nach oben

Environmental Management

16.05.2024

Elephants in the Room — Analyzing Local Discourses for Sustainable Management of Bannerghatta National Park, South India

verfasst von: Lingaraj G. Jayaprakash, Gordon M. Hickey

Erschienen in: Environmental Management

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Landscape governance challenges, particularly in peri-urban contexts like the Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) region in South India, exemplify ‘wicked’ problems due to their inherent complexities. These challenges arise from a mix of conflicting interests, policy ambiguities, and sociocultural dynamics, which often blur the definition of problems and hinder effective solutions. Despite apparent options for resolution, stakeholder disagreements and deep uncertainties about implementation strategies complicate governance. This study, therefore, has two broad objectives. The first objective is to analyze the local discourses surrounding planned policy interventions around the BNP region in South India. Based on the findings, the second objective is to draw insights for sustainable natural resource governance research and practice. We applied Q-methodology to understand the discourses that underpin various conflicts in the rapidly urbanizing elephant corridor at BNP. We elicited information on how various local actors frame solutions to current collective action challenges in the BNP landscape and their perspectives on the proposed eco-sensitive zone notification, as well as the functioning of current policy interventions concerning conservation and development. The study uncovers the micropolitics and power regimes underpinning various natural resource governance challenges and demonstrates the utility of the Q-methodology in bringing diverse perspectives together in response to ‘wicked’ governance challenges.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

The national park, highly irregular in shape and approximately 500 meters at its narrowest point, is surrounded by a rapidly urbanizing area. This exposes it to edge effects, pollution, and significant resource pressures.

The proposed eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around Bannerghatta National Park was initially set at 268 square kilometers in a 2016 draft notification (S.O. 2116[E]), as per the 2002 Wildlife Conservation Strategy which mandates ESZs within 10 kilometers of parks under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Following a 2017 expert committee review, this area was reduced to 181 square kilometers.

Available here https://data.opencity.in/dataset/bda-revised-master-plan-2031.

Eucalyptus plantations are outlawed in the region as they are known to overdraw the ground water.

Local self-governing institutions at the village level.

All the quotes that follow originate from this workshop, conducted in Bannerghatta in April 2017.

Elephant camps are forest department facilities where captured ‘rogue’ wild elephants, rescued elephants are housed, cared for, and sometimes trained.

The citizen assembly of village local self governing institutions.

Adger WN, Benjaminsen TA, Brown K, Svarstad H (2001) Advancing a political ecology of global environmental discourses. Dev Change 32(4):681–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00222CrossRef

Adhikari S, Southworth J (2012) Simulating forest cover changes of Bannerghatta National Park based on a CA-Markov model: A remote sensing approach. Remote Sens 4:3215–3243. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs4103215CrossRef

Adhikari S, Southworth J, Nagendra H (2015) Understanding forest loss and recovery: a spatiotemporal analysis of land change in and around Bannerghatta National Park, India. J Land Use Sci 10(4):402–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2014.920425. Available atCrossRef

Agrawal A (2001) Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Dev 29(10):1649–1672. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00063-8CrossRef

Altheide DL (1987) Reflections: Ethnographic content analysis. Qual Sociol 10(1):65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988269CrossRef

Andersson K (2006) Understanding decentralized forest governance: an application of the institutional analysis and development framework. Sustainability: Sci, Pract, Policy 2(1):25–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2006.11907975CrossRef

Andrade R, van Riper CJ, Goodson DJ, Johnson DN, Stewart W, López-Rodríguez MD, Cebrián-Piqueras MA, Horcea-Milcu AI, Lo V, Raymond CM (2023) Values shift in response to social learning through deliberation about protected areas. Glob Environ Change 78:102630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102630CrossRef

Ansell C, Gash A (2008) Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. J Public Adm Res Theory 18(4):543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032CrossRef

Antunes P, Kallis G, Videira N, Santos R (2009) Participation and Evaluation for Sustainable River Basin Governance. Ecol Econ 68(4):931–939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.004CrossRef

Arjunan M, Holmes C, Puyravaud JP, Davidar P (2006) Do developmental initiatives influence local attitudes toward conservation? A case study from the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India. J Environ Manag 79(2):188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.007CrossRef

