The Role of Institutions, Actors and Social Networks in Societal Change

  • Claudia Pahl-WostlEmail author
Part of the Water Governance - Concepts, Methods, and Practice book series (WGCMP)


In Chapter  3, I defined adaptive capacity as the ability of a governance system to alter processes and to adapt its structural elements in response to current or anticipated changes in the social or natural environment. Transformative capacity was defined as the ability of a governance system to first adapt and if required transform structural elements in response to current or anticipated changes in the social or natural environment.


Mental Model Social Learning Institutional Change Governance System Water Governance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Araral, E. (2014). Ostrom, Hardin and the commons: A critical appreciation and a revisionist view. Environmental Science and Policy, 36, 11–23. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA, USA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  3. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Reading, MA, USA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Ehglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Cleaver, F. (2012). Development through Bricolage: Rethinking Institutions for Natural Resource Management. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Tomás S. V. (2010). A review of design principles for community-based natural resource management. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 38. [online] URL:
  8. Crawford, S. E. S., & Ostrom, E. (1995). A grammar of institutions. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denzau, A. T., & North, D. C. (1994). Shared mental models: Ideologies and institutions. Kyklos, 47(1), 3–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6435.1994.tb02246.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dewulf, A., Gray, B., Lewicki, R., Putnam, L., Aarts, N., Bouwen, R., et al. (2009). Disentangling approaches to framing in conflict and negotiation research: A meta-paradigmatic perspective. Human Relations, 69(2), 155–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dionnet, M., Daniell, K. A., Imache, A., von Korff, Y., Bouarfa, S., Garin, P., et al. (2013). Improving participatory processes through collective simulation: Use of a community of practice. Ecology and Society, 18(1), 36. doi: 10.5751/ES-05244-180136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2009). Homo reciprocans: Survey evidence on behavioural outcomes*. The Economic Journal, 119(536), 592–612. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02242.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doyle, J. K., & Ford, D. N. (1998). Mental models concepts for system dynamics research. System Dynamics Review, 14(1), 3–29. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199821)14:1<3:AID-SDR140>3.0.CO;2-K CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Doyle, J. K., & Ford, D. N. (1999). Mental models concepts revisited: Some clarifications and a reply to Lane. System Dynamics Review, 15(4), 411–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ebenhöh, E., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2006). Agent-based modelling with boundedly rational agents. In J.-P. Rennard (Ed.), Handbook of research on nature inspired computing for economy and management (Vol. 2, pp. 225–245). Hershey, PA, USA: Idea Group Reference.Google Scholar
  16. Ebenhöh, E., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2008). Agent behavior between maximization and cooperation. Rationality and Society, 20(2), 227–252. doi: 10.1177/1043463108089546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000). Cooperation and punishment in public good experiments. The American Economic Review, 90(4), 980–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garmestani, A. S., & Benson, M. H. (2013). A framework for resilience-based governance of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 18(1), 9. doi: 10.5751/ES-05180-180109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (Eds.). (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gintis, H. (2000). Game theory evolving: A problem-centered introduction to modeling strategic interaction Princeton. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
  25. Gray, B. (2004). Strong opposition: Frame-based resistance to collaboration. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 166–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Green, O. O., Garmestani, A. S., van Rijswick, H. F., & Keessen, A. M. (2013). EU water governance: Striking the right balance between regulatory flexibility and enforcement? Ecology and Society, 18(2), 10. doi: 10.5751/ES-05357-180210 Google Scholar
  27. Greif, A., & Latin, D. (2004). A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review, 98(04), 633–652. doi: 10.1017/S0003055404041395 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political science and the Three New Institutionalisms*. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Herrfahrdt-Pähle, E., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2012). Continuity and change in social-ecological systems: The role of institutional resilience. Ecology and Society, 17(2), 8. doi: 10.5751/ES-04565-170208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Huitema, D., & Meijerink, S. (2010). Realizing water transitions: The role of policy entrepreneurs in water policy change. Ecology and Society, 15(2), 26.Google Scholar
