Developing an interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral community of practice in the domain of forests and livelihoods

Although significant resources are being spent researching and fostering the relationship between forests and livelihoods to promote mutually beneficial outcomes, critical gaps in understanding persist. A core reason for such gaps is that researchers, practitioners, and policy makers lack the structured space to interact and collaborate, which is essential for effective, interdisciplinary research, practice, and evaluation. Thus, scientific findings, policy recommendations, and measured outcomes have not always been synthesized into deep, systemic understanding; learning from practice and implementation does not easily find its way into scientific analyses, and science often fails to influence policy. Communities of practice (CofPs) are dynamic sociocultural systems that bring people together to share and create knowledge around a common topic of interest. They offer participants a space and structure within which to develop new, systemic approaches to multidimensional problems on a common theme. Uniquely informed by a systems‐thinking perspective and drawing from the scientific and gray literatures and in‐depth interviews with representatives of established CofPs in the natural resource management and development domain, we argue that a well‐designed and adequately funded CofP can facilitate interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral relationships and knowledge exchange. Well‐designed CofPs integrate a set of core features and processes to enhance individual, collective, and domain outcomes; they set out an initial but evolving purpose, encourage diverse leadership, and promote collective‐identity development. Funding facilitates effective communication strategies (e.g., in person meetings). We urge our colleagues across sectors and disciplines to take advantage of CofPs to advance the domain of forests and livelihoods.     

Responding to a policy mandate to collaborate: structuring collaboration in the collaborative forest landscape restoration program

The Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) aims to expand the pace and scale of forest restoration on national forests in the United States. The program requires candidate projects to develop landscape-scale forest restoration proposals through a collaborative process and continue to collaborate throughout planning, implementation, and monitoring. Our comparative case analysis of the initial selected projects examines how existing collaborative groups draw on past experience of collaboration and the requirements of a new mandate to shape collaborative structures as they undertake CFLRP work. While mandating collaboration appears contrary to what is often defined as an informal and emergent process, mandates can encourage stakeholder engagement and renew commitment to overcome past conflict. Our findings also suggest that a collaborative mandate can lead to increased attention and scrutiny, prompting adjustments to collaborative process and structure. As such, mandating collaboration creates dynamic tensions between past experience and new requirements for collaborative practice.     

基于改进模体方法的国家应急组织合作网络基元比较

为分析和比较应对非常规突发事件过程中,由不同类型组织个体及其不同频次合作关系构成的应急复杂组织网络的微观结构特征,研究运用表征个体差异和关系强弱的改进模体分析方法,以中国和美国国家应急组织合作网络为例,比较分析其基元同构与异构特征。结果表明:中美应急组织系统不同类型的应急主导和支持组织构成的主要合作模式具有同构性,但子图结构数量分布具有异构性;考虑个体间关系频次差异,中美应急组织网络基元合作模式具有形式同构但相对数量分布异构的特征;比较而言,美国合作网络为分布式、分权化和关系型基元构型,中国合作网络具有集中式、集权化和契约型基元特征。     

Social learning in a policy-mandated collaboration: community wildfire protection planning in the eastern United States

Policies such as the US Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) mandate collaboration in planning to create benefits such as social learning and shared understanding among partners. However, some question the ability of top-down policy to foster successful local collaboration. Through in-depth interviews and document analysis, this paper investigates social learning and transformative learning in three case studies of Community Wildfire Protection Planning (CWPP), a policy-mandated collaboration under HFRA. Not all CWPP groups engaged in social learning. Those that did learned most about organisational priorities and values through communicative learning. Few participants gained new skills or knowledge through instrumental learning. CWPP groups had to commit to learning, but the design of the collaborative-mandate influenced the type of learning that was most likely to occur. This research suggests a potential role for top-down policy in setting the structural context for learning at the local level, but also confirms the importance of collaborative context and process in fostering social learning.     

A scenario-based study on information flow and collaboration patterns in disaster management

Disaster management (DM) is a continuous, highly collaborative process involving governments, DM organisations, responders, the construction sector, and the general public. Most research approaches to DM include the development of information and communication technologies (ICT) to support the collaboration process rather than the creation of a collaboration process to provide information flows and patterns. An Intelligent Disaster Collaboration System (IDCS) is introduced in this paper as a conceptual model to integrate ICT into DM and the mitigation process and to enhance collaboration. The framework is applicable to the collaboration process at the local, regional and national levels. Within this context, the deployment of ICT tools in DM is explored and scenario-based case studies on flooding and terrorism—examples of natural and human-induced disasters, respectively—are presented. Conclusions are drawn regarding the differences found in collaboration patterns and ICT used during natural and human-induced disasters and the differences between currently available ICT and proposed ICT.     

Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process1

Floress, Kristin, Jean C. Mangun, Mae A. Davenport, and Karl W.J. Williard, 2009. Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 45(6):1352‐1360. Abstract: The roles that agencies and other partners play in collaborative watershed management are not always clearly identified. Key factors contributing to group‐level outcomes in watershed groups include both structural and procedural elements. Structural elements include membership systems, project partners, and funding, while procedural elements include leadership, shared vision, and mission development. The current research reports on a case study conducted with a Midwestern watershed group that received Clean Water Act Section 319 funds to undertake a watershed planning process. Data come from focus groups, interviews, public comments, and meeting observation, and were analyzed using grounded theory. Findings of this study indicate that homogenous skill set, discord over group and partner roles, and failed problem identification contributed to the organizational inertia experienced by the watershed group. Implications of this research for groups receiving 319 funds are provided.     

NGO collaboration in community post‐disaster reconstruction: field research following the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China

The number of communities affected by disasters has been rising. As a result, non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) that attend community post‐disaster reconstruction are often unable to deliver all requirements and have to develop cooperative approaches. However, this collaboration can cause problems because of the complex environments, the fight for limited resources and uncoordinated management, all of which result in poor service delivery to the communities, adding to their woes. From extensive field research and case studies conducted in the post‐Wenchuan earthquake‐stricken communities, this paper introduces an integrated collaboration framework for community post‐disaster reconstruction with the focus on three types of NGOs: international, government organised and civil. The proposed collaboration framework examines the three interrelated components of organisational structure, operational processes and reconstruction goals/implementation areas. Of great significance in better promoting collaborative participation between NGOs are the crucial concepts of participatory reconstruction, double‐layer collaborative networks, and circular review and revision.     

Resident participation in post-Lushan earthquake housing reconstruction: a multi-stage field research method-based inquiry

In April 2013, a 7.0?Mw earthquake struck in Lushan County, Sichuan Province, China, causing serious housing damage. Housing reconstruction is a crucial part of disaster recovery, and resident participation has been recognized as a key part of reconstruction success. This paper examined housing reconstruction resident participation in the post-Lushan earthquake period as a multi-stage problem based on multi-stakeholder collaborative perspectives, which covered emergency shelter, temporary housing and permanent housing stages. Multi-stage field research was conducted in the affected areas, and the residents were found to be fully involved in the reconstruction with a ‘high – medium – high' distribution across the three stages. Resident participation experiences were summarized in terms of previous earthquake education, NGO participation and community-based organization functions, and the reasons discussed, such as civic awareness and civic rights. Problems regarding improper reconstruction and cultural conflicts were also examined and valuable suggestions given.