Advertisement

Introduction: Collaboration Across Boundaries for Social-Ecological Systems Science

  • Stephen G. PerzEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter introduces the challenge of collaboration across boundaries for social-ecological systems (SES) science. Management of SESs for sustainability and resilience amounts to a wicked problem that requires cross-boundary collaborative approaches. It is far less appreciated how to pursue such approaches effectively, since the basic sciences in which technical training for the study and management of SESs differ from the applied behavioral sciences to support collaboration across boundaries. The chapter reviews a framework for understanding the issues, tasks, challenges, and strategic practices involved in collaboration. A discussion of boundaries and their crossing follows, noting how spanning disciplinary, organizational, and national divides complicates collaboration. The chapter concludes with an outline of the book, which draws on experiences from collaborative projects that crossed multiple boundaries in the pursuit of SES science around the world.

References

  1. Anderies, J. M., Walker, B. H., & Kinzig, A. P. (2006). Fifteen Weddings and a Funeral: Case Studies and Resilience-Based Management. Ecology & Society, 11(1), article 21.Google Scholar
  2. Armitage, D. R., Plummer, R., Berkes, F., Arthur, R. I., Charles, A. T., Davidson-Hunt, I. J., et al. (2009). Adaptive Co-management for Social-Ecological Complexity. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 7(2), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin, J. E. (2000). The Collaboration Challenge: How Nonprofits and Businesses Succeed Through Strategic Alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  4. Balint, P., Stewart, R., Desai, A., & Walters, L. (2011). Wicked Environmental Problems: Managing Uncertainty and Conflict. Washington, DC: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, M. L., Bodin, O., Guerrero, A. M., McAllister, R. J. R., Alexander, S. M., & Robbins, G. (2017). The Social Structural Foundations of Adaptation and Transformation in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology & Society, 22(4), article 16.Google Scholar
  6. Batterbury, S. P. J., & Fernando, J. L. (2006). Rescaling Governance and the Impacts of Political and Environmental Decentralization: An Introduction. World Development, 34(11), 1851–1863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. Bristol, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Berdej, S. M., & Armitage, D. R. (2016). Bridging Organizations Drive Effective Governance Outcomes for Conservation of Indonesia’s Martine Systems. PLoS ONE, 11(1), 1–25. e0147142.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147142.
  9. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (2003). Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Berkes, F., & Turner, N. J. (2006). Knowledge, Learning and the Evolution of Conservation Practice for Social-Ecological System Resilience. Human Ecology, 34(4), 479–494.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-006-9008-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biermann, F., & Pattberg, P. (2008). Global Environmental Governance: Taking Stock, Moving Forward. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Binder, C. R., Hinkel, J., Bots, P. W. G., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2013). Comparison of Frameworks for Analyzing Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology & Society, 18(4), article 26.Google Scholar
  13. Boumans, R., Roman, J., Altman, I., & Kaufman, L. (2015). The Multiscale Integrated Model of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Simulating the Interactions of Coupled Human and Natural Systems. Ecosystem Services, 12, 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Breuer, E., Lee, L., de Silva, M., & Lund, C. (2016). Using Theory of Change to Design and Evaluate Public Health Interventions: A Systematic Review. Implementation Science, 11, 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brick, P., Snow, D., & Van de Wetering, S. (Eds.). (2001). Across the Great Divide: Explorations in Collaborative Conservation and the American West. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, V. A., Harris, J. A., & Russell, J. Y. (Eds.). (2008). Tackling Wicked Problems Through the Transdisciplinary Imagination. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  17. Buck, L. E., Geisler, C. C., Schelhas, J., & Wollenberg, E. (Eds.). (2001). Biological Diversity: Balancing Interests Through Adaptive Collaborative Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  18. Burton, J. W., & Drakes, F. (1990). Conflict: Practices in Management, Settlement and Resolution. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bury, J., Mark, B. G., Carey, M., Young, K. R., McKenzie, J. M., Baraer, M., et al. (2013). New Geographies of Water and Climate Change in Peru: Coupled Natural and Social Transformations in the Santa River Watershed. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(2), 363–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carlsson, L., & Berkes, F. (2005). Co-management: Concepts and Methodological Implications. Journal of Environmental Management, 75, 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Carter, N. H., Viña, A., Hull, V., McConnell, W. J., Axinn, W., Ghimire, D., et al. (2014). Coupled Human and Natural Systems Approach to Wildlife Research and Conservation. Ecology and Society, 19(3), article 43.Google Scholar
