stakeholder participation and sustainable fisheries: an integrative framework for assessing adaptive comanagement processes
Clicks: 214
ID: 206749
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
214 views
38 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #202 of 308 articles by views in ieee access
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 308 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Adaptive comanagement (ACM) has been suggested as the way to successfully achieve sustainable environmental governance. Despite excellent research, the field still suffers from underdeveloped frameworks of causality. To address this issue, we suggest a framework that integrates the structural frame of Plummer and Fitzgibbons' "adaptive comanagement" with the specific process characteristics of Senecah's "Trinity of Voice." The resulting conceptual hybrid is used to guide the comparison of two cases of stakeholder participation in fisheries management - the Swedish Co-management Initiative and the Polish Fisheries Roundtable. We examine how different components of preconditions and the process led to the observed outcomes. The analysis shows that despite the different cultural and ecological contexts, the cases developed similar results. Triggered by a crisis, the participating stakeholders were successful in developing trust and better communication and enhanced learning. This can be traced back to a combination of respected leadership, skilled mediation, and a strong focus on deliberative approaches and the creation of respectful dialogue. We also discuss the difficulties of integrating outcomes of the work of such initiatives into the actual decision-making process. Finally, we specify the lessons learned for the cases and the benefits of applying our integrated framework.
| Reference Key |
sthr2014ecologystakeholder
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Christian Stöhr;Cecilia Lundholm;Beatrice Crona;Ilan Chabay |
| Journal | ieee access |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
10.5751/ES-06638-190314
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.