wilson J (2006) Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):19, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art19/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lubell M (2005) Do watershed partnerships enhance beliefs conducive to collective action? In: Sabatier PA, Focht W, Lubell M, Trachtenberg Z, Vedlitz A, Matlock M (eds) Swimming upstream: collaborative approaches to watershed management. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 201–232

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lubell M, Schneider M, Scholz JT, Mete M (2002) Watershed partnerships and the emergence of collective action institutions. Am J Pol Sci 46(1):148–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. McAvoy M, McDonald D, Carlson M (2003) American Indian/First Nation place attachment to park lands: The case of the Nuu-chah-nulth of British Columbia. J Park Recreat Adm 21(2):84–104

    Google Scholar 

  46. Meinzen-Dick R, Knox A (1999) Collective action property rights and devolution of natural resource management: A conceptual framework. Workshop on Collective Action Property Rights and Devolution of Natural Resource Puerto Azul Philippines June (pp 21–24)

  47. Mintrom M (1997) Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. Am J Political Sci 41(3):738–770. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2111674.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Mintrom M, Norman P (2009) Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Stud J 37(4):649–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Moore ML, Westley F (2011) Surmountable chasms: Networks and social innovation for resilient systems. Ecol and Soc 16(1):5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art5/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mulgan G, Tucker S, Ali R, Sanders B (2006) Social innovation: What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. The Young Foundation, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  51. Olson M (1965) The logic of collective action. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  52. Olson M. (2002). Power and prosperity. New York: Basic Books 2000. Q J Austrian Econ 5(2): 85–87

  53. Olsson P, Folke C, Hahn T (2004) 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004b) Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social-ecological systems. J Environ Manag 34(1):75–90

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ontario (Minister of Natural Resources) v. Cote, 2005 CanLii33542 (ON SC).

  56. Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Science 104(39):15181–15187

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Ostrom E (2009) Institutional rational choice: An assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In: Sabatier PA, Weible CM (eds) Theories of policy process, 3rd edn. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 267–306

    Google Scholar 

  58. Plummer R, Baird J, Dzyundzyak A, Schultz L, Armitage D, Bodin Ö (2017a) Is adaptive co-management delivering? Examining relationships between collaboration, learning and outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves Ecol Econ 140:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Plummer R, Dzyundzyak A, Baird J, Schultz L, Armitage D, Bodin, Ö (2017b) Understanding how environmental governance leads to social and ecological outcomes using participant perceptions and causal pathways. PLOS One http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185375

  60. Pretty J, Ward H (2001) Social capital and the environment. World Dev 29(2):209–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00098-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Rosen F, Olsson P (2013) Institutional entrepreneurs global networks and the emergence of international institutions for ecosystem-based management: The Coral Triangle Initiative. Mar Policy 38:195–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sabatier PA, Focht W, Lubell M., Trachtenberg Z, Veditz A, Matlock M. (2005). Swimming upstream. Collaborative approaches to watershed management. M.I.T. Press Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

  63. Schlager E (2004) Common-pool resource theory. In: Durant RF, Fiorino DJ, O’Leary R Eds. Environmental governance reconsidered: challenges, choices and opportunities. MIT Press, Massachusetts, pp. 145–176

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sealey-Ruiz Y (2013) Learning to resist: Educational counter-narratives of black college re-entry mothers. Teach Coll Rec 115(4):1–31

    Google Scholar 

  65. Statistics Canada (1996) 1996 Census of population. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 95F0181XDB96001.

  66. Steins NA, Edwards VM (1999) Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources. Agric Human Values 16(3):241–255. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007591401621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Stone D (2001) Learning lessons, policy transfer and the international diffusion of policy ideas. CSGR Working Paper No. 69/01

  68. UNESCO (1996) Biosphere reserves: the Seville strategy and the statutory framework of the world network. UNESCO, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  69. Westley FR, Tjornbo O, Schultz L, Olsson P, Folke C, Crona B, Bodin Ö (2013) A theory of transformative agency in linked social-ecological systems. Ecol and Soc 18(3):27. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05072-180327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Wondolleck JM, Yaffee SL (2000) Making collaboration work. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  71. Young JC, Marzano M, White RM, McCracken DI, Redpath SM, Carss DN, Quine CP, Watt AD (2010) The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: Characteristics and management strategies. Biodivers Conserv 19(14):3973–3990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Zakocs RC, Edwards EM (2006) What explains community coalition effectiveness? Am J Prev Med 30(4):351–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Zurba M (2014) Leveling the playing field: Fostering collaborative governance towards on-going reconciliation. Environ Policy Gov 24(2):134–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Environmental Sustainability Research Centre, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, L2S 3A1, Canada

    Julia Baird & Ryan Plummer

  2. Department of Geography and Tourism Studies, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, L2S 3A1, Canada

    Julia Baird

  3. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden

    Lisen Schultz, Ryan Plummer & Örjan Bodin

  4. School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada

    Derek Armitage

Authors
  1. Julia Baird
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lisen Schultz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ryan Plummer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Derek Armitage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Örjan Bodin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Baird.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All data collection procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baird, J., Schultz, L., Plummer, R. et al. Emergence of Collaborative Environmental Governance: What are the Causal Mechanisms?. Environmental Management 63, 16–31 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1105-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Environmental governance
  • Causal mechanism
  • Collaboration