Adaptive co-management of environmental risks in result-based agreements for the provision of environmental services: A case study of the South of the Divide Conservation Action Program.

Environmental risks pose a threat to the achievement of ecosystem outcomes in Results- or Outcome-based Agreements for endangered species conservation on agricultural lands. As a result, environmental risks can deter prospective land managers from participating in Results-based Agreements if not addressed. This qualitative case study examines a Results-based Agreement program implemented by the South of the Divide Conservation Action Program (SODCAP Inc.) in Southwestern Saskatchewan. We contribute to understanding the nature of environmental risks in Results-based Agreements and how SODCAP Inc., an emergent leader in grassroots-focused conservation governance in Southwestern Saskatchewan, works with land managers to address environmental risks. Using drought as an example of environmental risks, the study finds that drought is a common occurrence in the study area; therefore, land managers consider it a critical determinant when deciding to participate in Results-based Agreements. The study also reveals that environmental risks affect land managers involved with Results-based Agreements both by limiting their ability to achieve ecosystem targets and by forcing them to incur extra costs (i.e., extra management and opportunity costs) in their attempt to meet ecosystem targets under drought conditions. Finally, the case study illustrates a participatory and result-enhancing approach adopted by SODCAP Inc., which draws several parallels with adaptive co-management, to manage environmental risks. Our study findings contribute to a relatively limited body of scholarship in environmental risk management in Results-based Agreements. In addition to the study's policy relevance, it also calls for studies into conservation programs that are result-enhancing.

How do biosphere stewards actively shape trajectories of social-ecological change?

The biosphere faces an uncertain future! Embracing change, uncertainty and complexity calls for creative transformative pathways. Biosphere stewardship provides a novel multi actor approach towards sustainability. Despite the critical role of individual environmental stewards, biosphere stewardship emphasizes the importance of collective action, and therefore governance. Biosphere stewardship denotes novel governance configurations with the capacity to effectively approach to sustainability transformation. In this paper we seek to advance understanding of how biosphere stewardship actively shapes trajectories of change to foster social-ecological resilience and human wellbeing. Considering the crucial role of governance and more specifically its two pillars of collaboration and learning, we conduct our study of biosphere stewardship through the lens of adaptive co-management. We first set out a framework for diagnosing and analyzing the process of biosphere stewardship. Secondly, we provide evidenced-based insights from applying the framework in four UNESCO biosphere reserves situated in Canada and Sweden to shed light on how active collective shaping of biosphere stewardship occurs and what it produces. In view of the lack of framework for environmental stewardship, we suggest that the present study makes a considerable contribution by providing an appropriate holistic and systemic framework with operational measures. The study also highlights how the comprehensive and consensual understanding of stewardship is proving to be a means of catalyzing biosphere stewardship by enabling effective crafting of policy design and strategic interventions. Moreover, the application of the framework to four case studies reveals the importance of the governance process attributes (collaboration and learning) in mediating outcomes from biosphere stewardship. Finally, the framework provides the basis to address new stewardship enquiries, which require further research in this field.

Co-creating urban green infrastructure connecting people and nature: A guiding framework and approach.

Urban green infrastructure (UGI) and nature-based solutions are increasingly recognized as instruments to address urban sustainability challenges, yet rely on a good understanding of complex social-ecological system (SES) to function adequately. Adaptive co-management (ACM), engaging a broad variety of stakeholders in collaborative learning, is an effective strategy to improve the resilience of a SES. However, ACM studies have been criticized for neglecting the urban context, while also offering little clarity on process objectives and outcomes. To address these knowledge gaps, while also drawing attention to the important issue of socially inclusive UGI development, we present a guiding framework and approach to encourage the ACM of UGI featuring two main components. Firstly, a Learning Alliance (LA) serves as an instrument for collaborative learning and experimentation across different scales. To facilitate upscaling, we propose to establish a complementary Urban Learning Lab (ULL) to facilitate a regular exchange between the LA and legitimate peripheral networks and stakeholders in the city region. Secondly, a stepwise approach to SES analysis serves to engage a representative group of stakeholders in the LAs and ULLs, and support the processes of setting LA objectives and monitoring of adaptive capacity. We illustrate our approach to the ACM of UGI with a case study of LivadaLAB in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Applying the framework and approach, we demonstrate increased adaptive capacity of the SES around UGI as indicated by: 1) improved overall stakeholder salience, in particular for previously disempowered actor groups, 2) increased number and strength of connections between stakeholders, and 3) the consideration of a broader range of sustainable development objectives by stakeholders in their daily practice.

Opportunities for adaptive online collaboration to enhance rural land management.

