Suchergebnisse

Adaptive governance focuses our attention on the relationships between science and management, whereby the so-called 'gaps' between these groups are seen to hinder effective adaptive responses to biophysical change. Yet the relationships between science and governance, knowledge and action, remain under theorized in discussions of adaptive governance, which largely focuses on abstract design principles or preferred institutional arrangements. In contrast, the metaphor of co-production highlights the social and political processes through which science, policy, and practice co-evolve. Co-production is invoked as a normative goal (Mitchell et al., 2004) and analytical lens (Jasanoff, 2004a and Jasanoff, 2004b), both of which provide useful insight into the processes underpinning adaptive governance. This paper builds on and integrates these disparate views to reconceptualize adaptive governance as a process of co-production. I outline an alternative conceptual framing, 'co-productive governance', that articulates the context, knowledge, process, and vision of governance. I explore these ideas through two cases of connectivity conservation, which draws on conservation science to promote collaborative cross-scale governance. This analysis highlights the ways in which the different contexts of these cases produced very different framings and responses to the same propositions of science and governance. Drawing on theoretical and empirical material, co-productive governance moves beyond long standing debates that institutions can be rationally crafted or must emerge from context resituate adaptive governance in a more critical and contextualized space. This reframing focuses on the process of governance through an explicit consideration of how normative considerations shape the interactions between knowledge and power, science and governance. ; This research was funded by a Land and Water Australia PhD scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Fund.

Adaptive governance focuses our attention on the relationships between science and management, whereby the so-called 'gaps' between these groups are seen to hinder effective adaptive responses to biophysical change. Yet the relationships between science and governance, knowledge and action, remain under theorized in discussions of adaptive governance, which largely focuses on abstract design principles or preferred institutional arrangements. In contrast, the metaphor of co-production highlights the social and political processes through which science, policy, and practice co-evolve. Co-production is invoked as a normative goal (Mitchell et al., 2004) and analytical lens (Jasanoff, 2004a and Jasanoff, 2004b), both of which provide useful insight into the processes underpinning adaptive governance. This paper builds on and integrates these disparate views to reconceptualize adaptive governance as a process of co-production. I outline an alternative conceptual framing, 'co-productive governance', that articulates the context, knowledge, process, and vision of governance. I explore these ideas through two cases of connectivity conservation, which draws on conservation science to promote collaborative cross-scale governance. This analysis highlights the ways in which the different contexts of these cases produced very different framings and responses to the same propositions of science and governance. Drawing on theoretical and empirical material, co-productive governance moves beyond long standing debates that institutions can be rationally crafted or must emerge from context resituate adaptive governance in a more critical and contextualized space. This reframing focuses on the process of governance through an explicit consideration of how normative considerations shape the interactions between knowledge and power, science and governance. ; This research was funded by a Land and Water Australia PhD scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Fund.

Presented at the Fall 2011 Center for Collaborative Conservation (https://collaborativeconservation.org/) Special Seminar, "Collaborative Conservation in Practice: Indigenous Peoples and Conservation", September 6, 2011, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. This series focused on Indigenous Peoples and Conservation. ; Carina Wyborn is a PhD student at the Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University. Her dissertation is examining the interplay between science, values and action in collaborative conservation with a particular focus on large landscape connectivity conservation in Australia and North America. Carina teaches in the Human Ecology program at the Fenner School and is funded by a Land and Water Australia postgraduate scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship. She is also a special advisor to the Federal Government National Wildlife Corridors Advisory Committee. Her current visit to the US was funded by a National Climate Adaptation Research Facility collaboration travel grant. ; Includes recorded speech and PowerPoint presentation. ; Large landscape 'connectivity conservation' initiatives are rapidly gaining prominence across the world. They are motivated by a desire to halt biodiversity decline and preserve ecosystem processes in the face of climate change and habitat fragmentation. At the heart of these initiatives is the motivation and ability of individuals, agencies and institutions to collaborate across multiple scales, land tenures and land uses. In a reasonably short period of time, proponents of connectivity conservation have launched the concept as front and centre in debates about climate change adaptation in conservation. The phenomenon of connectivity conservation has taken hold in Australia and there are now major connectivity initiatives in every state. Additionally, Australia is in the process of developing a National Wildlife Corridor Policy. Drawing on the concept of ecological connectivity, proponents claim to be 'connecting people' while 'connecting landscapes'. This framing intends to create a positive narrative that engages and inspires a commitment to conservation by placing small-scale interventions in a larger landscape context. This framing demonstrates the power of a science-based concept to bridge normative and scientific domains and create a space for meaningful action at the local scale. The presentation will explore how these 'science narratives' have been mobilised to create a shared imperative for collaboration. As these narratives blur the boundaries between science and values in an effort to inspire collective action, they present an interesting opportunity to examine the diffusion and interplay between science and practice in collaborative conservation.

PurposeThis paper seeks to report research undertaken to assess the extent to which Australian universities were engaged in professional development (PD) activities focusing on the development of education for sustainability for their academics.Design/methodology/approachThis web‐based survey seeks to identify the existence of PD programs and teaching induction programs within universities, or where programs in tertiary teaching that included any sustainability education content were offered.FindingsWhile the vast majority of universities had information about PD available, only one offers a PD course designed to introduce academics to sustainability and teaching sustainability. This is despite the high number of Australian universities that have signed sustainability education declarations, which include commitments to achieving sustainability literacy in staff and students.Research limitations/implicationsThe survey focused only on information contained on web sites, and information that would not have been identified by this methodology such as informal programs, forums and workshops, and anything on secure staff "intranet" sites.Practical implicationsThis research indicates that in Australia there is only very limited PD activity, which provides one explanation for the limited extent to which education for sustainability is evident in universities.Originality/valueThere is little information about PD activity in universities generally, and especially in Australia. This research provides a starting‐point investigation into activity that may have been missed by the research. More importantly, it provides a base for the exploration of PD programs that will be the most effective and efficient in facilitating education for sustainability.