Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Andrew J. Dougill is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Andrew J. Dougill.


Ecology and Society | 2006

Unpacking “Participation” in the Adaptive Management of Social–ecological Systems: a Critical Review

Lindsay C. Stringer; Andrew J. Dougill; Evan D. G. Fraser; Klaus Hubacek; Christina Prell; Mark S. Reed

Adaptive management has the potential to make environmental management more democratic through the involvement of different stakeholders. In this article, we examine three case studies at different scales that followed adaptive management processes, critically reflecting upon the role of stakeholder participation in each case. Specifically, we examine at which stages different types of stakeholders can play key roles and the ways that each might be involved. We show that a range of participatory mechanisms can be employed at different stages of the adaptive cycle, and can work together to create conditions for social learning and favorable outcomes for diverse stakeholders. This analysis highlights the need for greater reflection on case study research in order to further refine participatory processes within adaptive management. This should not only address the shortcomings and successes of adaptive management as a form of democratic environmental governance, but should also unpack the links between science, institutions, knowledge, and power.


Ecological Applications | 2008

PARTICIPATORY INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT: WHAT CAN ECOLOGISTS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES LEARN FROM EACH OTHER?

Mark S. Reed; Andrew J. Dougill; Timothy R. Baker

Given the growing popularity of indicators among policy-makers to measure progress toward conservation and sustainability goals, there is an urgent need to develop indicators that can be used accurately by both specialists and nonspecialists, drawing from the knowledge possessed by each group. This paper uses a case study from the Kalahari, Botswana to show how participatory and ecological methods can be combined to develop robust indicators that are accessible to a range of users to monitor and enhance the sustainability of land management. First, potential environmental sustainability indicators were elicited from pastoralists in three study sites. This knowledge was then evaluated by pastoralists, before being tested empirically using ecological and soil-based techniques. Despite the wealth of local knowledge about indicators, this knowledge was thinly spread. The knowledge was more holistic than published indicator lists for monitoring rangelands, encompassing vegetation, soil, livestock, wild animal, and socioeconomic indicators. Pastoralist preferences for vegetation and livestock indicators match recent shifts in ecological theory suggesting that livestock populations reach equilibrium with key forage resources in semiarid environments. Although most indicators suggested by pastoralists were validated through empirical work (e.g., decreased grass cover and soil organic matter content, and increased abundance of Acacia mellifera and thatching grass), they were not always sufficiently accurate or reliable for objective degradation assessment, showing that local knowledge cannot be accepted unquestioningly. We suggest that, by combining participatory and ecological approaches, it is possible to derive more accurate and relevant indicators than either approach could achieve alone.


Ecology and Society | 2011

Assessing Vulnerability to Climate Change in Dryland Livelihood Systems: Conceptual Challenges and Interdisciplinary Solutions

Evan D.G. Fraser; Andrew J. Dougill; Klaus Hubacek; Claire H. Quinn; Jan Sendzimir; Mette Termansen

Over 40% of the earths land surface are drylands that are home to approximately 2.5 billion people. Livelihood sustainability in drylands is threatened by a complex and interrelated range of social, economic, political, and environmental changes that present significant challenges to researchers, policy makers, and, above all, rural land users. Dynamic ecological and environmental change models suggest that climate change induced drought events may push dryland systems to cross biophysical thresholds, causing a long-term drop in agricultural productivity. Therefore, research is needed to explore how development strategies and other socioeconomic changes help livelihoods become more resilient and robust at a time of growing climatic risk and uncertainty. As a result, the overarching goal of this special feature is to conduct a structured comparison of how livelihood systems in different dryland regions are affected by drought, thereby making methodological, empirical, and theoretical contributions to our understanding of how these types of social-ecological systems may be vulnerable to climate change. In introducing these issues, the purpose of this editorial is to provide an overview of the two main intellectual challenges of this work, namely: (1) how to conceptualize vulnerability to climate change in coupled social-ecological systems; and (2) the methodological challenges of anticipating trends in vulnerability in dynamic environments.


