Lekelia D. Jenkins

The role of bridging organizations in environmental management: Examining social networks in working groups

The linkage of diverse sets of actors and knowledge systems across management levels and institutional boundaries often poses one of the greatest challenges in adaptive management of natural resources. Bridging organizations can facilitate interactions among actors in management settings by lowering the transaction costs of collaboration. The Center for Ocean Solutions (COS) is an example of a bridging organization that is focused on linking actors within the ocean sciences and governance arena through the use of working groups. This research examines how network connections between group members affect working group functionality and, more specifically, whether cohesive network structures allow groups to more effectively achieve their goals and objectives. A mixedmethods approach, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods, is employed to understand the structural characteristics of COS working groups. The study finds that cohesive network structures are not associated with increased working group functionality. Strong, centralized leadership is a better predictor of working group success in achieving goals and objectives.

Increasing conservation impact and policy relevance of research through embedded experiences.

Asresearchersinconservationscienceandthefieldofscience, technology, and society, we believe Rudd’s (2011) framework, described in “How Research-Prioritization Exercises Affect Conservation Policy,” for conceptualizing research has practical value. Rudd explores means to increase research impacts through techniques such as big-question exercises and exercises to determine best practices. As an additional means to increase the impact and policy relevance of conservation research, we suggest researchers embed themselves in the daily working environment of other communities, such as government offices, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) or disparate scientific fields, to learn about the constraints and opportunities that influence conservation work in these communities. In his thorough treatment of research impacts, Rudd presents the benefits and shortcomings of two frameworks for understanding and improving research impacts on policy in theory and in practice. Following Beyer (1997) and Amara et al. (2004), his first framework classifies research impacts as conceptual (policy makers are sensitized to new issues and change their beliefs), instrumental (policy decisions are affected directly by results of scientific research), and symbolic (results of scientific research are used to support established policy positions). In his second framework, which he bases on Shaxson (2009), Rudd classifies research issues into 4 domains according to the extent that scientific knowledge is fully developed and the policy issue is clearly articulated: domainofuncertainty(lowscientificknowledge,lowpolicy articulation), domain of evidence (low scientific knowledge, high policy articulation), domain of partisanship (high scientific knowledge, low policy articulation), and domain of best practices (high scientific knowledge, high

Profile and influence of the successful fisher-Inventor of marine conservation technology

Anecdotally it is often said that fi shers are the best inventors of marine conservation technologies. In this paper I describe case studies of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) and dolphin conservation technology, offering empirical evidence that fi shers are successful inventors of marine conservation technology. I describe the Local Inventor Effect, in which adoption of a technology is disproportionately high in the geographic area near the inventor’s home. In one case, the adoption of a local invention was 600% higher than that of the next most popular device. Further, I present the Successful Inventor Profi le for inventors of marine conservation technologies. This profi le consists of three characteristics (1) a successful conservation technology inventor will have extensive experience relevant to the problem and potential solutions, (2) he or she will have extensive experience in fabrication, and (3) he or she will have the ability and tendency to employ mental and/or physical models, to assemble and refi ne inventions.

Practical recommendations to help students bridge the research-implementation gap and promote conservation.

Seasoned conservation researchers often struggle to bridge the research-implementation gap and promote the translation of their work into meaningful conservation actions. Graduate students face the same problems and must contend with obstacles such as limited opportunities for relevant interdisciplinary training and a lack of institutional support for application of research results. However, students also have a crucial set of opportunities (e.g., access to academic resources outside their degree programs and opportunities to design research projects promoting collaboration with stakeholders) at their disposal to address these problems. On the basis of results of breakout discussions at a symposium on the human dimensions of the ocean, a review of the literature, and our own experiences, we devised recommendations on how graduate students can create resources within their academic institutions, institutionalize resources, and engage with stakeholders to promote real-world conservation outcomes. Within their academic institutions, graduate students should foster links to practitioners and promote knowledge and skill sharing among students. To institutionalize resources, students should cultivate student leaders and faculty sponsors, systematically document their program activities, and engage in strategic planning to promote the sustainability of their efforts. While conducting research, students should create connections to and engage actively with stakeholders in their relevant study areas and disseminate research results both to stakeholders and the broader public. Our recommendations can serve as a template for graduate students wishing to bridge the research-implementation gap, both during their current studies and in their future careers as conservation researchers and practitioners.

Sustainability: Multi-disciplinary perspectives

The sustainability concept is inherently multydisciplinary because it concerns the management of a complex system having economic, technological, ecological, political, and other perspectives. Consequently, any effort in the area of sustainability involves concept, principles, and methods from engineering, the social science including economics ans social psychology, the biological science including ecology, and physical sciences. In this context, the book Sustainability:Multi Disciplinary Perspectives edited by Heriberto Cabezas and Urmila Diwekar discusses, in a coherent and comprehensive manner, the salient concepts, principles and methods relevant to sustainability from the perspective of different disciplines. The book is a collection of fourteen papers, written by 23 authors drawn from fifteen distinct disciplinary backgrounds ranging from engineering to public policy, from ecology to thermodynamics, from organizational behavior to social psychology, and from industrial ecology to economics. Chapter 1, Introduction, by Heriberto Cabezas describes the general context, the aims and structure of the book. This chapter also provides the definition of sustainability: Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs . Chapter 2, Principles of Sustainability from Ecology, by Audrey L. Mayer, details what are the principles which support sustainability: resilience, desirability, temporal and spatial equity. Ecological theories and hypotheses have inspired new and creative ways to create more sustainable systems. In particular, the complex systems approach to understanding ecosystems have readily incorporated linked human systems into these models, and allowed for a greater understanding of the impacts of specific human activities on the entire socioecological system. ...

Marine resource management and conservation in the Anthropocene

Because the Anthropocene by definition is an epoch during which environmental change is largely anthropogenic and driven by social, economic, psychological and political forces, environmental social scientists can effectively analyse human behaviour and knowledge systems in this context. In this subject review, we summarize key ways in which the environmental social sciences can better inform fisheries management policy and practice and marine conservation in the Anthropocene. We argue that environmental social scientists are particularly well positioned to synergize research to fill the gaps between: (1) local behaviours/needs/worldviews and marine resource management and biological conservation concerns; and (2) large-scale drivers of planetary environmental change (globalization, affluence, technological change, etc.) and local cognitive, socioeconomic, cultural and historical processes that shape human behaviour in the marine environment. To illustrate this, we synthesize the roles of various environmental social science disciplines in better understanding the interaction between humans and tropical marine ecosystems in developing nations where issues arising from human–coastal interactions are particularly pronounced. We focus on: (1) the application of the environmental social sciences in marine resource management and conservation; (2) the development of ‘new’ socially equitable marine conservation; (3) repopulating the seascape; (4) incorporating multi-scale dynamics of marine social–ecological systems; and (5) envisioning the future of marine resource management and conservation for producing policies and projects for comprehensive and successful resource management and conservation in the Anthropocene.