Social process in grizzly bear management: lessons for collaborative governance and natural resource policy
In this study, we analyze a case of governance in natural resource management. Building on the limited body of literature on termination and using methods of problem orientation and social process mapping, we examine a stakeholder engagement process designed to address conflicts in grizzly bear management in Banff National Park, Alberta. Terminated in 2009 after several years of collaboration, this stakeholder engagement process explicitly used the policy sciences framework to cultivate dialogue, improve participants’ decision-making skills, and make consensus-based recommendations for grizzly bear management. Our analysis demonstrates the utility of undertaking social process mapping and problem orientation in order to understand a natural resource policy problem. We include recommendations to foster a social process that allows for clarification and advancement of the common interest in stakeholder groups, insights into how social process can contribute to policy termination, and reflections on the practical, collaborative use of the policy sciences to solve problems of governance. This analysis complements other articles on this case that examine stakeholder perspectives, initial outcomes, and decision process, collectively providing a thorough policy analysis. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2012
Volume (Year): 45 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
Web page: http://policysciences.org/index.html
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/political+science/journal/11077/PS2|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Peter Wilshusen, 2009. "Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 137-162, May.
- Douglas Clark & D. Slocombe, 2011. "Grizzly Bear conservation in the Foothills Model Forest: appraisal of a collaborative ecosystem management effort," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(1), pages 1-11, March.
- Tazim Jamal & Marcus Eyre, 2003. "Legitimation Struggles in National Park Spaces: The Banff Bow Valley Round Table," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(3), pages 417-441.
- Ronald Brunner, 2010. "Adaptive governance as a reform strategy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(4), pages 301-341, December.
- Ronald D. Brunner, 2004. "Context-sensitive monitoring and evaluation for the World Bank," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(2), pages 103-136, 06.
- Peter deLeon, 1983. "Policy Evaluation And Program Termination," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 2(4), pages 631-647, 05.
- Mark McBeth & Elizabeth Shanahan & Paul Hathaway & Linda Tigert & Lynette Sampson, 2010. "Buffalo tales: interest group policy stories in Greater Yellowstone," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(4), pages 391-409, December.
- David Mattson & Nina Chambers, 2009. "Human-provided waters for desert wildlife: what is the problem?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 113-135, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:45:y:2012:i:3:p:265-291. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.