The Geographical Journal | 2002

Participatory selection process for indicators of rangeland condition in the Kalahari

Mark S. Reed; Andrew J. Dougill

To develop indicator-based management tools that can facilitate sustainable natural resource management by non-specialists, meaningful participation of stakeholders is essential. A participatory framework is proposed for the identification, evaluation and selection of rangeland condition indicators. This framework is applied to the assessment of rangeland degradation processes and sustainable natural resource management with pastoralists in the southern Kalahari, Botswana. Farmer knowledge focused on vegetation and livestock, with soil, wild animal and socio-economic indicators playing a lesser role. Most were indicators of current rangeland condition; however ‘early warning’ indicators were also identified by some key informants. This demonstrates that some local knowledge is process-based. Such knowledge could be used to improve indicatorbased management tools and extension advice on the livelihood adaptations necessary to prevent or reduce ecological change, capable of threatening livelihood sustainability. There is evidence that social background influences indicator use. Communal farmers rely most heavily on vegetation and livestock indicators, whilst syndicate and landowning pastoralists cite wild animal and soil-based indicators most frequently. These factors must be considered if indicator-based management tools are to meet the requirements of a diverse community.


Annals of The Association of American Geographers | 1999

Environmental Change in the Kalahari: Integrated Land Degradation Studies for Nonequilibrium Dryland Environments

Andrew J. Dougill; David S.G. Thomas; A. Louise Heathwaite

Recent decades have seen major intensification of cattle-based agricultural production in semiarid savanna ecosystems. In the Kalahari of Botswana, cattle production now occurs on privatized and fenced ranches. Patterns of ecological change, notably increased bush dominance, have been linked to increased cattle-grazing intensity, but it remains contentious whether these changes represent land degradation. Uncertainty in ecological understanding stems from the dynamic, “nonequilibrium” functioning of semiarid ecosystems. Given the inherent ecological variability of drylands, we argue that degradation assessments should be based, not on ecological observations alone, but on the study of long-term changes in pastoral production figures and on changes in the ecologically determining factors of soil water and soil nutrient availability. Provided here is a framework incorporating soil and ecological changes at a range of scales that can enable us to distinguish drought-induced fluctuations from long-term ecolog...


Ecology and Society | 2011

Climate Science, Development Practice, and Policy Interactions in Dryland Agroecological Systems

Chasca Twyman; Evan D.G. Fraser; Lindsay C. Stringer; Claire H. Quinn; Andrew J. Dougill; T.A. Crane; Susannah M. Sallu

The literature on drought, livelihoods, and poverty suggests that dryland residents are especially vulnerable to climate change. However, assessing this vulnerability and sharing lessons between dryland communities on how to reduce vulnerability has proven difficult because of multiple definitions of vulnerability, complexities in quantification, and the temporal and spatial variability inherent in dryland agroecological systems. In this closing editorial, we review how we have addressed these challenges through a series of structured, multiscale, and interdisciplinary vulnerability assessment case studies from drylands in West Africa, southern Africa, Mediterranean Europe, Asia, and Latin America. These case studies adopt a common vulnerability framework but employ different approaches to measuring and assessing vulnerability. By comparing methods and results across these cases, we draw out the following key lessons: (1) Our studies show the utility of using consistent conceptual frameworks for vulnerability assessments even when quite different methodological approaches are taken; (2) Utilizing narratives and scenarios to capture the dynamics of dryland agroecological systems shows that vulnerability to climate change may depend more on access to financial, political, and institutional assets than to exposure to environmental change; (3) Our analysis shows that although the results of quantitative models seem authoritative, they may be treated too literally as predictions of the future by policy makers looking for evidence to support different strategies. In conclusion, we acknowledge there is a healthy tension between bottom-up/ qualitative/place-based approaches and top-down/quantitative/generalizable approaches, and we encourage researchers from different disciplines with different disciplinary languages, to talk, collaborate, and engage effectively with each other and with stakeholders at all levels.


