Pathways to impact for aquatic conservation science via multi‐modal communication and stakeholder engagement

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 1791-1797 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mae M. Noble ◽  
Christopher J. Fulton
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Dziadkiewicz ◽  
Wioleta Dryl ◽  
Tomasz Dryl ◽  
Robert Beben ◽  
Anna Wojewnik-Filipkowska

MedienJournal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-91
Author(s):  
Daniel Polzer ◽  
Angelika Maier

This paper deals with a stakeholder-focused perception of stakeholder engagement and the question of how much media and corporate communication influence people to get engaged with environmental issues and resources and the water issue in particular. With five case studies at a European, national, regional and local level it is shown that only a high degree of problematization of an issue (here: flooding or water scarcity and droughts) leads to participation as well as engagement which – much more than participation or activism – depends on the existence of organizational structures. Study findings conclude that stakeholder engagement equals a highly complex, autonomous and individual process that requires qualitative research methods. Organizations, political institutions as well as corporations have to acknowledge that stake - holders get engaged “themselves”, whereas the problematization of issues can foster engagement. Implications also refer to the field of Public Relations, where highly individual and customized communication strategies are needed.


This book gathers together 28 personal stories told by leading thinkers and practitioners in conservation – all of whom have something to say about the uncomfortable tension that arises when data meet dogma. Together, they make a powerful argument for conservation science that measures effectiveness and evolves in response to new data, rather than clinging to its treasured foundational ideas. Several chapters raise doubts about some of conservation’s core tenets, including the notion that habitat fragmentation is bad for biodiversity, biodiversity declines are threatening ecosystem function, non-native species are a net negative for conservation, and fisheries management is failing. Another set of chapters warns of the potent power of conservation narratives: undeniably useful to inspire conservation action, but potentially dangerous in locking in thinking against contrary data. These chapters challenge iconic stories about GM crops, orangutans in oil palm forests, frog feminization, salmon versus dams, rehabilitating oiled otters, and wolves in Yellowstone. A final set of chapters addresses conceptual and methodological approaches such as environmental tipping points, global assessments, payment for ecosystem service programs, and working with corporations. Throughout, examples of confirmation bias emerge—not as dishonesty, but as a human foible that is a challenge for all science, not just conservation science. Graduate students, in particular, will find a wealth of ideas to inspire their own research. Each chapter points to additional data that could help resolve lingering debates and improve conservation effectiveness.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 2128
Author(s):  
Amollo Ambole ◽  
Kweku Koranteng ◽  
Peris Njoroge ◽  
Douglas Logedi Luhangala

Energy communities have received considerable attention in the Global North, especially in Europe, due to their potential for achieving sustainable energy transitions. In Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), energy communities have received less attention partly due to the nascent energy systems in many emerging SSA states. In this paper, we argue that these nascent energy systems offer an opportunity to co-create energy communities that can tackle the energy access challenges faced by most SSA countries. To understand how such energy communities are realised in the sub-region, we undertake a systematic review of research on energy communities in 46 SSA countries. Our findings show that only a few energy projects exhibit the conventional characteristics of energy communities; In most of these projects, local communities are inadequately resourced to institute and manage their own projects. We thus look to stakeholder engagement approaches to propose co-design as a strategy for strengthening energy communities in SSA. We further embed our co-design proposal in energy democracy thinking to argue that energy communities can be a pathway towards equity and energy justice in SSA. We conclude that energy communities can indeed contribute to improving energy access in Africa, but they need an enabling policy environment to foster their growth and sustainability.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8562
Author(s):  
Andres M. Urcuqui-Bustamante ◽  
Theresa L. Selfa ◽  
Paul Hirsch ◽  
Catherine M. Ashcraft

Payment for ecosystem services (PES) is a market-based policy approach intended to foster land use practices, such as forest conservation or restoration, that protect and improve the benefits from healthy, functioning ecosystems. While PES programs are used globally, they are an especially prominent environmental policy tool in Latin America, where the vast majority are payment for hydrological services (PHS) programs, which incentivize the conservation and restoration of ecosystems associated with water production and clean water for clearly defined water users. As a market mechanism, PHS approaches involve a transactional relationship between upstream and downstream water users who are connected by a shared watershed. While existing literature has highlighted the important role of non-state actors in natural resource management and program effectiveness, few studies have explored the role of stakeholder participation in the context of PHS programs. Building on the collaborative learning approach and the Trinity of Voice framework, we sought to understand how and to what extent PHS program stakeholders are engaged in PHS design, implementation, and evaluation. In this paper we explored (1) the modes of stakeholder engagement in PHS programs that program administrators use, and (2) the degree to which different modes of stakeholder participation allow PHS stakeholders to have decision power with which to influence PHS policy design and expected outcomes. To better understand the role of stakeholder participation, and the different ways participation occurs, we used a comparative multiple-case study analysis of three PHS program administration types (government, non-profit, and a mixed public–private organization) in Mexico and Colombia that have incorporated stakeholder engagement to achieve ecological and social goals. Our analysis draws on institutional interviews to investigate the modes of stakeholder engagement and understand the degree of decision space that is shared with other PHS stakeholders. Across all cases, we found that the trust between key actors and institutions is an essential but underappreciated aspect of successful collaboration within PHS initiatives. We conclude with recommendations for ways in which program administrators and governmental agencies can better understand and facilitate the development of trust in PHS design and implementation, and natural resources management more broadly.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document