  22. Cascio, W. F. (1995). Whiter Industrial and Organizational Psychology in a Changing World of Work? American Psychologist, 50(11), 928–939.Google Scholar
  23. Chasek, P. S. (Ed.). (2000). The Global Environment in the Twenty-First Century: Prospects for International Cooperation. New York: CAB Direct.Google Scholar
  24. Colfer, C. (Ed.). (2010). The Complex Forest: Communities, Uncertainty, and Adaptive Collaborative Management. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  25. Cropper, S., Ebers, M., Huxham, C., & Smith Ring, P. (Eds.). (2008). The Oxford Handbook of Inter-organizational Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Daft, R. L. (2005). Management (7th ed.). New York: Thomson Southwestern.Google Scholar
  27. Devisscher, T., Boyd, E., & Malhi, Y. (2016). Anticipating Future Risk in Social-Ecological Systems Using Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping: The Case of Wildfire in the Chiquitania, Bolivia. Ecology and Society, 21(4), article 18.Google Scholar
  28. Downing, A. S., Van Nes, E., Balirwa, J., Beuving, J., Bwathondi, P., Chapman, L. J., et al. (2014). Coupled Human and Natural System Dynamics as Key to the Sustainability of Lake Victoria’s Ecosystem Services. Ecology and Society, 19(4), article 31.Google Scholar
  29. Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. (2000). Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present, and Future. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 783–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Edmunds, D., & Wollenberg, E. (2002). Disadvantaged Groups in Multistakeholder Negotiations. CIFOR Program Report. Retrieved June 30, 2007, from http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/Strategic_Negotiation_report.pdf.
  31. Epstein, G., Pittman, J., Alexander, S. M., Berdej, S., Dyck, T., Kreitmair, U., et al. (2015). Institutional Fit and the Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fan, P., Xie, Y., Qi, J., Chen, J., & Huang, H. (2014). Vulnerability of a Coupled Natural and Human System in a Changing Environment: Dynamics of Lanzhou’s Urban Landscape. Landscape Ecology, 29, 1709–1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fiori, S. M. (2008). Interdisciplinarity as Teamwork: How the Science of Teams Can Inform Team Science. Small Group Research, 39(3), 251–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fischer, J., Gardner, T. A., Bennett, E. M., Balvanera, P., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S., et al. (2015). Advancing Sustainability Through Mainstreaming a Social-Ecological Systems Perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 144–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The Emergence of a Perspective for Social-Ecological Systems Analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16, 253–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Friis, C., Østergaard Nielsen, J., Otero, I., Haberl, H., Niewöhner, J., & Hostert, P. (2016). From Teleconnection to Telecoupling: Taking Stock of an Emerging Framework in Land System Science. Journal of Land Use Science, 11(2), 131–153.Google Scholar
  37. Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Mitcham, C. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Gaillard, J. F. (1994). North-South Research Partnership: Is Collaboration Possible Between Unequal Partners? Knowledge and Policy, 7, 31–63.Google Scholar
  39. Galat, D. L., & Berkly, J. (2014). Introduction to Exploring Opportunities for Advancing Collaborative Adaptive Management: Integrating Experience and Practice. Ecology and Society, 19(2), article 40.Google Scholar
  40. Gewin, V. (2014). Interdisciplinary Research: Break Out. Nature, 511, 371–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gittell, J. H., Seider, R., & Wimbush, J. (2010). A Relational Model of How Higher-Performance Work Systems Work. Organization Science, 21, 490–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gittel, J. H., & Weiss, L. (2004). Coordination Networks Within and Across Organizations: A Multi-level Framework. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 127–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gomez-Mejia, L., Balkin, D., & Candy, R. (2008). Management: People, Performance, Change. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  44. Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multi-party Problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  45. Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.Google Scholar
