Multi-stakeholder collaboration in community post-disaster reconstruction: case study from the Longmen Shan Fault area in China

While multi-stakeholder collaboration is critical for effective community post-disaster reconstruction (CPDR), it is often very difficult in practice. The Longmen Shan Fault active seismic zone in China has experienced several recent earthquakes with the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake and 2013 Lushan earthquake, both of which caused extensive and widespread damage to many communities, presenting unprecedented challenges for post-disaster reconstruction. This paper develops a multi-cycle field research method that involves three interconnected cycles: internet research, field visits, and extensive surveys: to examine multi-stakeholder collaboration for the CPDR following the Wenchuan earthquake. It was found that there were 12 types of active stakeholders engaged across four main areas: infrastructure rebuilding, psychological recovery, socio-economic rehabilitation, and ecological restoration. Specifically, local community participation and effective collaboration between the community and the external stakeholders were found to be the most crucial elements for successful reconstruction. Multi-stage field research after the Lushan earthquake verified that CPDR was effective and that multi-stakeholder collaboration had improved from the lessons learnt from the Wenchuan earthquake reconstruction experience. Some advantages and limitations of this research are also given.     

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.     

Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management

Despite its necessity, integration of natural and social sciences to inform conservation efforts has been difficult. We examined the views of 63 scientists and practitioners involved in marine management in Mexico's Gulf of California, the central California coast, and the western Pacific on the challenges associated with integrating social science into research efforts that support ecosystem-based management (EBM) in marine systems. We used a semistructured interview format. Questions focused on how EBM was developed for these sites and how contextual factors affected its development and outcomes. Many of the traditional challenges linked with interdisciplinary research were present in the EBM projects we studied. However, a number of contextual elements affected how mandates to include social science were interpreted and implemented as well as how easily challenges could be addressed. For example, a common challenge is that conservation organizations are often dominated by natural scientists, but for some projects it was easier to address this imbalance than for others. We also found that the management and institutional histories that came before EBM in specific cases were important features of local context. Because challenges differed among cases, we believe resolving challenges to interdisciplinary research should be context specific.     

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.     

Climate change collaboration among natural resource management agencies: lessons learned from two US regions

It has been argued that regional collaboration can facilitate adaptation to climate change impacts through integrated planning and management. In an attempt to understand the underlying institutional factors that either support or contest this assumption, this paper explores the institutional factors influencing adaptation to climate change at the regional scale, where multiple public land and natural resource management jurisdictions are involved. Insights from two mid-western US case studies reveal that several challenges to collaboration persist and prevent fully integrative multi-jurisdictional adaptation planning at a regional scale. We propose that some of these challenges, such as lack of adequate time, funding and communication channels, be reframed as opportunities to build interdependence, identify issue-linkages and collaboratively explore the nature and extent of organisational trade-offs with respect to regional climate change adaptation efforts. Such a reframing can better facilitate multi-jurisdictional adaptation planning and management of shared biophysical resources generally while simultaneously enhancing organisational capacity to mitigate negative effects and take advantage of potentially favourable future conditions in an era characterised by rapid climate change.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.