Co-Producing Narratives and Indicators as Catalysts for Adaptive Governance of a Common-Pool Resource within a Protected Area.

The theory and practice of adaptive management and adaptive governance have been widely studied in the complex social contexts that mediate how humans interact with ecosystems. Adaptive governance is thought to enable adaptive management in such contexts. In this study, we examine four often-used principles of adaptive governance (polycentric institutions, collaboration, social learning and complexity thinking) to develop a framework for reflecting on adaptive governance of a social-ecological system-the Knysna Estuary in South Africa. This estuary is a priority for biodiversity conservation, as well as a common-pool resource central to livelihoods. We used the framework to structure dialogue on the extent to which the four principles of adaptive governance were being applied in the management of the Knysna Estuary. The dialogue included diverse stakeholders, from those who have the power to influence adaptive management to those most dependent on the resource for their livelihoods. Based on a combination of theory and current reality we then identified eight indicators that could be used to guide a transition towards improved adaptive governance of the estuary. These indicators were assessed and supported by most stakeholders. The main contributions of our research are (a) a process for combining theory and stakeholder dialogue to reflect on adaptive governance of a social-ecological system; (b) a set of indicators or conditions that emerged from our participatory process that can be used for reflexive monitoring and adaptation of adaptive governance of Knysna Estuary; and (c) a real-world example of seeking complementary links between adaptive governance and adaptive management to promote effective management of complex social-ecological systems.

A function-based typology for Earth's ecosystems.

As the United Nations develops a post-2020 global biodiversity framework for the Convention on Biological Diversity, attention is focusing on how new goals and targets for ecosystem conservation might serve its vision of 'living in harmony with nature'1,2. Advancing dual imperatives to conserve biodiversity and sustain ecosystem services requires reliable and resilient generalizations and predictions about ecosystem responses to environmental change and management3. Ecosystems vary in their biota4, service provision5 and relative exposure to risks6, yet there is no globally consistent classification of ecosystems that reflects functional responses to change and management. This hampers progress on developing conservation targets and sustainability goals. Here we present the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Ecosystem Typology, a conceptually robust, scalable, spatially explicit approach for generalizations and predictions about functions, biota, risks and management remedies across the entire biosphere. The outcome of a major cross-disciplinary collaboration, this novel framework places all of Earth's ecosystems into a unifying theoretical context to guide the transformation of ecosystem policy and management from global to local scales. This new information infrastructure will support knowledge transfer for ecosystem-specific management and restoration, globally standardized ecosystem risk assessments, natural capital accounting and progress on the post-2020 global biodiversity framework.

Appraising strategic adaptive management as a process of organizational learning.

Adaptive management is a systematic approach for linking learning with implementation to facilitate ongoing improvement in natural resource management. The idea of learning from experience and adapting subsequent policies, strategies and actions, is intuitively appealing. However, application of adaptive management has been hindered by several obstacles, including a paucity of documented lessons from existing adaptive management practices and inadequate attention to the complex social aspects of learning. Here we address these two impediments through (i) a case study of an established version of adaptive management and its application in the context of protected area management plans, and (ii) its critical comparison and conceptual integration with the seminal theory of organizational knowledge creation (TOKC), which emphasizes the social aspects of learning. As case study, we focus on Strategic Adaptive Management (SAM), which has been iteratively developed and implemented by South African National Parks for more than 20 years. We used TOKC as a conceptual sounding board to reflect on and appraise the learning that takes place through SAM. A comparison of the main steps of the SAM cycle with corresponding stages outlined by TOKC revealed remarkable complementarity between these two approaches, but also important differences. The conceptual comparison deepened our understanding of SAM's learning performance as well as potential, revealing strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement. Key insights include that valuable and different forms of learning takes place during each step of the SAM cycle. This learning can be enhanced through careful attention to approaches for creating, sharing and making explicit the tacit knowledge of individuals. Furthermore, dialogue and co-learning with stakeholders should be maintained beyond the visioning and objectives setting step of SAM. Based on insights gained, we developed a new and complementary conceptualization of SAM, as a spiraling process of organizational learning enabled by the interplay between tacit and explicit forms of knowledge, which in turn is mediated by different types of social interactions, media and engagement with practice. We believe that this conceptualization can help to better acknowledge and enable learning as one of the most fundamental purposes and outcomes of SAM, and adaptive management more generally.

Understanding rivers and their social relations: A critical step to advance environmental water management.

