Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Participatory Active Adaptive Management
Panarchy is a useful model for characterizing ecological systems and the formal
institutions that manage these systems [ 30 ]. One of the most critical aspects in the
panarchy appears to be a bridging organization that can monitor the status of the
social-ecological system, and manifest rapid change, if conditions are deteriorating
[ 31 ]. Monitoring will allow for management to set new target levels, and modify
policy to reach those target levels, as new information is generated on scale-specific
system attributes [ 32 ]. In order for management entities operating at discrete scales
to improve communication channels and create opportunities for collaboration,
intermediate level entities may serve to facilitate these cross-scale linkages. Bridg-
ing organizations have the capacity to fulfill this role and organize cooperation
between stakeholders across scales [ 33 ], but to do so successfully, one must
formulate strategies, coordinate joint action, address uncertainty, and link diverse
stakeholders in a world of increasing complexity. Brown [ 33 ] investigated bridging
organizations from across the world, and from a variety of scopes (e.g., regional
economic policy in the USA; small-scale irrigation projects in Indonesia; agricul-
tural productivity in Zimbabwe) found that bridging organizations are independent
of stakeholders in a social-ecological system, which allows them to negotiate with
stakeholders and advocate multiple positions. This unique role in the management
of social-ecological systems affords bridging organizations the capacity to catalyze
the formation of policies that are flexible and reflective of the panarchy of
ecosystems and institutions [ 33 ]. In addition, bridging organizations have the
capacity to reduce transaction costs, and provide a mechanism to enforce adherence
to desired policies, despite their lack of regulatory authority [ 34 ].
Examples of bridging organizations include: (1) assessment teams, which are
made up of actors across sectors in a social-ecological system; (2) nongovern-
mental organizations, which create an arena for trust-building, learning, conflict
resolution, and adaptive co-management; and (3) the scientific community, which
acts as a “watchdog,” as well as a facilitator, for adaptive management. For
purposes of environmental management, an example of a successful bridging
organization is that of Ekomuseum Kristianstads Vattenrike (EKV), a small, munic-
ipal organization that facilitated progressive ecosystem management in southern
Sweden [ 34 ]. EKV was tasked with managing water resources at a regional scale in
Sweden, and was successful largely because it employed organizational flexibility
that allowed for EKV to respond quickly to “surprise.” This was achieved through
leadership, a core interdisciplinary staff, and the facilitation of connections between
individuals and organizations (i.e., the panarchy of institutions) in the social-
ecological system. EKV was able to improve the social capacity to respond to
“surprises” and create the trust necessary to push the social-ecological system
toward improved adaptive management of resources.
The formal management institutions in place are likely to persist barring a large-
scale perturbation to social-ecological systems. So, managers must operate within the
limitations of these institutions, which complicates matters, but does not make the
Search WWH ::




Custom Search