  31. Huntjens, P., Lebel, L., Pahl-Wostl, C., Camkin, J., Schulze, R., & Kranz, N. (2012). Institutional design propositions for the governance of adaptation to climate change in the water sector. Global Environmental Change, 22(1), 67–81. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York, USA: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  33. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lindner, J. (2003). Institutional stability and change: Two sides of the same coin. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(6), 912–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2009). A theory of gradual institutional change. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Explaining Institutional change ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 1–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mantzavinos, C., North, D. C., & Shariq, S. (2004). Learning, institutions, and economic performance. Perspectives on Politics, 2(01), 75–84. doi: 10.1017/S1537592704000635 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Milly, P. C. D., Betancourt, J., Falkenmark, M., Hirsch, R. M., Kundzewicz, Z. W., Lettenmaier, D. P., et al. (2008). Stationarity is dead: Whither water management? Science, 319(5863), 573–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Newig, J., Günther, D., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2010). Synapses in the network: Learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 24.Google Scholar
  39. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. North, D. C. (1994). Economic performance through time. The American Economic Review, 84(3), 359–368. doi: 10.2307/2118057 Google Scholar
  41. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100, 641–672. doi: 10.1257/aer.100.3.641 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pahl-Wostl, C. (2006). The importance of social learning in restoring the multifunctionality of rivers and floodplains. Ecology and Society, 11(1), 10. [online] URL:
  45. Pahl-Wostl, C. (2009). A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Global Environmental Change, 19, 354–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pahl-Wostl, C., Craps, M., Dewulf, A., Mostert, E., Tabara, D., & Taillieu., T. (2007). Social learning and water resources management. Ecology and Society, 12(2), 5. [online] URL:
  47. Pahl-Wostl, C., Holtz, G., Kastens, B., & Knieper, C. (2010). Analyzing complex water governance regimes: The management and transition framework. Environmental Science and Policy, 13(7), 571–581. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pahl-Wostl, C., Jeffrey, P., Isendahl, N., & Brugnach, M. (2011). Maturing the new water management paradigm: Progressing from aspiration to practice. Water Resources Management, 25(3), 837–856. doi: 10.1007/s11269-010-9729-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pahl-Wostl, C., Becker, G., Sendzimir, J., & Knieper, C. (2013). How multilevel societal learning processes facilitate transformative change: A comparative case study analysis on flood management. Ecology and Society, 18(4), 58. doi: 10.5751/ES-05779-180458 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., et al. (2010). What is social learning? Ecology and Society, 15(4):r1.Google Scholar
  51. Rodela, R. (2011). Social learning and natural resource management: The emergence of three research perspectives. Ecology and Society, 16(4), 30. doi: 10.5751/ES-04554-160430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Innovativeness and adopter categories. In E. M. Rogers, (Ed.), Diffusion of innovations (5 ed, pp. 267–299). New York: Free Press, Simon & Schuster Inc.Google Scholar
  53. Scholz, G. (2014). How participatory methods facilitate social learning in natural resources management. Osnabrück: Osnabrück University.Google Scholar
  54. Scholz, G., Dewulf, A., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2013). An analytical framework of social learning facilitated by participatory methods. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 1–17, doi: 10.1007/s11213-013-9310-z
  55. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Scott, R. W. (2008). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests (3ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  57. Sendzimir, J., Flachner, Z., Pahl-Wostl, C., & Knieper, C. (2010). Stalled regime transition in the upper Tisza River Basin: The dynamics of linked action situations. Environmental Science and Policy, 13(7), 604–619. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Simon, H. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  59. Smith, G. (Ed.). (1999). Goffman and social organization: Studies of a sociological legacy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: System thinking and modeling for a complex world. USA: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  61. Streek, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streek & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies (pp. 3–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice; learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7, 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Young, O. R. (2001). The behavioral effects of environmental regimes: Collective-action vs. social-practice models. International Environmental Agreements, 1(1), 9–29. doi: 10.1023/A:1010181007938 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Young, O. R. (2008). Building regimes for socioecological systems: Institutional diagnostics. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 115–144). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Young, O. R. (2010). Institutional dynamics—Emergent patters in international environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Environmental Systems ResearchUniversity of OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations