Suchergebnisse

Presented at the 9th international wildlife ranching symposium: wildlife - the key to prosperity for rural communities, held on 12-16 September 2016 at Hotel Safari & the Safari Court, Windhoek, Namibia. ; The US Congress and President unanimously agreed on a national mammalian symbol with the National Bison Legacy Act of 2016. The law is entirely symbolic and could mean nothing to socially and ecologically rewild bison which might have totaled 30-60 million: the last clause of the bill reads "Nothing in this act or the adoption of the North American bison as the national mammal of the United States shall be construed or used as a reason to alter, change, modify, or otherwise affect any plan, policy, management decision, regulation, or other action by the federal government." Approximately 500,000 bison (20,000 plains and 10,000 wood bison) live in 62 conservation herds in the Great Plains and boreal forests of North America. Perhaps 15,000 bison are free-ranging and able to function ecologically. Relic extant populations persisted since near extirpation during the 1800s in Yellowstone National Park (4,900), and were restored on other public lands. Most numbers, 90 percent, were introduced to fenced private and tribal lands, bred for meat, husbanded as novelties and exhibits, or fostered for ecological and social considerations. The rewilding dream is limited by human populations and infrastructures, land uses, fragmented suitable landscapes, and attitudes that are incompatible with free-roaming wild herds of 1/2 to one ton ungulates. Mangers with governments, tribes, organizations, and private lands seek uncertain futures for bison considering legislation, land use alternatives, economics, social perspectives, dreams, and actions that not all can agree. Must we accept symbolic management of relics or ecologically rewild our dreams.

Members of organisations and public alike routinely treat the mention of some event in a record as unambiguous evidence for "the fact of" that event's occurrence, and thereby as an untroublesome basis for making inferences, deciding future courses of action, etc. However, there are occasions on which the factual character of a record is challenged and the subject of dispute. In this paper we examine such a dispute, which occurs between a cross‐examining counsel and a police witness during a Tribunal of Inquiry into events in Northern Ireland. In the analysis we explicate some of the moral inferential work (the allocation of blame, the construction of justifications, etc.) that can be bound up with such disputes, and we attempt to locate the procedures available to the interactants both for "authorising" the "fact" that some event occurred, and for challenging or defeating claims about such facts (in particular with procedures that have to do with the conventional basis for knowledge about certain events in the world).

Scholars have tended to treat the European Union (EU) as an environmental 'leader'. Yet significant potential nonetheless exists for it to learn lessons in areas such as water policy where it has a long and successful history of involvement. The EU's Water Framework Directive (2000) imposes potentially far reaching requirements on its Member States to enhance public participation in the process of catchment management. However, to date, its implementation has been highly variable across and even within individual states. As the EU starts to revise the original Directive, thoughts will turn to how the current situation could be improved. One potentially productive avenue, which has not yet been fully explored, is to draw lessons on public participation from comparable multi-levelled governance contexts such as in the USA and Australia, where public engagement has arguably been more advanced. Drawing on theoretical accounts of the most likely facilitators and obstacles to lesson drawing, this paper assesses the scope for transfer. It finds that while the EU could potentially learn from these jurisdictions, there are likely to be significant obstacles in practice. These should be born in mind by would-be policy learners. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Tidal River Management (TRM) is a local adaptation strategy for coastal floodplains in the Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta in Bangladesh. TRM involves the periodic opening and closing of embankments to accelerate land accretion (or reclamation) in a floodplain. Although the approach is considered a promising adaptation strategy, there have been both positive and negative outcomes from recent TRM implementation. The aim of this study is consequently to explore the institutional (community, rules-in-use, and also biophysical) factors influencing successes and failures of TRM implementation for managing common-pool resources, as a basis for making recommendations on future institutional design. The Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, first developed by Ostrom (2010) and revised by Bisaro and Hinkel (2016), is therefore used to conduct comparative analysis of TRM institutional effectiveness in three Delta floodplains or beels: one led by a local community and the other two by national authorities. Our research employs a mixed method approach involving focus group discussions, stakeholder interviews, site visits, along with secondary literature analysis. The results of this assessment provide insights into coastal adaptation governance that could inform TRM implementation in Bangladesh and other similar contexts worldwide.

This is the final version. Available from the Water Alternatives Association via the link in this record ; The European Union (EU) has established a major role in directing policy change, both internally and beyond its borders: a phenomenon known as 'Europeanisation'. This article examines the Europeanisation of water policy in Turkey in relation to implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Although some principles of EU water policy have been adopted in Turkey, the WFD has also been subject to significant domestic modification, prompting questions about how and why such patterns of partial implementation occur. In this respect, learning and socialisation within transnational 'instrument constituencies' (ICs) is shown to be an important explanatory factor. It follows that diffusion of the EU's water policy and the WFD beyond its borders may be enhanced by promoting the capacity for instrument constituency learning (or the 'cognitive environment') in non-EU countries. ; Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)