  46. Guerrero, A. M., & Wilson, K. A. (2016). Using a Social-Ecological Framework to Inform the Implementation of Conservation Plans. Conservation Biology, 31(2), 290–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Guimarães, M.-H., McKee, A., Lima, M. L., Vasconcelos, L., Boski, T., & Dentinho, T. (2015). Putting Transdisciplinarity into Practice: A Mixed Mode Procedure for Stakeholder Participation in Natural Resource Management. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(10), 1827–1852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gunderson, L., Costens, B. A., Chaffin, B. C., Arnold, C. A., Fremier, A. K., Garmestani, A. S., et al. (2017). Regime Shifts and Panarchies in Regional Scale Social-Ecological Water Systems. Ecology & Society, 22(1), article 31.Google Scholar
  49. Hansen, M. T. (2009). Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid the Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Results. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Heckscher, C., & Adler, P. S. (2006). The Firm as a Collaborative Community: Reconstructing Trust in the Knowledge Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Hemmati, M., with Dodds, F., Enayati, J., & McHarry, J. (2002). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability: Beyond Deadlock and Conflict. New York: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  52. Hersey, P. H., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (2007). Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading Human Resources (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  53. Hirsch Hadorn, G., Hoffmann-Riem, H., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Joye, D., Pohl, C., et al. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research. Bern: Springer.Google Scholar
  54. Hockings, M., with Stolton, S., & Dudley, N. (2005). Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing the Management of Protected Areas. Cardiff: IUCN and Cardiff University.Google Scholar
  55. Holling, C. S. (Ed.). (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  56. Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2005). Managing to Collaborate: The Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Jones, B. F., Wuchy, S., & Uzzi, B. (2008). Multi-University Research Teams: Shifting Impact, Geography and Stratification in Science. Science, 322, 1259–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kagan, J. (2009). The Three Cultures: Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, and the Humanities in the 21st Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kainer, K., Schmink, M., Covert, H., Stepp, J. R., Bruna, E., Dain, J., et al. (2006). A Graduate Education Framework for Tropical Conservation and Development. Conservation Biology, 20, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Keating, E., & Jarvenpaa, S. (2016). Words Matter: Communicating Effectively in the New Global Office. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  61. Klein, J. T. (1996). Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University of Virginia. Google Scholar
  62. Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating Interdisciplinary Campus Cultures: A Model for Strength and Sustainability. San Francisco: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  63. Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and Inter-organizational Collaboration: A Literature Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kraus, W. A. (1980). Collaboration in Organizations: Alternatives to Hierarchy. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  65. Lade, S. J., Tavoni, A., Levin, S. A., & Schluter, M. (2013). Regime Shifts in a Social-Ecological System. Theoretical Ecology, 6, 359–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2016). Work in the 21st Century: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology (5th ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  67. Lank, E. (2006). Collaborative Advantage: How Organizations Win by Working Together. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lauber, T. B., Stedman, R., Decker, D., & Knuth, B. (2011). Linking Knowledge to Action in Collaborative Conservation. Conservation Biology, 25(6), 1186–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Lee, K. N. (1993). Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  70. Lélé, S., & Norgaard, R. B. (2005). Practicing Interdisciplinarity. BioScience, 55, 967–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lemos, M. C., & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental Governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 297–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Leslie, H. M., Schlüter, M., Cudney-Bueno, R., & Levin, S. A. (2009). Modeling Responses of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems of the Gulf of California to Anthropogenic and Natural Perturbations. Ecological Research, 24, 505–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The Science of ‘Muddling Through’. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Liu, J., Dietz, T., Carpenter, S. R., Alberti, M., Folke, C., Moran, E., et al. (2007). Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems. Science, 317, 1513–1516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Liu, J., Hull, V., Luo, J., Yang, W., Liu, W., Viña, A., et al. (2015). Multiple Telecouplings and Their Complex Interrelationships. Ecology and Society, 20(3), article 44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07868-200344.
