|
|
|
|
|
| Walkerden, Greg; Macquarie University; gmw@bwassociates.com.au. |
| Adaptive management planning projects use multiparty, multidisciplinary workshops and simulation modeling to facilitate dialogue, negotiation, and planning. However, they have been criticized as a poor medium for conflict resolution. Alternative processes from the conflict resolution tradition, e.g., principled negotiation and sequenced negotiation, address uncertainty and biophysical constraints much less skillfully than does adaptive management. When we evaluate adaptive management planning using conflict resolution practice as a benchmark, we can design better planning procedures. Adaptive management planning procedures emerge that explore system structure, dynamics, and uncertainty, and that also provide a strong negotiation process, grounded in... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Adaptive management; Conflict resolution; Crossing; Ecosystem management; Environmental management; Negotiation; Planning; Practice; Principled negotiation; Professional practice; Resource management; Strategic environmental assessment.. |
| Ano: 2006 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Birner, Regina. |
| Participatory approaches in natural resource management are increasingly being criticized for their tendency to neglect power relations and conflicts of interests. Negotiation approaches have been proposed as a strategy to overcome such shortcomings. Using the case of negotiations on crop-livestock conflicts in Sri Lanka as an empirical example, this paper proposes to apply the concept of political capital in combination with game theoretical modeling for an analysis of negotiation processes in natural resource management. The model serves to analyze both the incentive structure of the resource users, who are motivated by economic incentives, and the incentive structure of political decision-makers, who are motivated by political interests. The crucial... |
| Tipo: Conference Paper or Presentation |
Palavras-chave: Natural resource management; Negotiation; Political capital; Extensive form game; Sri Lanka; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy; Q2. |
| Ano: 2003 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/25859 |
| |
|
|
| Daniell, Katherine A.; Centre for Policy Innovation, The Australian National University ; katherine.daniell@anu.edu.au; White, Ian; The Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University; ian.white@anu.edu.au; Ribarova, Irina S.; University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy; ribarova_fhe@uacg.bg; Coad, Peter; Hornsby Shire Council; PCoad@hornsby.nsw.gov.au; Rougier, Jean-Emmanuel; Lisode; Jean-Emmanuel.Rougier@lisode.com; Hare, Matthew; UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC), United Nations University; hare@unwater.unu.edu; Jones, Natalie A.; School of Natural and Rural Systems Management, University of Queensland; natalie.a.j@gmail.com; Popova, Albena; University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy; albena_krasimirova@abv.bg; Perez, Pascal; College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University; Marine and Atmospheric Research Division, Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) ; pascal.perez@anu.edu.au; Burn, Stewart; Land and Water, Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) ; Stewart.Burn@csiro.au. |
| Broad-scale, multi-governance level, participatory water management processes intended to aid collective decision making and learning are rarely initiated, designed, implemented, and managed by one person. These processes mostly emerge from some form of collective planning and organization activities because of the stakes, time, and budgets involved in their implementation. Despite the potential importance of these collective processes for managing complex water-related social–ecological systems, little research focusing on the project teams that design and organize participatory water management processes has ever been undertaken. We have begun to fill this gap by introducing and outlining the concept of a co-engineering process and examining... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Synthesis |
Palavras-chave: Co-engineering; Conflict; Multiple objectives; Negotiation; Participatory process; Planning; Water management. |
| Ano: 2010 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Dewulf, Art; Public Administration and Policy Group, Wageningen University; art.dewulf@psy.kuleuven.be; Taillieu, Tharsi; Center for Work, Organizational and Personnel Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; tharsi.taillieu@psy.kuleuven.be. |
| Uncertainty of late has become an increasingly important and controversial topic in water resource management, and natural resources management in general. Diverse managing goals, changing environmental conditions, conflicting interests, and lack of predictability are some of the characteristics that decision makers have to face. This has resulted in the application and development of strategies such as adaptive management, which proposes flexibility and capability to adapt to unknown conditions as a way of dealing with uncertainties. However, this shift in ideas about managing has not always been accompanied by a general shift in the way uncertainties are understood and handled. To improve this situation, we believe it is necessary to recontextualize... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Reports |
Palavras-chave: Adaptive management; Ambiguity; Frames; Framing; Knowledge relationship; Multiple knowledge frames; Natural resource management; Negotiation; Participation; Social learning; Uncertainty; Water management. |
| Ano: 2008 |
|
| |
|
|
|