Cross-property cooperation has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of environmental management actions that cut across property boundaries. Online tools can facilitate this and overcome barriers to landholder engagement in collaborative management. However, collaborative online tools need to be designed and tailored to users' needs and values, and landholder participation in the development process is critical to ensuring uptake and long-term use. This article presents a case study from the Central Tablelands region of New South Wales, Australia, where landholders have been involved in participatory development of a new online collaboration tool. The case study results highlight the significance of issues such as internet access, privacy, technical proficiency and differing stakeholder objectives. A landholder survey identified mapping and the uploading of monitoring data as important functions for the online tool, but these were not rated as highly as functions relating to data security, sharing settings and key term searches. Consequently, we recommend that a future online collaboration tool for the region is not framed specifically as a mapping or citizen science tool, but rather as an adaptive collaboration and communication tool that can incorporate a variety of data types and formats and be modified over time in line with changing landholder needs.

Monitoring and evaluation to support adaptive co-management: Lessons learned from the Millennium Villages Project.

This article focuses attention on monitoring and evaluation approaches that will help resource managers to manage for change and uncertainty in adaptive co-management (ACM). ACM is a learning-by-doing approach that aims to build flexible community-based natural resource governance systems through collaborative or otherwise participatory means. We describe the framework for monitoring and evaluation that we developed and applied in ten African countries, which includes fixed indicators and measures for co-management performance monitoring, a process evaluation element, a platform for repeat ecological surveillance, and a longitudinal household survey. We comment on the usefulness of this framework, and its applicability to a wide range of geographic contexts. We then present a four step model to assist managers in applying the framework to specific co-management problems. The model suggests a cascade approach to defining key evaluations questions at a systems, network, individual and synthesis level. We illustrate the application of our model and framework by means of a case study of a co-managed agroforestry program in western Kenya.

Adaptive co-management of biodiversity in rural socio-ecological systems of Ecuador and Latin America.

Biodiversity management in Ecuador, and across Latin America, focuses on using protected areas for conservation purposes. However, this management strategy does not adequately consider biodiversity interactions with humans by neglecting socio-ecological systems that provide many benefits especially to indigenous and other rural peoples. This paper reviews successful examples of local applications of adaptive co-management that incorporate socio-ecological interactions and the benefits they provide to rural communities in Latin America. These examples show the potential of applying adaptive co-management to manage biodiversity and to revitalize the development of rural communities across the region.

Bridging science and traditional knowledge to assess cumulative impacts of stressors on ecosystem health.

Cumulative environmental impacts driven by anthropogenic stressors lead to disproportionate effects on indigenous communities that are reliant on land and water resources. Understanding and counteracting these effects requires knowledge from multiple sources. Yet the combined use of Traditional Knowledge (TK) and Scientific Knowledge (SK) has both technical and philosophical hurdles to overcome, and suffers from inherently imbalanced power dynamics that can disfavour the very communities it intends to benefit. In this article, we present a 'two-eyed seeing' approach for co-producing and blending knowledge about ecosystem health by using an adapted Bayesian Belief Network for the Slave River and Delta region in Canada's Northwest Territories. We highlight how bridging TK and SK with a combination of field data, interview transcripts, existing models, and expert judgement can address key questions about ecosystem health when considerable uncertainty exists. SK indicators (e.g., bird counts, mercury in fish, water depth) were graded as moderate, whereas TK indicators (e.g., bird usage, fish aesthetics, changes to water flow) were graded as being poor in comparison to the past. SK indicators were predominantly spatial (i.e., comparing to other locations) while the TK indicators were predominantly temporal (i.e., comparing across time). After being populated by 16 experts (local harvesters, Elders, governmental representatives, and scientists) using both TK and SK, the model output reported low probabilities that the social-ecological system is healthy as it used to be. We argue that it is novel and important to bridge TK and SK to address the challenges of environmental change such as the cumulative impacts of multiple stressors on ecosystems and the services they provide. This study presents a critical social-ecological tool for widening the evidence-base to a more holistic understanding of the system dynamics of multiple environmental stressors in ecosystems and for developing more effective knowledge-inclusive partnerships between indigenous communities, researchers and policy decision-makers. This represents new transformational empirical insights into how wider knowledge discourses can contribute to more effective adaptive co-management governance practices and solutions for the resilience and sustainability of ecosystems in Northern Canada and other parts of the world with strong indigenous land tenure.

A framework for monitoring social process and outcomes in environmental programs.

When environmental programs frame their activities as being in the service of human wellbeing, social variables need to be integrated into monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. This article draws upon ecosystem services theory to develop a framework to guide the M&E of collaborative environmental programs with anticipated social benefits. The framework has six components: program need, program activities, pathway process variables, moderating process variables, outcomes, and program value. Needs are defined in terms of ecosystem services, as well as other human needs that must be addressed to achieve outcomes. The pathway variable relates to the development of natural resource governance capacity in the target community. Moderating processes can be externalities such as the inherent capacity of the natural system to service ecosystem needs, local demand for natural resources, policy or socio-economic drivers. Internal program-specific processes relate to program service delivery, targeting and participant responsiveness. Ecological outcomes are expressed in terms of changes in landscape structure and function, which in turn influence ecosystem service provision. Social benefits derived from the program are expressed in terms of the value of the eco-social service to user-specified goals. The article provides suggestions from the literature for identifying indicators and measures for components and component variables, and concludes with an example of how the framework was used to inform the M&E of an adaptive co-management program in western Kenya.