Armitage D, Berkes F, Dale A, Kocho-Schellenberg E, Patton E (2011) Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: Learning to adapt in Canada’s Arctic. Glob Environ Change 21(3):995–1004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.04.006CrossRef

Arts B, Buizer M, Horlings L, Ingram V, van Oosten C, Opdam P (2017) Landscape approaches: a state-of-the-art review. Annu Rev Environ Resour 42:439–463. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102016-060932CrossRef

Bainbridge JM, Potts T, O’Higgins TG (2011) Rapid policy network mapping: A new method for understanding governance structures for implementation of marine environmental policy. PLoS ONE 6:e26149. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026149CrossRef

Babbie ER (2014) The practice of social research. 14th ed. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA, ISBN 978-1-305-10494-5

Baber WF, Bartlett RV (2005) Deliberative Environmental Politics: Democracy and Ecological Rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 288. ISBN 0262025876

Bäckstrand K, Khan J, Kronsell A, Lövbrand E (2010) Environmental politics after the deliberative turn. Environmental Politics and Deliberative Democracy. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, p 217. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849806411.00023CrossRef

Bäckstrand K, Lövbrand E (2006) Planting trees to mitigate climate change: Contested discourses of ecological modernization, green governmentality and civic environmentalism. Glob Environ Politics 6(1):50–75. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2006.6.1.50CrossRef

Bächtiger A, Dryzek JS, Mansbridge J, Warren M (2018) Deliberative democracy: An introduction. In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, Oxford University Press. pp 1–32. Available at https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.50

Bächtiger A, Niemeyer S, Neblo M, Steenbergen MR, Steiner J (2010) Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities. J Political Philos 18:32–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00342.xCrossRef

Badry N, Hickey GM (2022) Enhancing collaboration across the knowledge system boundaries of ecosystem governance. Adv Ecol Res 66:63–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aecr.2022.04.010CrossRef

Balint PJ, Stewart RE, Desai A, Walters LC (2011) Wicked Environmental Problems: Managing Uncertainty and Conflict. Island Press/Center for Resource Economics. Paperback. pp 256. ISBN 9781597262149

Banasick S (2019) Ken-Q Analysis (Version 1.0.8) [Software]. Available from https://shawnbanasick.github.io/ken-q-analysis/https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1300201.

Bangalore Development Authority (2015) Revised Master Plan for Bengaluru - 2031 (Draft): Volume-3. Government of Karnataka, Bangalore, https://bdabangalore.org/uploads/files/TPM_Documents/RMP_2031/Volume_3_MasterPlanDocument.pdf

Banjade MR, Ojha H (2005) Facilitating deliberative governance: Innovations from Nepal’s community forestry program—a case study in Karmapunya. Forestry Chron 81(3):403–408. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc81403-3CrossRef

Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (Eds.) (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 393. ISBN 0-521-81592-4

Birnbaum S, Bodin Ö, Sandström A (2015) Tracing the sources of legitimacy: the impact of deliberation in participatory natural resource management. Policy Sci 48:443–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9230-0CrossRef

Brosius PJ, Tsing AL, Zerner C (Eds.) (2005) Communities and conservation: Histories and politics of community-based natural resource management. AltaMira Press. pp. 512 ISBN 9780759114722

Brown SR (1993) A primer on Q methodology Operant Subjectivity 16:91–138

Burns T, Stöhr C (2011) Power, knowledge, and conflict in the shaping of commons governance: The case of EU Baltic fisheries. Int J Commons 5:65–77. https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.260CrossRef

Chambers R (1994) The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World Dev 22(7):953–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(94)90141-4CrossRef

Christiano T (1997) The significance of public deliberation. Deliberative democracy: Essays reason politics 243:249

Cooke B, Kothari U (2001) Participation: The new tyranny?. Zed Books

Cornwall A (2008) Democratising engagement: What the UK can learn from international experience. Demos. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08bc0e5274a27b2000d29/Democratising_Engagement-Cornwall.pdf Accessed 26 May 2021

Divan S, Rosencranz A (2022) Environmental Law and Policy in India: Cases and Materials, 3rd edn. Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192865458.001.0001