Ecology and Society | 2013

Anticipating and managing future trade-offs and complementarities between ecosystem services

Mark S. Reed; Klaus Hubacek; Aletta Bonn; T. P. Burt; Joseph Holden; Lindsay C. Stringer; Nesha Beharry-Borg; Sarah Buckmaster; Daniel S. Chapman; Pippa J. Chapman; Gareth D. Clay; Stephen J. Cornell; Andrew J. Dougill; Anna Evely; Evan D. G. Fraser; Nanlin Jin; Brian Irvine; Mike Kirkby; William E. Kunin; Christina Prell; Claire H. Quinn; Bill Slee; Sigrid Stagl; Mette Termansen; Simon Thorp; Fred Worrall

This paper shows how, with the aid of computer models developed in close collaboration with decision makers and other stakeholders, it is possible to quantify and map how policy decisions are likely to affect multiple ecosystem services in future. In this way, potential trade-offs and complementarities between different ecosystem services can be identified, so that policies can be designed to avoid the worst trade-offs, and where possible, enhance multiple services. The paper brings together evidence from across the Rural Economy and Land Use Programmes Sustainable Uplands project for the first time, with previously unpublished model outputs relating to runoff, agricultural suitability, biomass, heather cover, age, and utility for Red Grouse (Lagopus scotica), grass cover, and accompanying scenario narratives and video. Two contrasting scenarios, based on policies to extensify or intensify land management up to 2030, were developed through a combination of interviews and discussions during site visits with stakeholders, literature review, conceptual modeling, and process-based computer models, using the Dark Peak of the Peak District National Park in the UK as a case study. Where extensification leads to a significant reduction in managed burning and grazing or land abandonment, changes in vegetation type and structure could compromise a range of species that are important for conservation, while compromising provisioning services, amenity value, and increasing wildfire risk. However, where extensification leads to the restoration of peatlands damaged by former intensive management, there would be an increase in carbon sequestration and storage, with a number of cobenefits, which could counter the loss of habitats and species elsewhere in the landscape. In the second scenario, land use and management was significantly intensified to boost UK self-sufficiency in food. This would benefit certain provisioning services but would have negative consequences for carbon storage and water quality and would lead to a reduction in the abundance of certain species of conservation concern. The paper emphasizes the need for spatially explicit models that can track how ecosystem services might change over time, in response to policy or environmental drivers, and in response to the changing demands and preferences of society, which are far harder to anticipate. By developing such models in close collaboration with decision makers and other stakeholders, it is possible to depict scenarios of real concern to those who need to use the research findings. By engaging these collaborators with the research findings through film, it was possible to discuss adaptive options to minimize trade-offs and enhance the provision of multiple ecosystem services under the very different future conditions depicted by each scenario. By preparing for as wide a range of futures as possible in this way, it may be possible for decision makers to act rapidly and effectively to protect and enhance the provision of ecosystem services in the face of unpredictable future change.


Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B | 2012

Lessons from community-based payment for ecosystem service schemes: from forests to rangelands

Andrew J. Dougill; Lindsay C. Stringer; Julia Leventon; Mike Riddell; Henri Rueff; D. V. Spracklen; Edward W. Butt