  76. MacMynowski, D. P. (2007). Pausing at the Brink of Interdisciplinarity: Power and Knowledge at the Meeting of Social and Biophysical Science. Ecology and Society, 12(1), article 20.Google Scholar
  77. Manring, S. (2007). Creating and Managing Inter-organizational Learning Networks to Achieve Sustainable Ecosystem Management. Organization and Environment, 20, 325–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Mantyka-Pringle, C. S., Jardine, T. D., Bradford, L., Bharadwaj, L., Kythreotis, A. P., Fresque-Baxter, J., et al. (2017). Bridging Science and Traditional Knowledge to Assess Cumulative Impacts of Stressors on Ecosystem Health. Environment International, 102, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. McConnell, W. J., Millington, J. D. A., Reo, N. J., Alberti, M., Asbjornsen, H., Baker, L. A., et al. (2011). Research on Coupled Human and Natural Systems (CHANS): Approach, Challenges, and Strategies. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 92, 218–228.Google Scholar
  80. Mehryar, S., Sliuzas, R., Sharifi, A., Reckien, D., & van Maarseveen, M. (2017). A Structured Participatory Method to Support Policy Option Analysis in a Social-Ecological System. Journal of Environmental Management, 197, 360–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Monteiro, M., & Keating, E. (2009). Managing Misunderstandings: The Role of Language in Interdisciplinary Scientific Collaboration. Science Communication, 31, 6–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Moon, K., & Blackman, D. (2014). A Guide to Understanding Social Science Research for Natural Scientists. Conservation Biology, 28(5), 1167–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. National Science Foundation (NSF). (2018, March). Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems Program. Available at https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=13681.
  84. Newig, J., & Fritsch, O. (2009). Environmental Governance: Participatory, Multi-level—And Effective? Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(3), 197–214.Google Scholar
  85. Oakes, L. E., Hennon, P. E., Ardoin, N. M., D’Amore, D. V., Ferguson, A. J., Steel, E. A., et al. (2015). Conservation in a Social-Ecological System Experiencing Climate-Induced Tree Mortality. Biological Conservation, 192, 276–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Ostrom, E. (2009). A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science, 325, 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Ott, J. S., Parkes, S. J., & Simpson, R. B. (Eds.). (2003). Classic Readings in Organizational Behavior (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  90. Oughton, E., & Bracken, L. (2009). Interdisciplinary Research: Framing and Reframing. Area, 41, 385–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Pennington, D. (2008). Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration and Learning. Ecology and Society, 13, article 8.Google Scholar
  92. Perz, S. G. (2016). Crossing Boundaries for Collaboration: Conservation and Development Projects in the Amazon. Lanham, MD: Lexington.Google Scholar
  93. Peters, B. G. (2001). The Politics of Bureaucracy (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  94. Peterson, G., Cumming, G., & Carpenter, S. (2003). Scenario Planning: A Tool for Conservation in an Uncertain World. Conservation Biology, 17(2), 358–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2000). Inter-organizational Collaboration and the Dynamics of Institutional Fields. Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 23–43.Google Scholar
  96. Pohl, C. (2005). Transdisciplinary Collaboration in Environmental Research. Futures, 37, 1159–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Poncelet, E. C. (2004). Partnering for the Environment: Multi-stakeholder Collaboration in a Changing World. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  98. Qi, J., Chen, J., Wan, S., & Ai, L. (2012). Understanding the Coupled Natural and Human Systems in Dryland East Asia. Environmental Research Letters, 7, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Reuer, J. J. (Ed.). (2004). Strategic Alliances: Theory and Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Robinson, D., Hewitt, T., & Harriss, J. (Eds.). (2000). Managing Development: Understanding Inter-organizational Relationships. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Ruiz-Mallén, I., & Corbera, E. (2013). Community-Based Conservation and Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Implications for Social-Ecological Resilience. Ecology and Society, 18(4), article 12.  https://doi.org/10.5751/es-05867-180412.