Datta PK (2019) Exploring the dynamics of deliberative democracy in rural India: Lessons from the working of Gram Sabhas in India and Gram Sansads in West Bengal. Indian J Public Adm 65(1):117–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019556118814937CrossRef

Dhanya B, Ramananda S, Jain R, Baghel P (2022) Peri-urban Protected Forests in Peril: Insights from Case Studies in Two Indian Megacities. In Forest Dynamics and Conservation: Science, Innovations and Policies. Springer Nature Singapore https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0071-6_11

Dryzek JS, Niemeyer S (2010) Foundations and frontiers of deliberative governance. Oxford University Press. pp. 256 ISBN 978-0-19-956294-7

Dryzek JS (2012) Foundations and frontiers of deliberative governance. OUP Oxford. pp. 229 ISBN 9780199644858.

Dryzek JS, Pickering J (2017) Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance. Ecol Econ 131:353–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.011CrossRef

Dryzek JS (2021) The politics of the Earth: Environmental discourses. 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 328. ISBN 9780198851745CrossRef

Emogor CA, Zabala A, Adaje PO, Clark D, Nielsen KS, Carmenta R (2023) Stakeholder preferences for pangolin conservation interventions in south-east Nigeria. People Nat 5:3. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10477CrossRef

Fairclough N (1993) Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse Soc 4(2):133–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002CrossRef

Fried HS, Hamilton M, Berardo R (2022) Closing integrative gaps in complex environmental governance systems. Ecol Soc 27:1. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12996-270115CrossRef

Freeman OE, Duguma LA, Minang PA (2015) Operationalizing the integrated landscape approach in practice. Ecol Soc 20(1):24. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07175-200124CrossRef

Fung A, Wright EO (2001) Deepening democracy: Innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics Soc 29(1):5–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329201029001002CrossRef

Gavin MC, McCarter J, Berkes F, Mead ATP, Sterling EJ, Tang R, Turner NJ (2018) Effective biodiversity conservation requires dynamic, pluralistic, partnership-based approaches. Sustainability 10(6):1846. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061846CrossRef

Gopalakrishna SP, Kaonga ML, Somashekar RK, Suresh HS, Suresh R (2015) Tree diversity in the tropical dry forest of Bannerghatta National Park in Eastern Ghats, Southern India. Eur J Ecol 1(2):12–27. https://doi.org/10.1515/eje-2015-0013CrossRef

Grimsrud K, Graesse M, Lindhjem H (2020) Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management. Ecol Econ 170:106588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106588CrossRef

Gubbi S (2012) Patterns and correlates of human-elephant conflict around a south Indian reserve. Biol Conserv 148:88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.046CrossRef

Gubbi S, Nagashettihalli H, Suthar S, Menon AM. (2019) Leopards of Bannerghatta National Park: A camera-trapping exercise to estimate abundance and densities of leopards. Nature Conservation Foundation, Mysore, India, p 3, https://images.assettype.com/ncfindia/2020-03/35214ee2-31a8-4472-b604-3e84ed1d2f03/Bannerghatta_Report_FINAL.pdf

Hajer MA (1997) The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Online edn. Oxford. Available at https://doi.org/10.1093/019829333X.001.0001 Accessed 9 Apr. 2023

Hajer M, Versteeg W (2005) A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives. J Environ Policy Plan 7(3):175–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339646CrossRef

Hinkel J, Nicholls R, Vafeidis AT, Tol R, Avagianou T (2010) Assessing risk of and adaptation to sea-level rise in the European Union: an application of DIVA. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 15:703–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-010-9237-yCrossRef

Holling CS (1973) Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1–23. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096802CrossRef

Holzer JM, Baird J, Hickey GM (2022) Pluralism in ecosystem governance. Adv Ecol Res 66:xvii–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2504(22)00020-4. ISBN: 9780323989015CrossRef

Idiculla M (2020) Unpacking Local Self-Government. Verfassung und Recht in Übersee/Law and Politics in Africa, Asia and Latin America 53:1:30–50 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27005212

Jayaprakash LG, Hickey GM (2019) Mistaking the map for the territory: What does the history of Bannerghatta National Park, India, tell us about the study of institutions? Soc Nat Resour 32(12):1433–1450. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2019.1643431CrossRef