Climate finance investments and international policy are driving new community-based projects incorporating payments for ecosystem services (PES) to simultaneously store carbon and generate livelihood benefits. Most community-based PES (CB-PES) research focuses on forest areas. Rangelands, which store globally significant quantities of carbon and support many of the worlds poor, have seen little CB-PES research attention, despite benefitting from several decades of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) projects. Lessons from CBNRM suggest institutional considerations are vital in underpinning the design and implementation of successful community projects. This study uses documentary analysis to explore the institutional characteristics of three African community-based forest projects that seek to deliver carbon-storage and poverty-reduction benefits. Strong existing local institutions, clear land tenure, community control over land management decision-making and up-front, flexible payment schemes are found to be vital. Additionally, we undertake a global review of rangeland CBNRM literature and identify that alongside the lessons learned from forest projects, rangeland CB-PES project design requires specific consideration of project boundaries, benefit distribution, capacity building for community monitoring of carbon storage together with awareness-raising using decision-support tools to display the benefits of carbon-friendly land management. We highlight that institutional analyses must be undertaken alongside improved scientific studies of the carbon cycle to enable links to payment schemes, and for them to contribute to poverty alleviation in rangelands.


Food Security | 2012

The socioeconomics of food crop production and climate change vulnerability: a global scale quantitative analysis of how grain crops are sensitive to drought

Elisabeth Simelton; Evan D.G. Fraser; Mette Termansen; Tim G. Benton; Simon N. Gosling; Andrew South; Nigel W. Arnell; Andrew J. Challinor; Andrew J. Dougill; Piers M. Forster

Many studies warn that climate change may undermine global food security. Much work on this topic focuses on modelling crop-weather interactions but these models do not generally account for the ways in which socio-economic factors influence how harvests are affected by weather. To address this gap, this paper uses a quantitative harvest vulnerability index based on annual soil moisture and grain production data as the dependent variable in a Linear Mixed Effects model with national scale socio-economic data as independent variables for the period 1990–2005. Results show that rice, wheat and maize production in middle income countries were especially vulnerable to droughts. By contrast, harvests in countries with higher investments in agriculture (e.g. higher amounts of fertilizer use) were less vulnerable to drought. In terms of differences between the world’s major grain crops, factors that made rice and wheat crops vulnerable to drought were quite consistent, while those of maize crops varied considerably depending on the type of region. This is likely due to the fact that maize is produced under very different conditions worldwide. One recommendation for reducing drought vulnerability risks is coordinated development and adaptation policies, including institutional support that enables farmers to take proactive action.


Climate Policy | 2014

Experiences of host communities with carbon market projects: towards multi-level climate justice

Vivek Narain Mathur; Stavros Afionis; Jouni Paavola; Andrew J. Dougill; Lindsay C. Stringer

The literature on equity and justice in climate change mitigation has largely focused on North–South relations and equity between states. However, some initiatives (e.g. the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation programme (REDD), and voluntary carbon markets (VCMs)) are already establishing multi-level governance structures that involve communities from developing countries in global mitigation efforts. This poses new equity and justice dilemmas: how the burdens and benefits of mitigation are shared across various levels and how host communities are positioned in multi-level governance structures. A review of the existing literature is used to distill a framework for distinguishing between four axes of climate justice from the perspective of communities. Empirical evidence from African and Asian carbon market projects is used to assess the distributive and procedural justice implications for host communities. The evidence suggests that host communities often benefit little from carbon market projects and find it difficult to protect their interests. Capacity building, attention to local power relations, supervision of business practices, promotion of projects with primarily development aims and an active involvement of non-state actors as bridges between local communities and the national/international levels could potentially contribute towards addressing some of the key justice concerns.Policy relevance International negotiations on the institutional frameworks that are envisaged to govern carbon markets are proceeding at a rather slow pace. As a consequence, host countries and private-sector actors are making their own arrangements to safeguard the interests of local communities. While several standards have emerged to guide carbon market activity on the ground, distributive as well as procedural justice concerns nevertheless remain salient. Four empirical case studies across Asia and Africa show that within the multi-scale and multi-actor carbon market governance, local-level actors often lack sufficient agency to advance their claims and protect their interests. This evidence suggests that ameliorating policy reforms are needed to enhance the positioning of local communities. Doing so is important to ensure future acceptability of carbon market activity in potential host communities as well as for ensuring their broader legitimacy.

Collaboration


Dive into the Andrew J. Dougill's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Philip Antwi-Agyei

Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge