IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v43y2019i1p3-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A practical dialogue protocol for sustainability science to contribute to regional resources management: its implementation in Réunion

Author

Listed:
  • Jérôme Queste
  • Tom Wassenaar

Abstract

Over the last decade, adaptive co‐management has been recommended as a policy framework to address complex and uncertain resources management issues. Implementing this theoretical management concept requires the integration of multidisciplinary research and local knowledge. Yet practical protocols to link science, policymaking and societies have yet to be developed. We designed a protocol to produce legitimate, credible and relevant solutions to a regional resources management issue. This is a two‐component protocol. A stakeholder grid categorizes stakeholder representatives in three distinct specialized dialogue arenas: institution representatives, technical experts and local end‐users. An iterative co‐design process then builds on these arenas to assess the institutional legitimacy, technical credibility and empirical relevance dimensions of a common solution initiated by an initial plausible promise. We tested this framework in Réunion to address organic waste management issues at the regional level. The plausible solution explored was the introduction of a recycling industry involved in collecting organic waste and producing and selling organic fertilizers tailored for local crop systems. The protocol application outcomes were consolidated and documented scenarios accepted by all, with knowledge exchange and the broad spread of a stabilized expectation contributing to private initiatives and public policy change.

Suggested Citation

  • Jérôme Queste & Tom Wassenaar, 2019. "A practical dialogue protocol for sustainability science to contribute to regional resources management: its implementation in Réunion," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(1), pages 3-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:43:y:2019:i:1:p:3-16
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12164
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12164
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-8947.12164?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul R. Carlile, 2004. "Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 555-568, October.
    2. Martine Antona, Didier Babin, 2001. "Multiple interest accommodation in African forest management projects: between pragmatism and theoretical coherence," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3/4), pages 286-305.
    3. Cees Leeuwis, 2000. "Reconceptualizing Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation Approach," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 31(5), pages 931-959, November.
    4. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    5. Cécile Barnaud & Annemarie van Paassen, 2013. "Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management," Post-Print hal-01386409, HAL.
    6. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    7. Douthwaite, Boru & Kuby, Thomas & van de Fliert, Elske & Schulz, Steffen, 2003. "Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 243-265, November.
    8. Gearey, Mary & Jeffrey, Paul, 2006. "Concepts of legitimacy within the context of adaptive water management strategies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 129-137, November.
    9. 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.
    10. Esther Turnhout, 2009. "The effectiveness of boundary objects: the case of ecological indicators," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 403-412, June.
    11. David Edmunds & Eva Wollenberg, 2001. "A Strategic Approach to Multistakeholder Negotiations," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(2), pages 231-253, March.
    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. Hoffecker, Elizabeth, 2021. "Understanding inclusive innovation processes in agricultural systems: A middle-range conceptual model," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(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. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2019. "Large-Scale Innovative Projects as Temporary Trading Zones: Toward an Interlanguage Theory," Post-Print hal-02390158, HAL.
    2. ZHU Chen & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2024. "The Fundraising of AI Startups: Evidence from web data," Discussion papers 24021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    3. Forrest Briscoe, 2007. "From Iron Cage to Iron Shield? How Bureaucracy Enables Temporal Flexibility for Professional Service Workers," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 297-314, April.
    4. Ann Majchrzak & Philip H. B. More & Samer Faraj, 2012. "Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 951-970, August.
    5. Dean A. Shepherd & Marc Gruber, 2021. "The Lean Startup Framework: Closing the Academic–Practitioner Divide," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(5), pages 967-998, September.
    6. Olivera Marjanovic & Greg Patmore & Nikola Balnave, 2023. "Visual Analytics: Transferring, Translating and Transforming Knowledge from Analytics Experts to Non-technical Domain Experts in Multidisciplinary Teams," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1571-1588, August.
    7. Guo, Jingjing & Guo, Bin & Zhou, Jianghua & Wu, Xiaobo, 2020. "How does the ambidexterity of technological learning routine affect firm innovation performance within industrial clusters? The moderating effects of knowledge attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Esther Tippmann & Pamela Sharkey Scott & Andrew Parker, 2017. "Boundary Capabilities in MNCs: Knowledge Transformation for Creative Solution Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 455-482, June.
    9. Karimikia, Hadi & Bradshaw, Robert & Singh, Harminder & Ojo, Adegboyega & Donnellan, Brian & Guerin, Michael, 2022. "An emergent taxonomy of boundary spanning in the smart city context – The case of smart Dublin," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    10. Caccamo, Marta & Pittino, Daniel & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Boundary objects, knowledge integration, and innovation management: A systematic review of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    11. Katherine C. Kellogg & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2006. "Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 22-44, February.
    12. Martinkenaite, Ieva & Breunig, Karl Joachim, 2016. "The emergence of absorptive capacity through micro–macro level interactions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 700-708.
    13. Claudio Biscaro & Anna Comacchio, 2018. "Knowledge Creation Across Worldviews: How Metaphors Impact and Orient Group Creativity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 289(1), pages 58-79, February.
    14. Melo, Sara & Bishop, Simon, 2020. "Translating healthcare research evidence into practice: The role of linked boundary objects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    15. Hsin Hsin Chang & Yao-Chuan Tsai & Chen-Su Fu & Shu-Hui Chen & Yao Peng, 2016. "Exploring the antecedents and consequences of technology and knowledge integration mechanisms in the context of NPD," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1165-1189, December.
    16. Haselsteiner, Julia, 2022. "Unraveling the Process of Knowledge Integration in Agile Product Development Teams," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 7(2), pages 354-389.
    17. Arvind Malhotra & Sanjay Gosain & Omar A. El Sawy, 2007. "Leveraging Standard Electronic Business Interfaces to Enable Adaptive Supply Chain Partnerships," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 260-279, September.
    18. Yan, Tingting & Azadegan, Arash, 2017. "Comparing inter-organizational new product development strategies: Buy or ally; Supply-chain or non-supply-chain partners?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(PA), pages 21-38.
    19. Daniele T. P. Souza & Eugenia A. Kuhn & Arjen E. J. Wals & Pedro R. Jacobi, 2020. "Learning in, with, and through the Territory: Territory-Based Learning as a Catalyst for Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.

    More about this item

    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:wly:natres:v:43:y:2019:i:1:p:3-16. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    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.