River flows connect people, places, and other forms of life, inspiring and sustaining diverse cultural beliefs, values, and ways of life. The concept of environmental flows provides a framework for improving understanding of relationships between river flows and people, and for supporting those that are mutually beneficial. Nevertheless, most approaches to determining environmental flows remain grounded in the biophysical sciences. The newly revised Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018) represents a new phase in environmental flow science and an opportunity to better consider the co-constitution of river flows, ecosystems, and society, and to more explicitly incorporate these relationships into river management. We synthesize understanding of relationships between people and rivers as conceived under the renewed definition of environmental flows. We present case studies from Honduras, India, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia that illustrate multidisciplinary, collaborative efforts where recognizing and meeting diverse flow needs of human populations was central to establishing environmental flow recommendations. We also review a small body of literature to highlight examples of the diversity and interdependencies of human-flow relationships-such as the linkages between river flow and human well-being, spiritual needs, cultural identity, and sense of place-that are typically overlooked when environmental flows are assessed and negotiated. Finally, we call for scientists and water managers to recognize the diversity of ways of knowing, relating to, and utilizing rivers, and to place this recognition at the center of future environmental flow assessments. This article is categorized under: Water and Life > Conservation, Management, and Awareness Human Water > Water Governance Human Water > Water as Imagined and Represented.

Principles for evaluating knowledge co-production in natural resource management: Incorporating decision-maker values.

A key reason for undertaking transdisciplinary processes such as knowledge co-production in natural resource management is to access and apply different knowledge systems to complex issues. However, the value of co-production is predominantly framed by academics. They have focused on research design and outcomes in the form of 'science informing policy'. In this paper we build a more inclusive and holistic framing of knowledge co-production incorporating values of non-academic participants, and values related to the participatory process. Specifically, we examine how knowledge is communicated and deliberated upon and the requirements for this to be done effectively. We draw upon empirical data from interviews with natural resource managers who participated in two case studies of knowledge co-production in Australia and South Africa. Their perspectives are captured in eight evaluation principles that build upon existing evaluation frameworks for public participation. Critically, decision-makers valued science-based outputs not just as salient knowledge sources, but to give legitimacy to their decisions. This need for legitimacy necessitates transparency, fairness and inclusivity in knowledge selection, participation and dialogue within knowledge co-production processes. The practice-based knowledge of decision-makers was important for contextualizing and applying science to specific decision contexts. Another key finding is that communicative competence is central to the process of knowledge co-production because it enables participants to critically explore and understand the knowledge claims of others.

The case for embedding researchers in conservation agencies.

Although protected areas represent a pivotal response to escalating anthropogenic threats, they face many pressures, inside and outside their boundaries. Amid these challenges, effective conservation is guided by evidence-based decision making supported by dynamic processes of learning and knowledge exchange. Although different models promote knowledge exchange, embedding research scientists within conservation agencies is best suited to supporting evidence-based conservation. Based on available literature and our experiences on several continents, we considered the benefits, challenges, and opportunities associated with embedding research scientists within conservation agencies and the research required to better understand the effectiveness of the embedding model for evidence-based conservation. Embedded researchers provide long-term commitment to building social capital among academic and nonacademic stakeholders; act as skilled gatekeepers who increase 2-way flow of knowledge between scientists and managers; attract, coordinate, and support management-relevant external research projects; drive the design and maintenance of long-term monitoring; and align their research with information needs. Notwithstanding the many benefits, research capacity of conservation agencies is declining worldwide. A significant challenge is that the values, structures, functions, and effectiveness of the embedding model of knowledge exchange remain poorly evaluated and documented. Also, embedded researchers have to balance their desire for creativity and flexibility with the standardization and quality control required by their public sector agencies; may be perceived as not credible because they are not truly independent of their agency; and have to couple scientific productivity with skills for transdisciplinary research, social facilitation, and stakeholder engagement. Systematic research on embedding and other models of knowledge exchange, across different world contexts, is required to better understand the benefits, costs, and institutional arrangements associated with different models.

