Charles Darwin University

CDU eSpace
Institutional Repository

 
CDU Staff and Student only
 

Collaboration mobilises institutions with scale-dependent comparative advantage in landscape-scale biodiversity conservation

Hill, Rosemary, Davies, Jocelyn, Bohnet, Iris, Robinson, Catherine J., Maclean, Kirsten and Pert, Petina L. (2015). Collaboration mobilises institutions with scale-dependent comparative advantage in landscape-scale biodiversity conservation. Environmental Science and Policy,51:267-277.

Document type: Journal Article
Citation counts: Altmetric Score Altmetric Score is 1
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar

IRMA ID 84278914xPUB54
Title Collaboration mobilises institutions with scale-dependent comparative advantage in landscape-scale biodiversity conservation
Author Hill, Rosemary
Davies, Jocelyn
Bohnet, Iris
Robinson, Catherine J.
Maclean, Kirsten
Pert, Petina L.
Journal Name Environmental Science and Policy
Publication Date 2015
Volume Number 51
ISSN 1462-9011   (check CDU catalogue  open catalogue search in new window)
Scopus ID 2-s2.0-84937962643
Start Page 267
End Page 277
Total Pages 11
Place of Publication United States
Publisher Elsevier Inc.
HERDC Category C1 - Journal Article (DIISR)
Abstract Landscape-scale approaches are emerging as central to ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation globally, triggering the requirement for collaboration between multiple actors and associated risks including knowledge asymmetries; institutional fragmentation; uncertainty; power imbalances; “invisible” slow-changing variables; and entrenched socio-economic inequities. While social science has elucidated some dimensions required for effective collaboration, little is known about how collaboration manages these risks, or of its effects on associated social-ecological linkages. Our analysis of four different Australian contexts of collaboration shows they mobilised institutions matched to addressing environmental threats, at diverse scales across regulatory and non-regulatory domains. The institutions mobilised included national regulatory controls on development that threatened habitat, incentives to farmers for practice-change, and mechanisms that increased resources for on-ground fire and pest management. Knowledge-sharing underpinned effective risk management and was facilitated through the use of boundary objects, enhanced multi-stakeholder peer review processes, interactive spatial platforms, and Aboriginal-driven planning. Institutions mobilised in these collaborations show scale-dependent comparative advantage for addressing environmental threats. The findings confirm the need to shift scientific attention away from theorising about the ideal-scale for governance. We argue instead for a focus on understanding how knowledge-sharing activities across multiple scales can more effectively connect environmental threats with the most capable institution to address these threats.
Keywords Risks
Social-ecological
Planning
Knowledge-sharing
Scale
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.014   (check subscription with CDU E-Gateway service for CDU Staff and Students  check subscription with CDU E-Gateway in new window)
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 16 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 26 Jul 2016, 13:01:19 CST