IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v5y2016i4p39-d82544.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Hodge

    (Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge, 19 Silver Street, Cambridge CB3 9EP, UK)

  • William M. Adams

    (Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge CB2 3EN, UK)

Abstract

Drawing on a survey of large-scale ecological restoration initiatives, we find that managers face contradictory demands. On the one hand, they have to raise funds from a variety of sources through competitive procedures for individual projects. These projects require the specification of deliverable outputs within a relatively short project period. On the other hand, ecologists argue that the complexity of ecosystem processes means that it is not possible to know how to deliver predetermined outcomes and that governance should be adaptive, long-term and implemented through networks of stakeholders. This debate parallels a debate in public administration between New Public Management and more recent proposals for a new approach, sometimes termed Public Value Management. Both of these approaches have strengths. Projectification provides control and accountability to funders. Adaptive governance recognises complexity and provides for long-term learning, building networks and adaptive responses. We suggest an institutional architecture that aims to capture the major benefits of each approach based on public support dedicated to ecological restoration and long-term funding programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Hodge & William M. Adams, 2016. "Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:39-:d:82544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/4/39/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/4/39/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    2. Marten Scheffer & Steve Carpenter & Jonathan A. Foley & Carl Folke & Brian Walker, 2001. "Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems," Nature, Nature, vol. 413(6856), pages 591-596, October.
    3. Whitten, Stuart M. & Reeson, Andrew & Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2013. "Designing conservation tenders to support landholder participation: A framework and case study assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 82-92.
    4. Hood, Christopher, 1995. "The "new public management" in the 1980s: Variations on a theme," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(2-3), pages 93-109.
    5. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    6. Tom H. Oliver & Nick J. B. Isaac & Tom A. August & Ben A. Woodcock & David B. Roy & James M. Bullock, 2015. "Declining resilience of ecosystem functions under biodiversity loss," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8, December.
    7. Paul Aligica & Anthony Evans, 2009. "Thought experiments, counterfactuals and comparative analysis," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 22(3), pages 225-239, 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. Royal, Tessa, 2021. "Private land conservation policy in Australia: Minimising social-ecological trade-offs raised by market-based policy instruments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Yitbarek, Tibebe Weldesemaet & Wilson, John R.U. & Dehnen-Schmutz, Katharina, 2023. "A governance framework for the design and evaluation of tree planting schemes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    3. Jeffrey Sayer & Chris Margules & Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono, 2017. "Will Biodiversity Be Conserved in Locally-Managed Forests?," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, January.
    4. Tim Busscher & Christian Zuidema & Taede Tillema & Jos Arts, 2019. "Learning in the face of change: The Dutch National Collaboration Programme on Air Quality," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 37(5), pages 929-945, August.
    5. Jeffrey Sayer & Chris Margules, 2017. "Biodiversity in Locally Managed Lands," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-5, June.

    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. Chenyang Xue & Chaofeng Shao & Junli Gao, 2020. "Ecological Compensation Strategy for SDG-Based Basin-Type National Parks: A Case Study of the Baoxing Giant Panda National Park," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Sattler, Claudia & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "PES in a nutshell: From definitions and origins to PES in practice—Approaches, design process and innovative aspects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 2-11.
    3. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    4. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    5. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    6. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    7. Duncan A. O’Brien & Smita Deb & Gideon Gal & Stephen J. Thackeray & Partha S. Dutta & Shin-ichiro S. Matsuzaki & Linda May & Christopher F. Clements, 2023. "Early warning signals have limited applicability to empirical lake data," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    9. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    10. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    11. Legrand, Thomas & Froger, Géraldine & Le Coq, Jean-François, 2013. "Institutional performance of Payments for Environmental Services: An analysis of the Costa Rican Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 115-123.
    12. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.
    13. Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2012. "Ecological restoration programs and payments for ecosystem services as integrated biophysical and socioeconomic processes—China's experience as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 56-65.
    14. Clements, Tom & John, Ashish & Nielsen, Karen & An, Dara & Tan, Setha & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2010. "Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: Comparison of three programs from Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1283-1291, April.
    15. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    16. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    17. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    18. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    19. Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2018. "Eco-System Services in Agrarian Value Chains: Value Detection of Bio-Diversity as Public Good Provision, Problems, and Institutional Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, December.
    20. Brathwaite, Angelique & Pascal, Nicolas & Clua, Eric, 2021. "When are payment for ecosystems services suitable for coral reef derived coastal protection?: A review of scientific requirements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:39-:d:82544. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.