Suchergebnisse

Adaptive management implies a system in which policy and practice are constantly revised in a continuous circular process to accommodate new ecological knowledge. This study set out to address the often complicated link between science and management, which holds a prominent position in adaptive management theory. The topic was elaborated focusing on the empirical case of fish stocking policy. While fish stocking is perceived as a solution to many problems of modern fishery management, scientific researchers warn that current practices, including introducing alien populations, seriously threaten the sustainability of fish stocks. Accordingly, the aim of the study was to address, explain the existence of and, finally, discuss the prospect of narrowing the gap between science and policy, promoting the potential for adaptability.Even though Sweden was used as an empirical point of departure, a multilevel governance perspective was adopted. Two separate studies were conducted; the first aimed at defining the characteristics of the policy subsystem, while the second study analyzed policy making related to fish stocking with a bottom-up approach. The empirical material was collected through documental analyses and interviews. The empirical findings underlined that fish stocking is a wicked policy problem, as the vast substantial and institutional uncertainties characterizing the policy subsystem were identified as variables complicating the realization of adaptive policy making. Fish stocking decisions are made within a complex policy subsystem that involves multiple actors and policy-making institutions, conflicting goals and competing notions of the problem. Policy is produced on the international, European and national levels and within different policy sectors. Moreover, current policies reveal great diversity and range as well as inconsistencies in definitions and terminology. The lower-level bureaucrats, making stocking decisions on the regional level in Sweden, must navigate within this complex policy subsystem. Even though all regions are embedded in the same formal institutional framework of legal rules, regulations and policies, they tend to behave differently. The empirical analysis highlighted some clear divergences in how the issues of genetic diversity and fish stocking are understood and addressed in different regions. These variations were explained by differences in existing implementation resources, policy beliefs and readings of formal regulations. Public policy makers can respond to the above described situation in two ways; they can either change formal regulations or influence available implementation resources. Both management approaches might have positive as well as negative effects on the subsystem's adaptability. There is a trade off between the need for more detailed regulations on the one hand and the possibility to accommodate regional contexts in policy making on the other. Finally, since the policy problem constitutes an illustrative example of the disparate challenges associated with adaptive management theory and the realization thereof, the findings are likely relevant also for other policy subsystem sharing similar qualities. ; Godkänd; 2011; 20111122 (annicas)

The importance of policy networks and the need to treat networks seriously have long been emphasized within the field of policy science. However, not many attempts have been made to investigate the explanatory power of policy networks using the tools and theoretical concepts provided by social network analysis (SNA). This historical limitation is the central undertaking of the current thesis, which sets out to clarify the possible relationship between network structure and the organizing capacities and performance of policy networks. Not only is the aim to elucidate how different network qualities affect performance, but the thesis also has a methodological aim of indicating in what ways SNA contributes to and enhances policy network research. Based on the theoretical concepts policy, networks, institutions, and social capital, an analytical framework is formed. A set of hypotheses regarding how network structures are believed to affect the performance of policy networks is suggested. Two particular network qualities-namely, network closure and network heterogeneity-are proposed as central for the process and its outcome. The former reflects the internal structure of a network in terms of density and centralization, while the latter reflects how the network is connected to other networks and addresses its level of diversity and cross-boundary character. The empirical part of the thesis consists of three case studies, in which policy processes within different policy sectors are studied. The empirical analysis confirms the existence of a relationship between network structure and performance. As the level of network closure increases, so does the capability to prioritize, thereby enhancing efficiency. However, the level of network heterogeneity is positively related to the function of resource mobilization, which, in turn, is a central prerequisite for improved effectiveness. The thesis concludes that a significant explanatory power exists in the concept of policy networks and that SNA is a promising way to explore its possibilities, enhancing policy research and the conceptual and theoretical developments within the field. Finally, the implications of the findings for contemporary policy making and public administration are discussed. ; Godkänd; 2008; 20080519 (ysko)

