Building Capacity for Individual and Systems-Level Collaborative Conservation Impacts: Intentional Design for Transformative Practice

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
R. Hauptfeld, Megan S. Jones, Kim Skyelander
{"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":null,"pages":null},"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.
个人和系统级协作保护影响的能力建设:变革实践的有意设计
摘要保护当地社区和利益相关者并与之合作至关重要。尽管以社区为导向的方法很重要,并呼吁在保护方面进行能力建设,但在合作保护等关系领域进行培训的影响和投入仍不清楚。我们使用混合方法对合作保护能力建设计划进行了第一次评估,并提出了一个基于经验的支持长期变化的计划投入因果模型。我们发现,对参与者的实践和职业轨迹,以及能力的多个维度,包括舒适度、信念和身份,都会产生中度到转型的影响。灵活的资金、融入安全的实践社区以及尝试合作方法的义务和机会促进了这些变化。我们还发现了实践景观不断发展的证据,以及对同事工作的社区的好处。我们建议项目纳入有意设计,包括网络实践社区和启发式,以增强个人和系统的影响。管理影响建设合作保护能力不仅仅涉及培训:应用经验、融入实践社区和灵活的资金可以支持长期采用新方法。尽早培养合作的信念可能会促使参与者参与(有时令人不舒服)新的体验和群体。采用“网络化”的实践社区可能会允许合作保护研究金,以减少个人和社会系统层面目标之间的潜在权衡。
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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
8.00%
发文量
83
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
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信