{"title":"Building Capacity for Individual and Systems-Level Collaborative Conservation Impacts: Intentional Design for Transformative Practice","authors":"R. Hauptfeld, Megan S. Jones, Kim Skyelander","doi":"10.1080/08941920.2022.2111738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Conservation for and with local communities and stakeholders is essential. Despite the importance of community-oriented approaches and calls for capacity building in conservation, the impacts and inputs of training in relational fields like collaborative conservation remain unclear. We used mixed methods to conduct one of the first evaluations of a collaborative conservation capacity building program, and present an empirically-based causal model of the programmatic inputs supporting long-term changes. We found moderate to transformational impacts on participants’ practice and professional trajectories, and on multiple dimensions of capacity, including comfort, conviction, and identity. Flexible funding, immersion into a safe community of practice, and the obligation and opportunity to experiment with collaborative approaches fostered these changes. We also found evidence of a developing landscape of practice, and perceived benefits to communities where fellows worked. We suggest programs incorporate intentional design, including networked communities of practice and heuristics, to enhance individual and systems impact. Management implications Building collaborative conservation capacity involves more than training: applied experiences, immersion into communities of practice, and flexible funding can support long-term adoption of new approaches. Fostering a sense of conviction for collaboration early may incite participants to engage with (sometimes uncomfortable) new experiences and groups. Adopting “networked” communities of practice may allow collaborative conservation fellowships to reduce potential tradeoffs between individual and social systems level goals.","PeriodicalId":48223,"journal":{"name":"Society & Natural Resources","volume":"35 1","pages":"1226 - 1245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society & Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2022.2111738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract Conservation for and with local communities and stakeholders is essential. Despite the importance of community-oriented approaches and calls for capacity building in conservation, the impacts and inputs of training in relational fields like collaborative conservation remain unclear. We used mixed methods to conduct one of the first evaluations of a collaborative conservation capacity building program, and present an empirically-based causal model of the programmatic inputs supporting long-term changes. We found moderate to transformational impacts on participants’ practice and professional trajectories, and on multiple dimensions of capacity, including comfort, conviction, and identity. Flexible funding, immersion into a safe community of practice, and the obligation and opportunity to experiment with collaborative approaches fostered these changes. We also found evidence of a developing landscape of practice, and perceived benefits to communities where fellows worked. We suggest programs incorporate intentional design, including networked communities of practice and heuristics, to enhance individual and systems impact. Management implications Building collaborative conservation capacity involves more than training: applied experiences, immersion into communities of practice, and flexible funding can support long-term adoption of new approaches. Fostering a sense of conviction for collaboration early may incite participants to engage with (sometimes uncomfortable) new experiences and groups. Adopting “networked” communities of practice may allow collaborative conservation fellowships to reduce potential tradeoffs between individual and social systems level goals.
期刊介绍:
Society and Natural Resources publishes cutting edge social science research that advances understanding of the interaction between society and natural resources.Social science research is extensive and comes from a number of disciplines, including sociology, psychology, political science, communications, planning, education, and anthropology. We welcome research from all of these disciplines and interdisciplinary social science research that transcends the boundaries of any single social science discipline. We define natural resources broadly to include water, air, wildlife, fisheries, forests, natural lands, urban ecosystems, and intensively managed lands. While we welcome all papers that fit within this broad scope, we especially welcome papers in the following four important and broad areas in the field: 1. Protected area management and governance 2. Stakeholder analysis, consultation and engagement; deliberation processes; governance; conflict resolution; social learning; social impact assessment 3. Theoretical frameworks, epistemological issues, and methodological perspectives 4. Multiscalar character of social implications of natural resource management