The central undertaking in this thesis is to explore the explanatory power of the concept of policy networks. The main question is whether there is a relation between the structural features of policy networks and their performance? Does network structure matter for network performance, and in that case, in what sense? In order to investigate the relationship between structure and performance, five implementation networks, engaged in inter-organizational collaboration with the task to create multidisciplinary units, at Luleå University of Technology (LTU), are studied. Each network is analyzed regarding both structural properties and performances. First, network performance is measured by the level of effectiveness and innovation. Next, the structural features of the implementation networks are measured. Drawing upon previous work of Burt, the structural analysis is based on the examination of two specific network mechanisms, namely network closure and global structural holes. Basically, while the former refers to the degree of interconnectedness, the latter considers the extent to which the actors span global structural holes, meaning that they have contacts reaching outside the network in focus. A positive relation between the two above mentioned mechanisms and performance is proposed. The empirical analysis confirms the assumption that there is a relation between structure and performance. While the existence of global structural holes is a necessity for innovative networks to form, their level of effectiveness is positively related to the degree of network closure. Following this, an innovative network is a network in which the actors are tightly connected and, at the same time, have many connections to other actors, engaged in other network constellations. Further, on the basis of the empirical findings, two new hypotheses, specifying the relationship between structure and performance, are suggested. Firstly, it is proposed that the function of prioritizing, so vital for the process of organizing, is facilitated within centrally integrated networks. Secondly, the function of mobilization of resources is facilitated within networks that span a large amount of global structural holes. Accordingly, network structure does matter for the effectiveness of innovative policy networks. To conclude, there is certainly a lot of explanatory power in the concept of policy networks and the formal analytical approach, offered by social network analysis (SNA), is one way to explore its possibilities. ; Godkänd; 2004; 20070128 (ysko)

AbstractThe widespread supposition that collaborative management designs enhance legitimacy must be examined empirically, and the rich diversity of different collaborative arrangements should be better acknowledged in this endeavor. This study adopts a social network perspective and examines three state‐initiated and interest‐based collaborative management arenas in Swedish wildlife management: wildlife conservation committees (WCCs). Is there a link between social network structures in collaborative management arenas and the perceived legitimacy of output by policy stakeholders? This puzzle is addressed through social network analysis combined with survey data and interviews. The empirical results confirm the notion that collaborative arenas consisting of high network closure with many bridging ties across organizational boundaries enjoy a higher level of support among stakeholders directly involved in management, as members of the committees, than networks with a more sparse structure do. This type of well‐integrated network structure seemingly increases stakeholders' understanding of other actors' perspectives through deliberation. Contrary to what was expected, though, the empirical analysis did not verify the effect of linking, or outreaching ties between the committee members and the organizations that they represent, on the organizations' support of WCC decisions. Given the rapid rise of collaborative designs in public administrations, the topic elaborated in this paper is urgent and further research is encouraged.

AbstractAs the theoretical and practical interest in policy networks increases, so does the need for further research into how, and based on what rationales, actors within a policy subsystem engage in interorganizational collective action and form political coalitions. The aim of this paper is to continue the search for explanations for coordination and coalition structures in the setting of Swedish carnivore policy. Based on the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and a previous case study within the same policy subsystem, the study investigates a set of hypotheses regarding actors' coordinating behavior and the defining elements of coalitions. The empirical analysis indicates, in support of the ACF, that perceived belief correspondence is a better predictor of coordination than perceived influence. Moreover, the explanatory power of empirical policy core beliefs in general, and normative policy core beliefs in particular, is further reinforced, while deep core beliefs seemingly do not influence coalition structure. The relevance of more shallow beliefs for coalition formation cannot be dismissed and therefore calls for additional research.

