Carina Lundmark

The new ecological paradigm revisited : anchoring the NEP scale in environmental ethics

The New Environmental or Ecological Paradigm (NEP) is widely acknowledged as a reliable multiple‐item scale to capture environmental attitudes or beliefs. It has been used in statistical analyses for almost 30 years, primarily by psychologists, but also by political scientists, sociologists and geographers. The scales theoretical foundation is, however, seldom discussed and not comprehensively specified. This article explores the environmental ethics that underlies the scale, analysing which ethical positions on human—nature relations the scale seem to match. The study shows that pronounced forms of anthropocentrism are well captured by the scale, while the environmental position is ‘shallow’ rather than ‘deep green’ and misses crucial elements of the contemporary environmental ethics debate.

Exploring the prospects for deliberative practices as a conflict-reducing and legitimacy-enhancing tool: the case of Swedish carnivore management

A new structure for decision-making in relation to management of large carnivores is presently being implemented in Sweden through a system of regional Wildlife Management Delegations (WMD). The governing idea is that strengthened regional influence will increase the legitimacy of both the management system and its outcomes. We use this institutional change as a backdrop for analyzing the possibilities to apply deliberative practices to reduce conflict and enhance legitimacy in the management of natural resources. We argue that structures alone do not determine the prospects of deliberative arrangements; the political context (i.e. the characteristics and relationships among participating actors) is equally important. An analytical framework is proposed that merges structural prospects for deliberation in co-management with stakeholder features, capturing the interests and beliefs of the actors involved. We illustrate the application of this framework by analysing original data from three Wildlife Management Delegations. Our findings show that there are significant differences in the beliefs among the actors within the system. Based on similarities in their beliefs, they can potentially form a relatively strong anti-carnivore/pro-WMD-coalition, opposing the pro-carnivore/anti-WMD-beliefs of the nature conservation interest. Furthermore, the structure is designed to meet vital deliberative criteria, yet we point at substantial differences between statutory and effective representation that, as it coincides with diverging beliefs, can affect decision-making. One qualitative criterion for successful deliberation stands out in our study — reasoned debate. The prospects for deliberation in WMDs to reduce conflict levels among opposing interests seem to depend on the capacity for ensuring exchange of reasonable and informed arguments.

Adaptive co-management: How social networks, deliberation and learning affect legitimacy in carnivore management

Adaptive co-management (ACM) is a key concept in science and an increasingly adopted policy response in conservation, associated with a number of positive outcomes. However, the effects and mechanisms of co-management arrangements, including the conditions under which ACM gives rise to higher levels of internal and external legitimacy, are yet to be explored. This endeavor, in turn, requires theoretically driven models providing assumptions and outlining testable hypotheses. Considering the social challenges of ACM and using an institutional change within the Swedish carnivore management system aimed at achieving legitimacy through co-management as an illustrative example, this article develops a conceptual model that encompasses conditions and possible explanations to ACM outcomes. More specifically, drawing on lessons from social theory, we model the impact of three key factors—social networks, deliberation and learning—on the external and internal legitimacy resulting from ACM arrangements. Based on the model proposed, the popular assumptions of ACM outcomes can thus be empirically scrutinized and the conditions for increased legitimacy through ACM arrangements better comprehended.

Prospects for learning in river management: exploring the initial implementation of the Water Framework Directive in a Swedish river basin

This case study explores the initial implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) in the Lule River basin, Sweden, examining how and to what extent administrative procedures enable learning through dialogue and stakeholder collaboration. Theorising on adaptive co-management and social learning is used to structure what is to be learnt, how and by whom. Qualitative content analyses of policy documents, responses from consultation procedures and interviews show that there are opportunities for stakeholder involvement and dialogue in organizational settings of various kinds, but as the number of affected interest is large and difficult to demarcate many interests lack a formal channel for influence. It is primarily through poorly attended Water Council meetings and during the consultation process prior to decisions on management plans that all affected interests can voice their opinions. Consultation processes represent one-way communication rather than dialogue and the ones examined are strongly focused on scientific rather than experience based knowledge. If language is to be used productively to assist the constitution of relevant knowledge in the implementation of the WFD, it is important to find ways of communication that can serve as a platform for common meaning making among a large number of diverse societal actors.

Lack of recognition of genetic biodiversity: International policy and its implementation in Baltic Sea marine protected areas.

Genetic diversity is needed for species’ adaptation to changing selective pressures and is particularly important in regions with rapid environmental change such as the Baltic Sea. Conservation measures should consider maintaining large gene pools to maximize species’ adaptive potential for long-term survival. In this study, we explored concerns regarding genetic variation in international and national policies that governs biodiversity and evaluated if and how such policy is put into practice in management plans governing Baltic Sea Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Sweden, Finland, Estonia, and Germany. We performed qualitative and quantitative textual analysis of 240 documents and found that agreed international and national policies on genetic biodiversity are not reflected in management plans for Baltic Sea MPAs. Management plans in all countries are largely void of goals and strategies for genetic biodiversity, which can partly be explained by a general lack of conservation genetics in policies directed toward aquatic environments.

Assessment of management practices regarding genetic biodiversity in Baltic Sea marine protected areas

The aim of this study is to examine, and tentatively explain, how genetic biodiversity is handled in the management of Baltic Sea Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). Genetic biodiversity is critical for species’ adaptation to changing environmental conditions and is protected by international agreements. Nevertheless, recent research indicates that genetic biodiversity is neglected in marine environments and in the management of MPAs. This study focuses on Sweden and Finland, which together govern a substantial part of Baltic Sea MPAs, and builds on in-depth interviews with regional conservation managers that are responsible for establishing and managing these areas. The empirical findings confirm that genetic biodiversity is absent, or plays a minor role, in contemporary MPA management. The findings also provide several possible explanations to this situation: unclear understandings of formal policy, lack of resources, deficient knowledge base, and the managers’ own policy beliefs. Policy makers and high-level managers need to consider these aspects in their efforts to protect biodiversity.

Effectiveness of short-term knowledge communication on Baltic Sea marine genetic biodiversity to public managers

The aim of this study is to assess the impact of two forms of short-term knowledge communication—lectures and group deliberations—on public managers’ policy beliefs regarding genetic biodiversity in the Baltic Sea. Genetic biodiversity is a key component of biological variation, but despite scientific knowledge and far-reaching political goals, genetic biodiversity remains neglected in marine management. Previous research highlights lack of knowledge among managers as one explanation to the implementation deficit. This multidisciplinary study builds on the identified need for an improved knowledge transfer between science and ongoing management. A basic knowledge package on genetic biodiversity in the Baltic Sea was presented as either a lecture or a deliberative group discussion to two separate samples of public managers who are involved in Baltic Sea and other biodiversity management at the regional level in Sweden. The empirical findings show that the communicated information has an impact on the public managers’ beliefs on genetic biodiversity of the Baltic Sea. Lectures seem more efficient to transfer knowledge on this theme. Those who received information through a lecture strengthen their confidence in area protection as a management tool to conserve genetic diversity. They were also more convinced of the obligation of authorities at national and regional level to take on larger responsibility for genetic conservation than those managers who participated in a deliberative discussion.