IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v113y2022ics0264837721006499.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A cup of tea? – The role of social relationships, networks and learning in land managers’ adaptations to policy change

Author

Listed:
  • Eastwood, Antonia
  • Fischer, Anke
  • Hague, Alice
  • Brown, Katrina

Abstract

Within international and, more specifically, European policy there is a shift towards managing land for multiple benefits and in the public interest. This necessitates greater collaboration between different actors, often with diverging management objectives, across a landscape. Here we present the findings of a qualitative study exploring the influence of social relationships, networks and associated power on land managers’ decision-making, collaborative management and implementation of policy change across a national park in Scotland. We found that social relationships and networks were key in facilitating transformative change in land management but could also consolidate the status quo of land management practices and thus hamper change. Consequently, we observed a polarisation of management practices across the national park shaped by social relationships and networks; with one trend towards an intensification of traditional land use (grouse shooting), and another one towards landscape restoration and nature-based solutions. Top-down collaborative groups, composed of participants with divergent views and perspectives, and designed to promote policy uptake, had not yet improved mutual understanding or social learning. By contrast, voluntary collaboration between like-minded estates strengthened existing views, resulting in polarisation. Poor relationships and distrust between some actors constrained social learning and collaborative decision-making between land managers with diverging interests. However, personal one-to-one relationships, developed over time, between agency staff and land managers could moderate patterns of polarisation, where land managers were amenable and had the capacity to make changes to management.

Suggested Citation

  • Eastwood, Antonia & Fischer, Anke & Hague, Alice & Brown, Katrina, 2022. "A cup of tea? – The role of social relationships, networks and learning in land managers’ adaptations to policy change," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:113:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721006499
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105926
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721006499
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105926?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. Thomas C. Beierle & David M. Konisky, 2000. "Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 587-602.
    2. Westerink, Judith & Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & Prager, Katrin & Franks, Jeremy & Dupraz, Pierre & Mettepenningen, Evy, 2017. "Collaborative governance arrangements to deliver spatially coordinated agri-environmental management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 176-192.
    3. Bouwma, Irene & Schleyer, Christian & Primmer, Eeva & Winkler, Klara Johanna & Berry, Pam & Young, Juliette & Carmen, Esther & Špulerová, Jana & Bezák, Peter & Preda, Elena & Vadineanu, Angheluta, 2018. "Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 213-222.
    4. Hodgson, Isla D. & Redpath, Steve M. & Fischer, Anke & Young, Juliette, 2018. "Fighting talk: Organisational discourses of the conflict over raptors and grouse moor management in Scotland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 332-343.
    5. Anke Fischer & Camilla Sandström & Miguel Delibes-Mateos & Beatriz Arroyo & Degu Tadie & Deborah Randall & Fetene Hailu & Asanterabi Lowassa & Maurus Msuha & Vesna Kereži & Slaven Reljić & John Linnel, 2013. "On the multifunctionality of hunting -- an institutional analysis of eight cases from Europe and Africa," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 531-552, May.
    6. Katie Hoover & Marc J. Stern, 2014. "Constraints to public influence in US Forest Service NEPA processes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(2), pages 173-189, 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. Loivaranta, Tikli, 2023. "Geographies of knowledge creation in forest rights claims-making processes among Indigenous communities in Central India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(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. Joshua Otieno WANGA & Patrick Odhiambo HAYOMBE & Pius Ongoro ODUNGA & Fredrick Z.A. ODEDE, 2013. "The Nexus between environmental knowledge and ecotourism attitude among the local youths in Co-educational Secondary Schools in Bondo Sub-County, Siaya County, Kenya," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 3(7), pages 103-116, July.
    2. Buchecker, Matthias & Hunziker, Marcel, 2006. "The effect of consensus building processes on regional collaboration," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Dai, Xuhuan & Li, Bo & Zheng, Hua & Yang, Yanzheng & Yang, Zihan & Peng, Chenchen, 2023. "Can sedentarization decrease the dependence of pastoral livelihoods on ecosystem services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    4. Marie Lassalas & Sabine Duvaleix & Laure Latruffe, 2024. "The technical and economic effects of biodiversity standards on wheat production," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 51(2), pages 275-308.
    5. Živojinović, I. & Weiss, G. & Wilding, M. & Wong, J.L.G. & Ludvig, A., 2020. "Experiencing forest products – An innovation trend by rural entrepreneurs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2022. "Как Да Оценим Управленческата Ефективност На Българските Земеделски Стопанства [How to assess the governance efficiency of Bulgarian agricultural farms]," MPRA Paper 113590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Simoncini, Riccardo & Ring, Irene & Sandström, Camilla & Albert, Christian & Kasymov, Ulan & Arlettaz, Raphael, 2019. "Constraints and opportunities for mainstreaming biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy: Insights from the IPBES assessment for Europe and Central Asia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Clare Bayley & Simon French, 2008. "Designing a Participatory Process for Stakeholder Involvement in a Societal Decision," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 195-210, May.
    9. Kuifeng Wang & Paul Liu & Fengsheng Sun & Shengwen Wang & Gong Zhang & Taiping Zhang & Guodong Chen & Jinqiu Liu & Gangchao Wang & Songkun Cao, 2023. "Progress in Realizing the Value of Ecological Products in China and Its Practice in Shandong Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-30, June.
    10. Blattert, Clemens & Eyvindson, Kyle & Hartikainen, Markus & Burgas, Daniel & Potterf, Maria & Lukkarinen, Jani & Snäll, Tord & Toraño-Caicoya, Astor & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2022. "Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    11. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    12. Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2018. "Eco-System Services in Agrarian Value Chains: Value Detection of Bio-Diversity as Public Good Provision, Problems, and Institutional Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Marie Balková & Lucie Kubalíková & Marcela Prokopová & Petr Sedlák & Aleš Bajer, 2021. "Ecosystem Services of Vegetation Features as the Multifunction Anti-Erosion Measures in the Czech Republic in 2019 and Its 30-Year Prediction," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    14. Johanna Norris & Bettina Matzdorf & Rena Barghusen & Christoph Schulze & Bart van Gorcum, 2021. "Viewpoints on Cooperative Peatland Management: Expectations and Motives of Dutch Farmers," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    15. François Bareille & Matteo Zavalloni & Davide Viaggi, 2023. "Agglomeration bonus and endogenous group formation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 76-98, January.
    16. Hérivaux, Cécile & Grémont, Marine, 2019. "Valuing a diversity of ecosystem services: The way forward to protect strategic groundwater resources for the future?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 184-193.
    17. Elomina, Jerbelle & Pülzl, Helga, 2021. "How are forests framed? An analysis of EU forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    18. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    19. Kanokporn Swangjang, 2022. "Linkage of Sustainability to Environmental Impact Assessment Using the Concept of Ecosystem Services: Lessons from Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    20. Runhaar, Hens & Polman, Nico, 2018. "Partnering for nature conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 11-19.

    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:113:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721006499. 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.