  102. Saterson, K., Margolis, R., & Salafsky, N. (1996). Measuring Conservation Impact: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Project Monitoring and Evaluation. Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund.Google Scholar
  103. Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S. R., Lenton, T. M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W., Dakos, V., et al. (2012). Anticipating Crtitical Transitions. Science, 338, 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Schoenberger, E. (2001). Interdisciplinarity and Social Power. Progress in Human Geography, 25(3), 365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Shoemaker, P. J. H. (1991). When and How to Use Scenario Planning: A Heuristic Approach with Illustration. Journal of Forecasting, 10(6), 549–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Spies, T. A., White, E. M., Kline, J. D., Paige, A., Bailey, J., Bolte, J., et al. (2014). Examining Fire-prone Forest Landscapes as Coupled Human and Natural Systems. Ecology and Society, 19(3), article 9.Google Scholar
  107. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  108. Stewart, A., & Gray, T. (2006). The Authenticity of ‘Type Two’ Multi-stakeholder Partnerships for Water and Sanitation in Africa: When Is a Stakeholder a Partner? Environmental Politics, 15, 362–378.Google Scholar
  109. Taplin, D. H., Clark, H., Collins, E., & Colby, D. C. (2013). Theory of Change Technical Papers: A Series of Papers to Support Development of Theories of Change Based on Practice in the Field. New York: ActKnowledge.Google Scholar
  110. Villamayor-Tomas, S., Avagyan, M., Firlus, M., Helbing, G., & Kabakova, M. (2016). Hydropower vs. Fisheries Conservation: A Test of Institutional Design Principles for Common-Pool Resource Management in the Lower Mekong Basin Social-Ecological System. Ecology and Society, 21(1), article 3.Google Scholar
  111. Walker, B. H., Anderies, J. M., Kinsig, A. P., & Ryan, P. (2006). Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Through Comparative Studies and Theory Development. Ecology and Society, 11(1), article 1.Google Scholar
  112. Warner, J. (Ed.). (2007). Multi-stakeholder Platforms for Integrated Water Management. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  113. Weingart, P., & Stehr, N. (Eds.). (2000). Practising Interdisciplinarity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  114. Wildman, J. L., & Bedwell, W. L. (2013). Practicing What We Preach: Teaching Teams Using Validated Team Science. Small Group Research, 44(4), 381–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Winter, K. B., & Lucas, M. (2017). Spatial Modeling of Social-Ecological Management Zones of the Ali’i Era on the Island of Kaua’i with Implications for Large-Scale Biocultural Conservation and Forest Restoration Efforts in Hawai’i. Pacific Science, 71(4), 457–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Wollenberg, E., Iwan, R., Limberg, G., Moeliono, M., Rhee, S., & Sudana, M. (2007). Facilitating Cooperation During Times of Chaos: Spontaneous Orders and Muddling Through in Malinau. Ecology and Society, 12(1), article 3.Google Scholar
  117. Wondolleck, J., & Yaffee, S. (2000). Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  118. Young, O. R. (1989). International Cooperation: Building Regimes for Natural Resources and the Environment. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Young, O. R. (Ed.). (1997). Global Governance: Drawing Insights from the Environmental Experience. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  120. Yu, D. W., Qubbaje, M. R., Muneepeerakulf, R., Anderies, J. M., & Aggarwal, R. M. (2015). Effect of Infrastructure Design on Commons Dilemmas in Social-Ecological System Dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(43), 13207–13212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology and Criminology and LawUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations