IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v77y2012icp16-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of the methodological underpinnings of social learning research in natural resource management

Author

Listed:
  • Rodela, Romina
  • Cundill, Georgina
  • Wals, Arjen E.J.

Abstract

This analysis is focused on research that uses a social learning approach to study natural resource issues. We map out the prevailing epistemological orientation of social learning research through the de-construction of the methodological choices reported in current social learning literature. Based on an analysis of 54 empirical investigations of social learning and natural resources published after peer review, we investigated aspects of research design that include data collection methods, evidence types and the researcher's role. We consider these against different research-orientations (positivist, interpretive, critical, and post-normal). We discuss which research-orientation appears most congruent with the overall commitment and premises of social learning studies. In line with initial expectations this study shows that positivist stances are hardly present, however research that follows a postnormal approach is less frequent than initially assumed. Instead, findings suggest that researchers using a social learning perspective to study resource issues tend to choose methodologies that allow for in-depth descriptions, for meaning making and enquiry as a form of action.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodela, Romina & Cundill, Georgina & Wals, Arjen E.J., 2012. "An analysis of the methodological underpinnings of social learning research in natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 16-26.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:77:y:2012:i:c:p:16-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800912000961
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.032?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kastenhofer, Karen & Bechtold, Ulrike & Wilfing, Harald, 2011. "Sustaining sustainability science: The role of established inter-disciplines," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 835-843, February.
    2. Norgaard, Richard B., 1989. "The case for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 37-57, February.
    3. Joanne Millar & Allan Curtis, 1999. "Challenging the boundaries of local and scientific knowledge in Australia: Opportunities for social learning in managing temperate upland pastures," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(4), pages 389-399, December.
    4. Wilson, Matthew A. & Howarth, Richard B., 2002. "Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 431-443, June.
    5. Funtowicz, Silvio O. & Ravetz, Jerome R., 1994. "The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 197-207, August.
    6. Norgaard, Richard B., 1985. "Environmental economics: An evolutionary critique and a plea for pluralism," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 382-394, December.
    7. M. Muro & P. Jeffrey, 2008. "A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management processes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3), pages 325-344.
    8. O'Hara, Sabine U., 1996. "Discursive ethics in ecosystems valuation and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 95-107, February.
    9. Tacconi, Luca, 1998. "Scientific methodology for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 91-105, October.
    10. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    11. Meppem, Tony & Bourke, Simon, 1999. "Different ways of knowing: a communicative turn toward sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 389-404, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrea K. Gerlak & Tanya Heikkila & Sharon L. Smolinski & Dave Huitema & Derek Armitage, 2018. "Learning our way out of environmental policy problems: a review of the scholarship," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 335-371, September.
    2. Feliciano, D. & Blagojević, D. & Böhling, K. & Hujala, T. & Lawrence, A. & Lidestav, G. & Ludvig, A. & Turner, T. & Weiss, G. & Zivojinovic, I., 2019. "Learning about forest ownership and management issues in Europe while travelling: The Travellab approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 32-42.
    3. Tasos Hovardas, 2021. "Social Sustainability as Social Learning: Insights from Multi-Stakeholder Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Kipling, Richard P. & Bannink, André & Bellocchi, Gianni & Dalgaard, Tommy & Fox, Naomi J. & Hutchings, Nicholas J. & Kjeldsen, Chris & Lacetera, Nicola & Sinabell, Franz & Topp, Cairistiona F.E. & va, 2016. "Modeling European ruminant production systems: Facing the challenges of climate change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 24-37.
    5. Bisaro, Alexander & Roggero, Matteo & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio, 2018. "Institutional Analysis in Climate Change Adaptation Research: A Systematic Literature Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 34-43.
    6. Aino Rekola & Riikka Paloniemi, 2018. "Researcher–Planner Dialogue on Environmental Justice and Its Knowledges—A Means to Encourage Social Learning Towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Meppem, Tony & Bourke, Simon, 1999. "Different ways of knowing: a communicative turn toward sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 389-404, September.
    3. Farrell, Katharine N., 2011. "Framing the Valuation of Ecosystem Services: A Theoretical Discussion of the Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Articulating Values that Reflect the Economic Contributions of Ecological Phen," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114362, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Shi, Tian, 2004. "Ecological economics as a policy science: rhetoric or commitment towards an improved decision-making process on sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 23-36, January.
    5. Meppem, Tony, 2000. "The discursive community: evolving institutional structures for planning sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 47-61, July.
    6. Hezri, Adnan A. & Dovers, Stephen R., 2006. "Sustainability indicators, policy and governance: Issues for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 86-99, November.
    7. Lehtonen, Markku, 2009. "OECD organisational discourse, peer reviews and sustainable development: An ecological-institutionalist perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 389-397, December.
    8. Spash, Clive L., 2013. "The shallow or the deep ecological economics movement?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 351-362.
    9. Spash, Clive L., 2012. "Ecological Economics and Philosophy of Science: Ontology, Epistemology, Methodology and Ideology," SRE-Discussion Papers 2012/03, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    10. Castro e Silva, Manuela & Teixeira, Aurora A.C., 2011. "A bibliometric account of the evolution of EE in the last two decades: Is ecological economics (becoming) a post-normal science?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 849-862, March.
    11. Luks, Fred, 1998. "The rhetorics of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 139-149, August.
    12. Lo, Alex, 2014. "The Problem of Methodological Pluralism in Ecological Economics," MPRA Paper 49543, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos & Plumecocq, Gaël, 2015. "Legitimizing farmers' new knowledge, learning and practices through communicative action: Application of an agro-environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 86-96.
    14. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Becker, Christian & Frank, Karin & Müller, Birgit & Quaas, Martin, 2008. "Relating the philosophy and practice of ecological economics: The role of concepts, models, and case studies in inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 384-393, October.
    15. Gowdy, John M. & Ferreri Carbonell, Ada, 1999. "Toward consilience between biology and economics: the contribution of Ecological Economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 337-348, June.
    16. Swedeen, Paula, 2006. "Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 190-208, May.
    17. Martinez-Alier, Joan & Munda, Giuseppe & O'Neill, John, 1998. "Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 277-286, September.
    18. Tacconi, Luca, 1998. "Scientific methodology for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 91-105, October.
    19. Spash, Clive L., 2012. "New foundations for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 36-47.
    20. Luks, Fred & Siebenhuner, Bernd, 2007. "Transdisciplinarity for social learning? The contribution of the German socio-ecological research initiative to sustainability governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 418-426, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:77:y:2012:i:c:p:16-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.