El Caso para la Incorporación de Investigadores en las Agencias de Conservación Resumen Aunque las áreas protegidas representan una respuesta crucial a las crecientes amenazas antropogénicas, estas enfrentan muchas presiones dentro y fuera de sus fronteras. En medio de estos desafíos, la conservación efectiva se guía por la toma de decisiones con base en evidencias respaldada por los procesos dinámicos de aprendizaje e intercambio de conocimiento. Mientras que diferentes modelos promueven el intercambio de conocimiento, la incorporación de investigadores científicos en las agencias de conservación es más adecuada para respaldar la conservación basada en evidencias. Con base en la literatura disponible y en nuestras experiencias en varios continentes consideramos los beneficios, desafíos y oportunidades asociadas con la incorporación de investigadores científicos en las agencias de conservación y la investigación requerida para entender de mejor manera la efectividad del modelo de incorporación para la conservación basada en evidencias. Los investigadores incorporados proporcionan un compromiso a largo plazo con la construcción de un capital social entre los accionistas académicos y no académicos; fungen como guardianes habilidosos que incrementan el flujo de dos vías de conocimiento entre los científicos y los administradores; atraen, coordinan y apoyan los proyectos de investigación externos relevantes para el manejo; llevan el diseño y el mantenimiento del monitoreo a largo plazo; y alinean su investigación con las necesidades de información. A pesar de los beneficios, la capacidad de investigación de las agencias de conservación está declinando a nivel mundial. Un desafío significativo es que los valores, estructuras, funciones y efectividad del modelo de incorporación del intercambio de conocimiento permanecen pobremente evaluados y documentados. Además, los investigadores incorporados tienen que balancear su deseo por ser creativos y flexibles con la estandarización y el control de calidad requeridos por sus agencias del sector público; pueden ser percibidos como no creíbles porque no son realmente independientes de su agencia; y tienen que emparejar la productividad científica con las habilidades de investigación transdisciplinaria, facilitación social y participación de los accionistas. Se requiere de la investigación sistemática sobre la incorporación y otros modelos de intercambio de conocimiento en diferentes contextos globales para entender de mejor manera los beneficios, costos y arreglos institucionales asociados con diferentes modelos.

Knowledge co-production and boundary work to promote implementation of conservation plans.

Knowledge co-production and boundary work offer planners a new frame for critically designing a social process that fosters collaborative implementation of resulting plans. Knowledge co-production involves stakeholders from diverse knowledge systems working iteratively toward common vision and action. Boundary work is a means of creating permeable knowledge boundaries that satisfy the needs of multiple social groups while guarding the functional integrity of contributing knowledge systems. Resulting products are boundary objects of mutual interest that maintain coherence across all knowledge boundaries. We examined how knowledge co-production and boundary work can bridge the gap between planning and implementation and promote cross-sectoral cooperation. We applied these concepts to well-established stages in regional conservation planning within a national scale conservation planning project aimed at identifying areas for conserving rivers and wetlands of South Africa and developing an institutional environment for promoting their conservation. Knowledge co-production occurred iteratively over 4 years in interactive stake-holder workshops that included co-development of national freshwater conservation goals and spatial data on freshwater biodiversity and local conservation feasibility; translation of goals into quantitative inputs that were used in Marxan to select draft priority conservation areas; review of draft priority areas; and packaging of resulting map products into an atlas and implementation manual to promote application of the priority area maps in 37 different decision-making contexts. Knowledge co-production stimulated dialogue and negotiation and built capacity for multi-scale implementation beyond the project. The resulting maps and information integrated diverse knowledge types of over 450 stakeholders and represented >1000 years of collective experience. The maps provided a consistent national source of information on priority conservation areas for rivers and wetlands and have been applied in 25 of the 37 use contexts since their launch just over 3 years ago. When framed as a knowledge co-production process supported by boundary work, regional conservation plans can be developed into valuable boundary objects that offer a tangible tool for multi-agency cooperation around conservation. Our work provides practical guidance for promoting uptake of conservation science and contributes to an evidence base on how conservation efforts can be improved.

The role and value of conservation agency research.

Governments charge their conservation agencies to safeguard biodiversity through protected areas and threat mitigation. Increasingly, conservation management and policy need to be supported by rigorous evidence provided by science. As such, institutional arrangements should consider and enable effective scientific research and information dissemination. What role can in-house agency research play in responding to this challenge? We examined the research capabilities of three conservation agencies from Australia, South Africa, and United States. Seven indicators were used to characterize the reliability and relevance of agency research. We found similarities among agencies in their patterns of peer-reviewed publication, cultures of research collaboration, and tendencies to align research with organizational objectives. Among the many and diverse activities that constitute the role of a contemporary agency researcher, we emphasize two key research dimensions: reliability, achieved through peer-reviewed research output, and relevance, achieved through active stakeholder engagement. Amid increasingly challenging realities for conservation of ecosystems, agency science functions are vital to providing the evidence base required for effective management and policy development.

