IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v100y2021ics0264837720304300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fostering adaptive co-management with stakeholder participation in the surroundings of soda pans in Kiskunság, Hungary – An assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Kovács, Eszter
  • Mile, Orsolya
  • Fabók, Veronika
  • Margóczi, Katalin
  • Kalóczkai, Ágnes
  • Kasza, Veronika
  • Nagyné Grecs, Anita
  • Bankovics, András
  • Mihók, Barbara

Abstract

In constantly changing complex social-ecological systems conservation organisations need to take steps toward adaptive co-management if they want to be effective in their conservation activities. In the surroundings of the soda pans of the Kiskunság region in Hungary, a participatory process was initiated with the local national park directorate to understand the socio-economic context of the sodic wetland area, reveal the perceptions of local stakeholders about the current and preferable management of the area and start discussions with them about certain priority management issues related to sustainable use (grazing and ecotourism). In this article, we show how this process helped in taking the first steps toward adaptive co-management. For the assessment, criteria of effective adaptive co-management were derived from the literature. The results show that most conditions for adaptive co-management have already been fulfilled (e.g. identified set of stakeholders, sense of place shared or incentives for participation) and some social outcomes were achieved. The participatory process assisted the collaboration of stakeholders, which can contribute to positive economic and ecological outcomes in the future. Through the engagement of local stakeholders some conflicting management issues were resolved (e.g. accepting a wider range of grazing animal species and allowing flexible time for mowing) and collaboration started on ecotourism issues (e.g. information sharing with the assistance of the national park directorate). This process can be seen as the ‘formulation’ phase of adaptive co-management but more efforts are needed to move toward the ‘conjoint’ phase with more actions, monitoring and social learning. Our case also shows that ACM can be a good method for both conservation and rural development but supporting policy environment as well as financial resources assisting the participatory process and nature-friendly farming activities can be important for its long term success.

Suggested Citation

  • Kovács, Eszter & Mile, Orsolya & Fabók, Veronika & Margóczi, Katalin & Kalóczkai, Ágnes & Kasza, Veronika & Nagyné Grecs, Anita & Bankovics, András & Mihók, Barbara, 2021. "Fostering adaptive co-management with stakeholder participation in the surroundings of soda pans in Kiskunság, Hungary – An assessment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:100:y:2021:i:c:s0264837720304300
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104894
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837720304300
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104894?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    2. Ryan Plummer & Julia Baird, 2013. "Adaptive Co-Management for Climate Change Adaptation: Considerations for the Barents Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Plummer, Ryan & Armitage, Derek, 2007. "A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 62-74, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ullah, Ayat & Zeb, Alam & Saqib, Shahab E. & Kächele, Harald, 2022. "Landscape co-management and livelihood sustainability: Lessons learned from the billion trees afforestation project in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Begum, Flora & de Bruyn, Lisa Lobry & Kristiansen, Paul & Islam, Mohammad Amirul, 2023. "Development pathways for co-management in the Sundarban mangrove forest: A multiple stakeholder perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Viola Hakkarainen & Katri Mäkinen‐Rostedt & Andra Horcea‐Milcu & Dalia D'Amato & Johanna Jämsä & Katriina Soini, 2022. "Transdisciplinary research in natural resources management: Towards an integrative and transformative use of co‐concepts," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 309-325, April.
    2. Ullah, Ayat & Zeb, Alam & Saqib, Shahab E. & Kächele, Harald, 2022. "Landscape co-management and livelihood sustainability: Lessons learned from the billion trees afforestation project in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Alexandra Montoya Restrepo & Paula Viviana Robayo Acuña & Oscar Castellanos Domínguez, 2011. "Aportes desde las ciencias biológicas a la teoría de la gestión," Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, June.
    4. Xin Xuan & Bing Liu & Fan Zhang, 2021. "Climate Change and Adaptive Management: Case Study in Agriculture, Forestry and Pastoral Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Ziyan Zheng & Fangdao Qiu & Xinlin Zhang, 2020. "Heterogeneity of correlation between the locational condition and industrial transformation of regenerative resource‐based cities in China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 771-791, June.
    6. Sylvie Ferrari & Sébastien Lavaud & Jean-Christophe Pereau, 2012. "Critical natural capital, ecological resilience and sustainable wetland management: a french case study," Post-Print hal-00799051, HAL.
    7. Alina Botezat & Mihaela David & Cristian Incaltarau & Peter Nijkamp, 2021. "The Illusion of Urbanization: Impact of Administrative Reform on Communities’ Resilience," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 44(1), pages 33-84, January.
    8. Fabrice Renaud & Jörn Birkmann & Marion Damm & Gilberto Gallopín, 2010. "Understanding multiple thresholds of coupled social–ecological systems exposed to natural hazards as external shocks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 55(3), pages 749-763, December.
    9. Takasaki, Yoshito, 2016. "Learning from disaster: community-based marine protected areas in Fiji," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 53-77, February.
    10. Wood, Apanie L. & Butler, James R.A. & Sheaves, Marcus & Wani, Jacob, 2013. "Sport fisheries: Opportunities and challenges for diversifying coastal livelihoods in the Pacific," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 305-314.
    11. Langarudi, Saeed P. & Maxwell, Connie M. & Bai, Yining & Hanson, Austin & Fernald, Alexander, 2019. "Does Socioeconomic Feedback Matter for Water Models?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 35-45.
    12. Liliana Caughman & Lauren Withycombe Keeler & Fletcher Beaudoin, 2020. "Real-Time Evaluation of City–University Partnerships for Sustainability and Resilience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Vaughan, Mehana Blaich & Caldwell, Margaret R., 2015. "Hana Pa'a: Challenges and lessons for early phases of co-management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 51-62.
    14. Forliano, Canio & Bullini Orlandi, Ludovico & Zardini, Alessandro & Rossignoli, Cecilia, 2023. "Technological orientation and organizational resilience to Covid-19: The mediating role of strategy's digital maturity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    15. McConnell, Jesse, 2019. "Adoption for adaptation: A theory-based approach for monitoring a complex policy initiative," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 214-223.
    16. Spiegel, Alisa & Slijper, Thomas & de Mey, Yann & Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Poortvliet, P. Marijn & Rommel, Jens & Hansson, Helena & Vigani, Mauro & Soriano, Bárbara & Wauters, Erwin & Appel, Franzisk, 2021. "Resilience capacities as perceived by European farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Conz, Elisa & Lamb, Peter William & De Massis, Alfredo, 2020. "Practicing resilience in family firms: An investigation through phenomenography," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 11(2).
    18. Ricciardi, Francesca & De Bernardi, Paola & Cantino, Valter, 2020. "System dynamics modeling as a circular process: The smart commons approach to impact management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    19. Kolinjivadi, Vijay, 2019. "Avoiding dualisms in ecological economics: Towards a dialectically-informed understanding of co-produced socionatures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 32-41.
    20. Weston M. Eaton & Kathryn J. Brasier & Mark E. Burbach & Stephanie Kennedy & Jodi L. Delozier & Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba & Hannah T. Whitley & Walt Whitmer & Nicole Santangelo, 2023. "A new approach for studying social, behavioral, and environmental change through stakeholder engagement in water resource management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(3), pages 389-403, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:100:y:2021:i:c:s0264837720304300. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.