Co-management: concepts and methodological implications |
| |
| Authors: | Carlsson Lars Berkes Fikret |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Division of Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, S-971 87 Lulea, Sweden;2. Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3T 2N2;1. Department of Environmental Studies and Community Development, Kenyatta University, PO Box 43844-00100, Nairobi, Kenya;2. Department of Environmental Management (DEM), Lincoln University, PO Box 84, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand;3. Research, Investigations and Monitoring Unit, Auckland Council, Private Bag 92300, Auckland 1142, New Zealand;1. Department of Environmental Science and Management, School of Health & Life Sciences, North South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh;2. Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia;1. Instituto Nacional de Pesca, Calle Tortuga No.1, La Cruz de Huanacaxtle, Nayarit, 63732, Mexico;2. Nereus Program, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6K1J5, Canada;1. Hopkins Marine Station, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA, USA;2. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Beaufort, NC, USA;1. University of Birmingham, UK;2. University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa;3. University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania;1. Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS), University of Tasmania, Hobart 7001, Tasmania, Australia;2. Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), Fahrenheitstrasse 6, 28359 Bremen, Germany;3. Centre for Marine Socioecology (CMS), University of Tasmania, Private Bag 129, Hobart 7001, Tasmania, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | Co-management, or the joint management of the commons, is often formulated in terms of some arrangement of power sharing between the State and a community of resource users. In reality, there often are multiple local interests and multiple government agencies at play, and co-management can hardly be understood as the interaction of a unitary State and a homogeneous community. An approach focusing on the legal aspects of co-management, and emphasizing the formal structure of arrangements (how governance is configured) runs the risk of neglecting the functional side of co-management. An alternative approach is to start from the assumption that co-management is a continuous problem-solving process, rather than a fixed state, involving extensive deliberation, negotiation and joint learning within problem-solving networks. This presumption implies that co-management research should preferably focus on how different management tasks are organized and distributed concentrating on the function, rather than the structure, of the system. Such an approach has the effect of highlighting that power sharing is the result, and not the starting point, of the process. This kind of research approach might employ the steps of (1) defining the social-ecological system under focus; (2) mapping the essential management tasks and problems to be solved; (3) clarifying the participants in the problem-solving processes; (4) analyzing linkages in the system, in particular across levels of organization and across geographical space; (5) evaluating capacity-building needs for enhancing the skills and capabilities of people and institutions at various levels; and (6) prescribing ways to improve policy making and problem-solving. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录！ |
|