Conservation planning as a transdisciplinary process.

Despite substantial growth in the field of conservation planning, the speed and success with which conservation plans are converted into conservation action remains limited. This gap between science and action extends beyond conservation planning into many other applied sciences and has been linked to complexity of current societal problems, compartmentalization of knowledge and management sectors, and limited collaboration between scientists and decision makers. Transdisciplinary approaches have been proposed as a possible way to address these challenges and to bridge the gap between science and action. These approaches move beyond the bridging of disciplines to an approach in which science becomes a social process resolving problems through the participation and mutual learning of stakeholders. We explored the principles of transdisciplinarity, in light of our experiences as conservation-planning researchers working in South Africa, to better understand what is required to make conservation planning transdisciplinary and therefore more effective. Using the transdisciplinary hierarchy of knowledge (empirical, pragmatic, normative, and purposive), we found that conservation planning has succeeded in integrating many empirical disciplines into the pragmatic stakeholder-engaged process of strategy development and implementation. Nevertheless, challenges remain in engagement of the social sciences and in understanding the social context of implementation. Farther up this knowledge hierarchy, at the normative and purposive levels, we found that a lack of integrated land-use planning and policies (normative) and the dominant effect of national values (purposive) that prioritize growth and development limit the effectiveness and relevance of conservation plans. The transdisciplinary hierarchy of knowledge highlighted that we need to move beyond bridging the empirical and pragmatic disciplines into the complex normative world of laws, policies, and planning and become engaged in the purposive processes of decision making, behavior change, and value transfer. Although there are indications of progress in this direction, working at the normative and purposive levels requires time, leadership, resources, skills that are absent in conservation training and practice, and new forms of recognition in systems of scientific reward and funding.

An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation.

Research on ecosystem services has grown markedly in recent years. However, few studies are embedded in a social process designed to ensure effective management of ecosystem services. Most research has focused only on biophysical and valuation assessments of putative services. As a mission-oriented discipline, ecosystem service research should be user-inspired and user-useful, which will require that researchers respond to stakeholder needs from the outset and collaborate with them in strategy development and implementation. Here we provide a pragmatic operational model for achieving the safeguarding of ecosystem services. The model comprises three phases: assessment, planning, and management. Outcomes of social, biophysical, and valuation assessments are used to identify opportunities and constraints for implementation. The latter then are transformed into user-friendly products to identify, with stakeholders, strategic objectives for implementation (the planning phase). The management phase undertakes and coordinates actions that achieve the protection of ecosystem services and ensure the flow of these services to beneficiaries. This outcome is achieved via mainstreaming, or incorporating the safeguarding of ecosystem services into the policies and practices of sectors that deal with land- and water-use planning. Management needs to be adaptive and should be institutionalized in a suite of learning organizations that are representative of the sectors that are concerned with decision-making and planning. By following the phases of our operational model, projects for safeguarding ecosystem services are likely to empower stakeholders to implement effective on-the-ground management that will achieve resilience of the corresponding social-ecological systems.

The impact of scientific information on ecosystem management: making sense of the contextual gap between information providers and decision makers.

Scientific information is not always effectively incorporated into decision-making processes. This phenomenon seems to hold even when the information is aligned with an articulated need, is generated according to sound scientific procedures, and is packaged with end-user preferences in mind. We propose that contextual or cultural differences contribute significantly to the misalignment in communication between those who generate information and those who seek information for improved management of natural resources. The solution is to cultivate shared understanding, which in turn relies on acknowledgment and sharing of diverse values and attitudes. This constitutes a difficult challenge in a culturally diverse environment. Whereas cultural diversity represents wealth in experiences, knowledge and perspectives it can constrain the potential to develop the shared understandings necessary for effective integration of new information. This article illustrates how a lack of shared understanding among participants engaged in a resource-management process can produce and perpetuate divergent views of the world, to the extent that information and knowledge flows are ineffective and scientific information, even when requested, cannot be used effectively. Four themes were distilled from interviews with management and scientific staff of a natural resource-management agency in South Africa. The themes are used to illustrate how divergent views embedded in different cultures can discourage alignment of effort toward a common purpose. The article then presents a sense-making framework to illustrate the potential for developing shared understandings in a culturally diverse world.