Framing up the “Stretching” of Co-Management

Leonie J. Pearson, Melanie (Lain) Dare

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Collaborative management, or co-management, is recognized as best practice for protected area management. A vast literature explores the benefits and challenges of implementing co-management, but more literature is not always better. We propose that the term co-management has been uncritically “stretched”, losing its original framing of actors working together collaboratively. Co-management has become a facade under which traditional hierarchical and market-based management regimes can occur. Conceptual stretching inhibits the capacity to critically articulate variations within models of collaborative governance. We investigate this stretching through a nuanced framework of co-management models with varying intensities. By considering participating actors, institutions and delivery objectives, the theoretically informed and empirically tested framework highlights the stretched implementation of co-management, enabling protected area managers an opportunity to align their practice with the promise of co-management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-19
Number of pages19
JournalSociety and Natural Resources
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 11 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

co-management
comanagement
protected area
management
best practice
manager
governance
market

Cite this

@article{e9c3816b6dc1480b9c334a18eb219789,
title = "Framing up the “Stretching” of Co-Management",
abstract = "Collaborative management, or co-management, is recognized as best practice for protected area management. A vast literature explores the benefits and challenges of implementing co-management, but more literature is not always better. We propose that the term co-management has been uncritically “stretched”, losing its original framing of actors working together collaboratively. Co-management has become a facade under which traditional hierarchical and market-based management regimes can occur. Conceptual stretching inhibits the capacity to critically articulate variations within models of collaborative governance. We investigate this stretching through a nuanced framework of co-management models with varying intensities. By considering participating actors, institutions and delivery objectives, the theoretically informed and empirically tested framework highlights the stretched implementation of co-management, enabling protected area managers an opportunity to align their practice with the promise of co-management.",
keywords = "Australia, collaborative management, environmental governance, natural resource management, protected areas",
author = "Pearson, {Leonie J.} and Dare, {Melanie (Lain)}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1080/08941920.2018.1544677",
language = "English",
pages = "1--19",
journal = "Society Natural Resources",
issn = "0894-1920",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

}

Framing up the “Stretching” of Co-Management. / Pearson, Leonie J.; Dare, Melanie (Lain).

In: Society and Natural Resources, 11.01.2019, p. 1-19.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Framing up the “Stretching” of Co-Management

AU - Pearson, Leonie J.

AU - Dare, Melanie (Lain)

PY - 2019/1/11

Y1 - 2019/1/11

N2 - Collaborative management, or co-management, is recognized as best practice for protected area management. A vast literature explores the benefits and challenges of implementing co-management, but more literature is not always better. We propose that the term co-management has been uncritically “stretched”, losing its original framing of actors working together collaboratively. Co-management has become a facade under which traditional hierarchical and market-based management regimes can occur. Conceptual stretching inhibits the capacity to critically articulate variations within models of collaborative governance. We investigate this stretching through a nuanced framework of co-management models with varying intensities. By considering participating actors, institutions and delivery objectives, the theoretically informed and empirically tested framework highlights the stretched implementation of co-management, enabling protected area managers an opportunity to align their practice with the promise of co-management.

AB - Collaborative management, or co-management, is recognized as best practice for protected area management. A vast literature explores the benefits and challenges of implementing co-management, but more literature is not always better. We propose that the term co-management has been uncritically “stretched”, losing its original framing of actors working together collaboratively. Co-management has become a facade under which traditional hierarchical and market-based management regimes can occur. Conceptual stretching inhibits the capacity to critically articulate variations within models of collaborative governance. We investigate this stretching through a nuanced framework of co-management models with varying intensities. By considering participating actors, institutions and delivery objectives, the theoretically informed and empirically tested framework highlights the stretched implementation of co-management, enabling protected area managers an opportunity to align their practice with the promise of co-management.

KW - Australia

KW - collaborative management

KW - environmental governance

KW - natural resource management

KW - protected areas

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060090022&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/08941920.2018.1544677

DO - 10.1080/08941920.2018.1544677

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 19

JO - Society Natural Resources

JF - Society Natural Resources

SN - 0894-1920

ER -