Jayaprakash LG, Hickey GM (2022) Of green spaces and grey areas: An ethnography of forest management in peri-urban Bengaluru, India. Adv Ecol Res 66:91–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aecr.2022.04.003CrossRef

Johansson J (2016) Participation and deliberation in Swedish forest governance: The process of initiating a National Forest Program. For Policy Econ 70:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.001CrossRef

Kashwan P, Mudaliar P, Foster SR, Clement F (2021) Reimagining and governing the commons in an unequal world: A critical engagement. Curr Res Environ Sustainability 3:100102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100102CrossRef

Lasgorceix A, Kothari A (2009) Displacement and relocation of protected areas: A synthesis and analysis of case studies. Eco Political Weekly 44(49):37–47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25663860

Leitch AM, Cundill G, Schultz L, Meek CL (2015) Principle 6 – Broaden participation. In Biggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML (eds) Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social–Ecological Systems. Cambridge University Press. pp 201-218. ISBN 978-1-107-08265-6

Liggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML (2015) An introduction to the resilience approach and principles to sustain ecosystem services in social–ecological systems. In: Biggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML (eds) Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems. Cambridge University Press, pp 1–31. ISBN 978-1-107-08265-6

Levin K, Cashore B, Bernstein S, Auld G (2012) Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sci 45:123–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0CrossRef

Lindblom CE (1959) The science of muddling through. Public Admin Rev 19(2):79–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/973677CrossRef

Link J (2010) Ecosystem-based fisheries management: Confronting tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667091

Ludwig M, Grüninger F, Rothfuss E, Heurich M (2012) Discourse analysis as an instrument to reveal the pivotal role of the media in local acceptance or rejection of a wildlife management project: A case study from the Bavarian Forest National Park ERDKUNDE 66:2:143–156. https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.2012.02.04

Maclean K, Robinson CJ, Natcher DC (2015) Consensus building or constructive conflict? Aboriginal discursive strategies to enhance participation in natural resource management in Australia and Canada. Soc Nat Resour 28(2):197–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.928396CrossRef

Martin A, McGuire S, Sullivan S (2013) Global environmental justice and biodiversity conservation. Geographical J 179(2):122–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12018CrossRef

Moser SC, Ekstrom JA (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(51):22026–22031. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1007887107CrossRef

Moser SC, Jeffress Williams S, Boesch DF (2012) Wicked challenges at land’s end: Managing coastal vulnerability under climate change. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37(1):51–78. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-021611-135158CrossRef

Muro M, Jeffrey P (2008) A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management processes. J Environ Plan Manag 51(3):325–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560801977190CrossRef

Nabatchi T (2012) Putting the “public” back in public values research: Designing participation to identify and respond to values. Public Adm Rev 72(5):699–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02544.xCrossRef

Negi SS (2002) Handbook of national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and biosphere reserves in India. 3rd ed. Indus Publishing. pp. 200 ISBN 9788173871283

Niemeyer S, Dryzek JS (2007) The Ends of Deliberation: Meta-consensus and Inter-subjective Rationality as Ideal Outcomes. Swiss Political Sci Rev 13:497–526. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00087.xCrossRef

Newig J, Kvarda E (2012) Participation in environmental governance: legitimate and effective. Environmental Governance: The Challenge of Legitimacy and Effectiveness 29–45. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849802703.00010

Ney S, Verweij M (2015) Messy institutions for wicked problems: How to generate clumsy solutions? Environ Plan C: Gov Policy 33(6):1679–1696. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614450CrossRef

Mansbridge J (2015) A minimalist definition of deliberation. Deliberation and Development: Rethinking the Role of Voice and Collective Action in Unequal Societies 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0501-1_ch2

Ostrom E (2001) Decentralization and development: The new panacea. In: Dowding K, Hughes J, Margetts H (eds) Challenges to Democracy: Ideas, Involvement and Institutions. 1st ed. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 237–256.CrossRef

Pecurul-Botines M, Di Gregorio M, Paavola J (2014) Discourses of conflict and collaboration and institutional context in the implementation of forest conservation policies in Soria, Spain. Biodivers Conserv 23(14):3483–3499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0823-2CrossRef

Polski M (2017) Extending the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework to Policy Analysis and Design. In Institutional Diversity in Self-Governing Societies: The Bloomington School and Beyond. Lexington Books, Landam, MD, pp 25–47.

