The political ontology of collaborative water governance

This article examines the various definitions of, and analytical approaches to, collaborative water governance (CWG). While the concept’s usage has increased over the past decade, there lacks any deep engagement with the concept of the political at the heart of CWG. This article argues that contemporary approaches to CWG risk emptying the concept of its utility and coherence. Correcting this deficiency requires a focus on the social and ideational constructions of water. This will strengthen future collaborative water arrangements and enable deeper appreciation of the ways the political makes and remakes what is possible in water governance

Mobilized bias and multistakeholder protected-area planning: a socio-institutional perspective on collaboration

By examining the Kawartha Highlands Local Stakeholder Committee, this paper considers how historical factors impact the efficacy of local collaborations. Tasked with developing an initial planning framework for a new protected area in Ontario, Canada, the design of this largely inefficacious process exhibited several questionable trade-offs between competing procedural objectives. However, these factors were not the sole driver behind the establishment of a second, more regionally driven process; previous planning initiatives were equally important. Ontario’s larger history of land use planning contributed to the emergence of rigid discursive constructions amongst powerful stakeholder coalitions, whose interests were consistently accommodated through closed-door negotiations. Healey’s (2007; 2006) socio-institutional approach, which frames such historical factors as part of the informal ‘infrastructures’ of collaboration and as a form of mobilized bias, is offered as a conceptual bridge between the potential scales and units of analysis involved in the study of collaborative natural resource management

Tourism Partnerships in Protected Areas: Exploring Contributions to Sustainability

Partnerships between natural-area managers and the tourism industry have been suggested to contribute to sustainability in protected areas. This article explores how important sustainability outcomes of partnerships are to their members, how well they are realised and the features of partnerships leading to their achievement. In 21 case studies in Australia, interviews (n = 97) and surveys (n = 100) showed that of 14 sustainability outcomes, improved understanding of protected areas values and improved biodiversity conservation were the most important. Other highly ranked outcomes were greater respect for culture, heritage, and/or traditions; improved quality of environmental conditions; social benefits to local communities; and improved economic viability of the protected area. Scores for satisfaction with outcomes were, like those for importance, all high but were less than those for importance for the majority, with improvement in quality of environmental conditions showing the largest gap. The satisfaction score exceeded that for importance only for increased competitiveness of the protected area as a tourist destination. “Brown” aspects of sustainability, i.e., decreased waste or energy use, were among the lowest-scoring outcomes for both importance and satisfaction. The most important factor enabling sustainability outcomes was provision of benefits to partnership members. Others were increased financial support, inclusiveness, supportive organisational and administrative arrangements, direct involvement of decision makers, partnership maturity, creation of new relationships, decreased conflict, and stimulation of innovation. Improving sustainability outcomes, therefore, requires maintaining these partnership attributes and also increasing emphasis on reducing waste and resource use

Gendered Risk Perceptions Associated with Human-Wildlife Conflict: Implications for Participatory Conservation

This research aims to foster discourse about the extent to which gender is important to consider within the context of participatory approaches for biological conservation. Our objectives are to: (1) gender-disaggregate data about stakeholders' risk perceptions associated with human-wildlife conflict (HWC) in a participatory conservation context, and (2) highlight insights from characterizing gendered similarities and differences in the way people think about HWC-related risks. Two communal conservancies in Caprivi, Namibia served as case study sites. We analyzed data from focus groups (n = 2) to create gendered concept maps about risks to wildlife and livelihoods and any associations of those risks with HWC, and semi-structured interviews (n = 76; men = 38, women = 38) to measure explicit risk attitudes associated with HWC. Concept maps indicated some divergent perceptions in how groups characterized risks to wildlife and livelihoods; however, not only were identified risks to wildlife (e.g., pollution, hunting) dissimilar in some instances, descriptions of risks varied as well. Study groups reported similar risk perceptions associated with HWC with the exception of worry associated with HWC effects on local livelihoods. Gendered differences in risk perceptions may signal different priorities or incentives to participate in efforts to resolve HWC-related risks. Thus, although shared goals and interests may seem to be an obvious reason for cooperative wildlife management, it is not always obvious that management goals are shared. Opportunity exists to move beyond thinking about gender as an explanatory variable for understanding how different groups think about participating in conservation activities