The contemporary trend within natural resource governance sees a strong increase in collaborative management. The principal idea is that collaborative structures constitute effective arenas for problem solving, an institutional arrangement promoting deliberation and learning among opposing interests. In advisory policy subsystems that are characterized by the existence of many competing policy coalitions collaborative management is often regarded as a response to experienced legitimacy deficits. A successful outcome of such institutional reforms, however, requires that policy learning within and between coalitions take place. Thus the turnout of collaborative arrangements is dependent upon the characteristics of political coalitions for deliberation and learning to evolve across competing coalitions. Uncovering the mechanisms driving the formation and maintenance of coalitions is therefore a key undertaking in policy analysis and the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) has been widely applied for this purpose. This study aimed to explore policy coordination and coalition formation, both inspired by, and with a critical assessment, of the ACF. For this purpose, a case study analysis set within the Swedish game management policy was conducted, applying social network analysis as a tool to identify existing coalitions and a value-survey to capture the actors beliefs on a vide range of matters. The results indicate, firstly, that perceived belief correspondence constitute the rationale determining the formation of coalitions and, secondly, that the catalogue of beliefs shared by actors within a coalition is composed by policy beliefs, in particular the more empirically oriented, as no connection between deep core beliefs and coalitions was found. The study contribute to the theoretical puzzle concerning the driving forces behind coalition formation in general and to the specific area of collaborative game management in particular, as the prospects for learning across the defined coalitions was discussed. ; Natural resource governance sees a strong increase in collaborative management. The principal idea is that collaborative structures constitute effective arenas for problem solving, an institutional arrangement promoting deliberation and learning among opposing interests. In advisory policy subsystems that are characterized by the existence of many competing policy coalitions collaborative management is often regarded as a response to experienced legitimacy deficits. A successful outcome of such institutional reforms, however, requires that policy learning within and between coalitions take place. Thus the turnout of collaborative arrangements is dependent upon the characteristics of political coalitions for deliberation and learning to evolve across competing coalitions. Uncovering the mechanisms driving the formation and maintenance of coalitions is therefore a key undertaking in policy analysis and the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) has been widely applied for this purpose. This study aim to explore policy coordination and coalition formation both inspired by, and with a critical assessment, of the ACF. For this purpose, a case study analysis set within the Swedish game management policy was conducted, applying social network analysis as a tool to identify existing coalitions and a value-survey to capture the actors beliefs on a vide range of matters. ; Godkänd; 2011; 20111122 (annicas)

The challenge of establishing adaptive management systems is a widely discussed topic in the literature on natural resource management. Adaptive management essentially focuses on achieving a governance process that is both sensitive to and has the capacity to continuously react to changes within the ecosystem being managed. The adoption of a network approach that perceives governance structures as social networks, searching for the kind of network features promoting this important feature, has been requested by researchers in the field. In particular, the possibilities associated with the application of a formal network approach, using the tools and concepts of social network analysis (SNA), have been identified as having significant potential for advancing this branch of research. This paper aims to address the relation between network structure and adaptability using an empirical approach. With the point of departure in a previously generated theoretical framework as well as related hypotheses, this paper presents a case study of a governance process within a fish management area in Sweden. The hypotheses state that, although higher levels of network density and centralisation promote the rule-forming process, the level of network heterogeneity is important for the existence and spread of ecological knowledge among the actors involved. According to the empirical results, restricted by the single-case study design, this assumption is still a well-working hypothesis. However, in order to advance our knowledge concerning these issues and test the validity of the hypotheses, more empirical work using a similar approach in multiple case study designs is needed. ; Validerad; 2010; 20090816 (annica_s)

The survival of the commons is closely associated with the potential to find ways to strengthen contemporary management systems, making them more responsive to a number of complexities, like the dynamics of ecosystems and related, but often fragmented, institutions. A discussion on the desirability of finding ways to establish so-called cross-scale linkages has recently been vitalised in the literature. In the same vein, concepts like adaptive management, co-management and adaptive co-management have been discussed. In essence, these ways of organizing management incorporate an implicit assumption about the establishment of social networks and is more closely related to network governance and social network theory, than to political administrative hierarchy. However, so far, attempts to incorporate social network analysis (SNA) in this literature have been rather few, and not particularly elaborate. In this paper, a framework for such an approach will be presented. The framework provides an analytical skeleton for the understanding of joint management and the establishment of cross-scale linkages. The relationships between structural network properties - like density, centrality and heterogeneity - and innovation in adaptive co-management systems are highlighted as important to consider when crafting institutions for natural resource management. The paper makes a theoretical and methodological contribution to the understanding of co-management, and thereby to the survival of the commons. ; Validerad; 2008; 20071105 (annica_s)