Institutional jelling in socio-ecological systems: Towards a novel theoretical construct?

IF 5.9 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi , Gertrud Buchenrieder , Jürgen Pretzsch , Roland Azibo Balgah , Bishawjit Mallick , Tobias Haller , Maria Fernanda Gebara
{"title":"Institutional jelling in socio-ecological systems: Towards a novel theoretical construct?","authors":"Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi ,&nbsp;Gertrud Buchenrieder ,&nbsp;Jürgen Pretzsch ,&nbsp;Roland Azibo Balgah ,&nbsp;Bishawjit Mallick ,&nbsp;Tobias Haller ,&nbsp;Maria Fernanda Gebara","doi":"10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Institutional dynamics trigger resource management decisions and practices around socio-ecological systems (SESs), with (sub-) optimal management outcomes. For instance, studies show that formal institutions are continually prioritized over informal ones in land use decisions – the latter also countervailing the former in several instances. This reality presents an opportunity to theorize in favour of a new institutional arrangement that blends formal and informal institutional provisions. However, the theoretical positions of Hobbes, Ostrom, Ensminger, Cleaver, and Haller did not conclude with a <em>jelled institutional framework</em>, to enhance our understanding of the multiplicity of interdependent decisions within SESs. This raises two questions: (1) How could jelled institutional arrangements potentially (re)define actor constellations around SESs? (2) Which forward-looking research questions are required to analyse resource use and management by actors in SESs? We employ a theoretical research approach and a backward snowballing literature review to advance the search for a <em>unifying theoretical perspective</em>. In doing so, we theorize an institutional change path towards an <em>institutional jelling</em> construct – one in which compatible provisions of formal and informal institutions shape actors. This is done to create an institutional framework perceived as legitimate by all actors in SESs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17933,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Policy","volume":"157 ","pages":"Article 107681"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837725002157","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Institutional dynamics trigger resource management decisions and practices around socio-ecological systems (SESs), with (sub-) optimal management outcomes. For instance, studies show that formal institutions are continually prioritized over informal ones in land use decisions – the latter also countervailing the former in several instances. This reality presents an opportunity to theorize in favour of a new institutional arrangement that blends formal and informal institutional provisions. However, the theoretical positions of Hobbes, Ostrom, Ensminger, Cleaver, and Haller did not conclude with a jelled institutional framework, to enhance our understanding of the multiplicity of interdependent decisions within SESs. This raises two questions: (1) How could jelled institutional arrangements potentially (re)define actor constellations around SESs? (2) Which forward-looking research questions are required to analyse resource use and management by actors in SESs? We employ a theoretical research approach and a backward snowballing literature review to advance the search for a unifying theoretical perspective. In doing so, we theorize an institutional change path towards an institutional jelling construct – one in which compatible provisions of formal and informal institutions shape actors. This is done to create an institutional framework perceived as legitimate by all actors in SESs.
社会生态系统中的制度凝聚:走向一种新的理论建构?
制度动态触发围绕社会生态系统(SESs)的资源管理决策和实践,具有(次)最佳管理结果。例如,研究表明,在土地使用决定中,正式机构一直优先于非正式机构- -在若干情况下,非正式机构也抵消了前者。这一现实提供了一个从理论上支持一种混合正式和非正式体制规定的新体制安排的机会。然而,霍布斯、奥斯特罗姆、恩斯明格、克利弗和哈勒的理论立场并没有以一个固定的制度框架来结束,以增强我们对社会经济体系中相互依存决策的多样性的理解。这就提出了两个问题:(1)凝聚的制度安排如何可能(重新)定义围绕SESs的行动者星座?(2)需要哪些前瞻性的研究问题来分析SESs中参与者的资源使用和管理?我们采用理论研究方法和向后滚雪球文献综述来推进对统一理论视角的探索。在此过程中,我们理论化了一条通往制度凝胶结构的制度变革之路——在这种结构中,正式和非正式制度的相容规定塑造了行动者。这样做是为了创建一个被SESs中所有参与者视为合法的制度框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Land Use Policy
Land Use Policy ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
8.50%
发文量
553
期刊介绍: Land Use Policy is an international and interdisciplinary journal concerned with the social, economic, political, legal, physical and planning aspects of urban and rural land use. Land Use Policy examines issues in geography, agriculture, forestry, irrigation, environmental conservation, housing, urban development and transport in both developed and developing countries through major refereed articles and shorter viewpoint pieces.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信