On the frontiers of collaboration and conflict: how context influences the success of collaboration

Michael Schoon,Mollie Chapman,Jacqueline Loos,Chinwe Ifejika Speranza,Candice Carr Kelman,Jaime Aburto,Steve Alexander,Jacopo Baggio,Ute Brady,Jessica Cockburn,Georgina Cundill,Gustavo Garcia Lopez,Rosemary Hill,Catherine Robinson,Gladman Thondhlana,Micaela Trimble,Dane Whittaker

doi:10.1080/26395916.2021.1946593

Abstract

ABSTRACT The increasing scale and interconnection of many environmental challenges – from climate change to land use – has resulted in the need to collaborate across borders and boundaries of all types. Traditional centralized, top-down and sectoral approaches to governance of single-issue areas or species within social-ecological systems often have limited potential to alleviate issues that go beyond their jurisdiction. As a result, collaborative governance approaches have come to the forefront. A great deal of past research has examined the conditions under which collaborative efforts are likely to achieve desired outcomes. However, few studies have analyzed how the means to achieve successful collaborative outcomes differ based on context when examined across multiple studies. In this research, we begin to chart a means for doing this. Building onto a Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) Framework, we provide a coding manual to analyse how contextual variables mediate the effects of mechanism variables on outcomes of the collaborative governance of social-ecological systems. Through the examination of four cases, we provide a proof-of-concept assessment and show the utility of the CMO framework and coding manual to draw comparisons across cases for understanding how collaborative outcomes are contingent on the social-ecological context in which they occur.

Highlights

Over the past two decades, much research has emphasized the need to craft institutions to the scale of the environmental challenge addressed (Epstein et al 2015; Leventon et al 2019). Young (2002), approaching this from the scale of international regimes, describes this as improving institutional fit. Ostrom (1990) discusses the importance of polycentric governance and congruence between institutions and the ecological system, focusing on cases at the local level
Building onto a Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) Framework, we provide a coding manual to analyse how contextual variables mediate the effects of mechanism variables on outcomes of the collaborative governance of social-ecological systems
While the literature on collaboration in social-ecological systems recognizes the importance of context, the moderating influence of context on the pathways of how mechanism variables lead to outcomes – whether successful or unsuccessful – is not well understood (Cockburn et al 2020)

Summary

Introduction

Over the past two decades, much research has emphasized the need to craft institutions to the scale of the environmental challenge addressed (Epstein et al 2015; Leventon et al 2019). Young (2002), approaching this from the scale of international regimes, describes this as improving institutional fit. Ostrom (1990) discusses the importance of polycentric governance and congruence between institutions and the ecological system, focusing on cases at the local level. Increasing fragmentation of ecosystems due to land-use change, telecoupling and interconnection of our social, economic, and ecological subsystems across space, the threats of climate change, and the globalized scale of human activities, have exacerbated the challenge of achieving institutional fit with many social-ecological challenges crossing jurisdictional boundaries (Newig et al 2019) These boundaries arise between private landowners, between public and private land managers, between local and national agencies, between resource sectors, and across international frontiers. Decades of debate surround the questions of what actions and sacrifices should be taken (and by whom) to address salmon declines (Breslow 2014) This case draws on research described in Chapman et al (2019) and Chapman et al (2020), which together involved analysis and coding of 19 documents and over 30 interviews with farmers and representatives of tribal organizations and US federal and state agencies and local/regional government. With highly variable rainfall and inadequate water infrastructure, access to water is a critical development concern (resource type)

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion