IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v13y2024i6p26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Social Connections to Local CBNRM Institutions Shape Interaction: A Mixed Methods Case from Namibia

Author

Listed:
  • Julie Snorek
  • Thomas Kraft
  • Vignesh Chockalingam
  • Alyssa Gao
  • Meghna Ray

Abstract

Strong social connections between communities and institutions are essential to effective community-based natural resource management. Connectivity and willingness to engage with actors across scales are related to one’s perceptions of institutions managing natural resources. To better understand how individuals’ perceptions are related to connections between communities and institutions, and how these promote or inhibit interaction across scales, we carried out a mixed methods case study on the multiple actors living and working in the Namib Naukluft National Park in Namibia. We took a descriptive approach to the social network analysis and identified distinct subgroups as well as boundary actors for the community-institutional network. Thereafter, we regressed interview data on connections, perceptions, and willingness to reach out to institutions to understand more about network dynamics. Finally, we performed a qualitative analysis of interview data, to further highlight why community individuals were connected to institutional members. Positive perceptions are associated with greater connectivity for two out of three institutions. Better quality connections between community members and institutions was equated with a greater willingness (of community members) to reach out to an institutional member in only one out of three cases. As in other studies, willingness to reach out may be more strongly correlated to intergroup actor dynamics, as shown by subgrouping in the social network analysis, than one’s perceptions alone. This research highlights that direct interactions between community members and local institutions has the potential to support collaboration in the context of community-based natural resource management.

Suggested Citation

  • Julie Snorek & Thomas Kraft & Vignesh Chockalingam & Alyssa Gao & Meghna Ray, 2024. "How Social Connections to Local CBNRM Institutions Shape Interaction: A Mixed Methods Case from Namibia," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/0/0/43887/46517
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/0/43887
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fikret Berkes, 2017. "Environmental Governance for the Anthropocene? Social-Ecological Systems, Resilience, and Collaborative Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mikko Kurenlahti & Arto O. Salonen, 2018. "Rethinking Consumerism from the Perspective of Religion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Ming Lu & Zhuolin Tan & Chao Yuan & Yu Dong & Wei Dong, 2023. "Resilience Measurements and Dynamics of Resource-Based Cities in Heilongjiang Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Xi Zhao & Yuming Liu & Wenchao Jiang & Dongri Wei, 2023. "Study on the Factors Influencing and Mechanisms Shaping the Institutional Resilience of Mega Railway Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Targetti, Stefano & Schaller, Lena L. & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2021. "A fuzzy cognitive mapping approach for the assessment of public-goods governance in agricultural landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Tasos Hovardas, 2021. "Social Sustainability as Social Learning: Insights from Multi-Stakeholder Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    6. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2023. "Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 461-478, June.
    7. Melanie Zurba & Dominic Stucker & Grace Mwaura & Catie Burlando & Archi Rastogi & Shalini Dhyani & Rebecca Koss, 2020. "Intergenerational Dialogue, Collaboration, Learning, and Decision-Making in Global Environmental Governance: The Case of the IUCN Intergenerational Partnership for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Okura, Fumi & Budiasa, I Wayan & Kato, Tasuku, 2022. "Exploring a Balinese irrigation water management system using agent-based modeling and game theory," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 274(C).
    9. Per Angelstam & Terrence Bush & Michael Manton, 2023. "Challenges and Solutions for Forest Biodiversity Conservation in Sweden: Assessment of Policy, Implementation Outputs, and Consequences," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-58, May.
    10. Ethmadalage Dineth Perera & Magnus Moglia & Stephen Glackin, 2023. "Beyond “Community-Washing”: Effective and Sustained Community Collaboration in Urban Waterways Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, March.
    11. Sattler, Claudia & Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Meyer, Claas, 2018. "Methods in ecosystem services governance analysis: An introduction," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 155-168.
    12. Marco Casazza & Francesco Gonella & Gengyuan Liu & Antonio Proto & Renato Passaro, 2021. "Physical Constraints on Global Social-Ecological Energy System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-25, December.
    13. Chien, Herlin & Saito, Osamu, 2021. "Evaluating social–ecological fit in urban stream management: The role of governing institutions in sustainable urban ecosystem service provision," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    14. 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).
    15. Ramezani, Javaneh & Camarinha-Matos, Luis M., 2020. "Approaches for resilience and antifragility in collaborative business ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    16. Kanoeʻulalani Morishige & Pelika Andrade & Puaʻala Pascua & Kanoelani Steward & Emily Cadiz & Lauren Kapono & Uakoko Chong, 2018. "Nā Kilo ʻĀina: Visions of Biocultural Restoration through Indigenous Relationships between People and Place," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, September.
    17. Jacob, Céline & Bernatchez, Pascal & Dupras, Jérôme & Cusson, Mathieu, 2021. "Not just an engineering problem: The role of knowledge and understanding of ecosystem services for adaptive management of coastal erosion," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    18. Natalie Kurashima & Jason Jeremiah & A. Nāmaka Whitehead & Jon Tulchin & Mililani Browning & Trever Duarte, 2018. "‘Āina Kaumaha: The Maintenance of Ancestral Principles for 21st Century Indigenous Resource Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, October.
    19. Sabrina Dressel & Annelie Sjölander-Lindqvist & Maria Johansson & Göran Ericsson & Camilla Sandström, 2021. "Achieving Social and Ecological Outcomes in Collaborative Environmental Governance: Good Examples from Swedish Moose Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, February.
    20. Rodriguez, Maykol & Bodini, Antonio & Escobedo, Francisco J. & Clerici, Nicola, 2021. "Analyzing socio-ecological interactions through qualitative modeling: Forest conservation and implications for sustainability in the peri‑urban bogota (Colombia)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 439(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:26. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.