Rai ND, Devy MS, Ganesh T, Ganesan R, Setty SR, Hiremath AJ, Khaling S, Rajan PD (2021) Beyond fortress conservation: The long-term integration of natural and social science research for an inclusive conservation practice in India. Biol Conserv 254:108888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108888CrossRef

Rajeev BM (2002) Wildlife management plan for Bannerghatta National Park, 2003–04 to 2007–08. Government of Karnataka, India

Ramkumar K, Varma S, Easa PS, Venkataraman A, Ramakrishnan B, Tiwari S, Menon V, Sukumar R (2017) Elephant corridors of southern India. In: Menon V, Tiwari SK, Ramkumar K, Kyarong S, Ganguly U, Sukumar R (eds) Right of Passage: Elephant Corridors of India. 2nd Edition. Conservation Reference Series No. 3. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi, p 574–761

Rangarajan M, Desai A, Sukumar R, Easa PS, Menon V, Vincent S, Ganguly S, Talukdar BK, Singh B, Mudappa D, Chowdhary S, Prasad AN (2010) Gajah: Securing the Future for Elephants in India. The Report of the Elephant Task Force. Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi, http://www.environmentandsociety.org/node/2697

Rastogi A, Hickey GM, Badola R, Hussain SA (2013) Diverging viewpoints on tiger conservation: A Q-Method study and survey of conservation professionals in India. Biol Conserv 161:182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.03.013CrossRef

Ray L (2011) Using Q-methodology to identify local perspectives on wildfires in two Koyukon Athabascan communities in rural Alaska. Sustainability: Sci, Pract Policy 7(2):18–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2011.11908070CrossRef

Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biol Conserv 141(10):2417–2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014CrossRef

Reed MS, Evely AC, Cundill G, Fazey I, Glass J, Laing A, Newig J, Parrish B, Prell C, Raymond C, Stringer LC (2010) What is Social Learning? Ecol Soc 15:4. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26268235CrossRef

Reed J, Ickowitz A, Chervier C, Djoudi H, Moombe K, Ros-Tonen M, Sunderland T (2020) Integrated landscape approaches in the tropics: A brief stock-take. Land Use Policy 99:104822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104822CrossRef

Ribot J (2002) Democratic decentralization of natural resources: Institutionalizing popular participation. World Resources Institute http://pdf.wri.org/ddnr_full.pdf

Rittel HW, Webber MM (1974) Wicked problems. Man-made Futures 26(1):272–280. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4531523?origin=JSTOR-pdf

Rodela R (2012) Advancing the deliberative turn in natural resource management: An analysis of discourses on the use of local resources. J Environ Manag 96(1):26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.10.013CrossRef

Ros-Tonen MAF et al. (2021) Spatial tools for integrated and inclusive landscape governance: Toward a new research agenda. Environ Manag 68:611–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01547-xCrossRef

Ros-Tonen MAF, Reed J, Sunderland T (2018) From synergy to complexity: The trend toward integrated value chain and landscape governance. Environ Manag 62:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1055-0CrossRef

Saito-Jensen M, Nathan I, Treue T (2010) Beyond elite capture? Community-based natural resource management and power in Mohammed Nagar village, Andhra Pradesh, India. Environ Conserv 37(3):327–335. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44519987CrossRef

Sayer J, Bull G, Elliott C (2008) Mediating forest transitions: ‘grand design’ or ‘muddling through. Conserv Soc 6(4):320–327. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.49195CrossRef

Schultz M, Hahn T, Ituarte-Lima C, Hällström N (2018) Deliberative multi-actor dialogues as opportunities for transformative social learning and conflict resolution in international environmental negotiations. Int Environ Agreements: Politics, Law Econ 18(5):671–688a. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-018-9410-4CrossRef

Schusler TM, Decker DJ, Pfeffer MJ (2003) Social learning for collaborative natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 16(4):309–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920390178874CrossRef

Sekher M (2001) Organized participatory resource management: Insights from community forestry practices in India. For Policy Econ 3(3-4):137–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-9341(01)00060-0CrossRef

Singh NM (2013) The affective labor of growing forests and the becoming of environmental subjects: Rethinking environmentality in Odisha, India. Geoforum 47:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.01.010CrossRef

Singh VV (2008) Wildlife Management Plan for Bannerghatta National Park, 2008-09 to 2012-13 Government of Karnataka.

