IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v70y2010i2p283-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary organizations for sustainable land management: The example of Dutch Environmental Co-operatives

Author

Listed:
  • Franks, Jeremy

Abstract

This paper uses Boundary Organization Theory (BOT) to examine the proposition that Dutch Environmental Co-operatives (ECs) conform to the characteristics of boundary organizations (BOs). Many conservationists believe BO-type institutions are essential for addressing eco-system management problems, but believe there are currently too few examples of BOs working across sustainability issues. It is concluded that ECs have organizational structures and work practices typical of BOs: they allow people on different sides of the land management for food and nature conservation boundary (land managers, conservationists, scientists and policy makers) to negotiate to transform agri-environmental schemes into boundary objects and scheme options into implementable standardized packages. This is achieved by adopting convening, translation, collaboration and mediation functions that create extended peer communities able to contribute important knowledge of eco-system management, whilst allowing each participate to remain within their respective professional boundaries and responsible to their different constituencies. As an example of BOs, ECs are a post-normal sustainability technology (PNST) that offers "clumsy" solutions to the "wicked" problem of eco-system management. BOs work in many fields across the globe, showing their underling organizational principals and working practices are not restricted to any particular issue or geographical monopoly. As such, ECs - adjusted to suit local priorities and circumstances - could be the basis of a more widely used sustainability-led governance unit most particularly where cultural practices favour collective and collaborative behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Franks, Jeremy, 2010. "Boundary organizations for sustainable land management: The example of Dutch Environmental Co-operatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 283-295, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2010:i:2:p:283-295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(10)00335-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. J. R. Franks & A. McGloin, 2007. "Joint submissions, output related payments and environmental co-operatives: Can the Dutch experience innovate UK agri-environment policy?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 233-256.
    3. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    4. David R. Harvey, 2003. "Agri-environmental Relationships and Multi-functionality: Further Considerations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 705-725, May.
    5. Todd Sandler & John Tschirhart, 1997. "Club theory: Thirty years later," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 335-355, December.
    6. Norton, Bryan G. & Noonan, Douglas, 2007. "Ecology and valuation: Big changes needed," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 664-675, September.
    7. Gottfried, Robert & Wear, David & Lee, Robert, 1996. "Institutional solutions to market failure on the landscape scale," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 133-140, August.
    8. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers' Participation in Agri-environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    9. Frame, Bob & Brown, Judy, 2008. "Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 225-241, April.
    10. Jessica Goldberger, 2008. "Non-governmental organizations, strategic bridge building, and the “scientization” of organic agriculture in Kenya," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(2), pages 271-289, June.
    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. Smink, Magda & Negro, Simona O. & Niesten, Eva & Hekkert, Marko P., 2015. "How mismatching institutional logics hinder niche–regime interaction and how boundary spanners intervene," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 225-237.
    2. Blandford, David & Hodge, Ian D., 2012. "Adapting Agri-Environment Schemes for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation – Observations from U.K. and U.S. Experience," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135517, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Ortiz-Miranda, Dionisio & Hodge, Ian, 2011. "Entre la propiedad agraria y la ambiental: El debate respecto a los derechos de propiedad de la tierra," Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Rural y Marino (formerly Ministry of Agriculture), issue 231.
    4. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Sampsa Hyysalo & Laurens Klerkx, 2017. "Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Transitions: a Systematic Review," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-17, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.

    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:70:y:2010:i:2:p:283-295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.