Science Embedded in Local Forest Landscape Management Improves Benefit Flows to Society

James Douglas Langston,Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono,Agustinus Kastanya,Chris Margules,Jeffrey Sayer,Rebecca Anne Riggs

doi:10.3389/ffgc.2019.00003

Abstract

There is a global shift of forest management to local levels to better reconcile local livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. We argue that achieving such outcomes will require embedding science in landscape-scale management systems. We show that science can contribute to local learning and adaptation within landscape contexts. Complexity and power relations have hampered scientists' efforts to engage with the people who use and influence the use of resources at landscape scales. Landscape approaches present an opportunity for science to help steer local management to address local contexts. We have conducted research at the interface of policy and management at landscape scales. More effort must go toward transdisciplinary approaches to co-generate knowledge and create “Communities of Commitment” for continual learning and adaptation amongst landscape-scale actors. Embedded science incorporating local knowledge and contexts and engaged in landscape scale development processes is necessary for improving decision and policy-making.

Highlights

Place-based sustainability science and transdisciplinary research have contributed to a better understanding of development processes (Mauser et al, 2013; Balvanera et al, 2017)
Forests allocated for local community management are expanding more rapidly than those allocated for strict protection
We show that scientists must be flexible, reflective, and reflexive in their roles and approaches if they are to influence the ways in which local management regimes deliver conservation and development impacts (Evans et al, 2017; Boedhihartono et al, 2018; Ros-Tonen et al, 2018)

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Place-based sustainability science and transdisciplinary research have contributed to a better understanding of development processes (Mauser et al, 2013; Balvanera et al, 2017). Organizations have far been too conservative in their approach to both partnering locally for the co-generation of knowledge and to sustaining natural resources (Sundar, 2000) Their bureaucratic institutional inflexibility, with myriad compliance requirements, inhibits the creation of innovative relationships and networks that influence system wide learning (Scheba and Mustalahti, 2015). ACM is a process where multiple stakeholders bring together their different knowledge, experiences, perspectives, values, and capacities to communicate and critically reflect to understand and address common concerns (Khadka and Vacik, 2008) It acknowledges that reaching consensus on what the problems are and acting to implement policy decisions requires change in multiple actors in any given social-ecological system. This includes understanding the need to cede control of problem framing and aim for contributions that redistribute power throughout the system for inclusivity and sustainability

A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY

CONCLUSION