Smith G (2003) Deliberative democracy and the environment. Routledge, London, ISBN 9780415309400CrossRef

Springate-Baginski O, Sarin M, Reddy MG (2013) Resisting rights: Forest bureaucracy and the tenure transition in India. Small-scale Forestry 12:107–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-012-9219-xCrossRef

Stankey GH, Clark RN, Bormann BT (2005) Adaptive Management of Natural Resources: Theory, Concepts, and Management Institutions. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 73 pp. Digitized 13 August 2009. Original from the University of Minnesota. https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-654

Stephenson W (1935) Technique of Factor Analysis. Nature 136(3434):297. https://doi.org/10.1038/136297b0. Available atCrossRef

Stern MJ, Briske DD, Meadow AM (2021) Opening learning spaces to create actionable knowledge for conservation. Conserv Sci Pract 3(5):e378. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.378CrossRef

Stevenson H, Dryzek JS (2014) Democratizing Global Climate Governance Chapter 3 - Governance with and without institutionalized authority pp 37–60 Cambridge University Press Can delete Berkes 2004

Stone M, Phalke S, Warren N, Kumar AV, Krishnan A (2019) Gauging farmers’ acceptance of ‘social barrier’ mechanisms for preventing elephant crop raids. Gajah 50:23–28. https://www.asesg.org/PDFfiles/2019/50-23-Stone.pdf

Stringer LC, Dougill AJ, Fraser E, Hubacek K, Prell C, Reed MS (2006) Unpacking “participation” in the adaptive management of social–ecological systems: a critical review. Ecol Soc 11(2):39, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art39/CrossRef

van der Ree R, Smith DJ, Grilo C (2015) The ecological effects of linear infrastructure and traffic: Challenges and opportunities of rapid global growth. In van der Ree R, Smith DJ, Grilo C (eds) Handbook of Road Ecology. Chapter 1, pp 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118568170.ch1

van Ierland EC, de Bruin K, Dellink RB, Ruijs A, Bolwidt L, van Buuren A, Graveland J, de Groot RS, Kuikman P, Nillesen EEM, Platteeuw M, Reinhard S, Tassone VC, Verhagen A, Roetter R, Verzandvoort-van Dijck S (2007) Routeplanner naar een klimaatbestendig Nederland: Adaptiestrategiën: 3: A qualitative assessment of climate adaptation options and some estimates of adaptation costs. Klimaat voor Ruimte, Wageningen UR, https://edepot.wur.nl/23446

Varma S, Anand VD, Gopalakrishna SP, Avinash KG, Nishant MS (2009) Ecology, conservation and management of the Asian elephant in Bannerghatta National Park, southern India. A Rocha India/ANCF. Asian Elephant Ecol Conserv Ref Ser No 1:13–52

Venkataramana GV, Sreenivasa, Lingaraju HG (2017) An assessment of crop damage and economic loss caused by elephants in Harohalli and Kodihalli ranges of Bannerghatta National Park, Karnataka, India. Curr Sci 113(1):161–167. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26163921CrossRef

Wildlife Institute of India (WII) (2016) Eco-friendly Measures to Mitigate Impacts of Linear Infrastructure on Wildlife. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India, http://moef.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/eco_friendly_measures_mitigate_impacts_linear_infra_wildlife_compressed.pdf

Young IM (2000) Inclusive political communication. In Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford University Press USA 52–80

Zabala A, Sandbrook C, Mukherjee N (2018) When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research. Conserv Biol 32(5):1185–1194. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13123CrossRef

Zimmermann A, Albers N, Kenter JO (2021) Deliberating Our Frames: How Members of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives Use Shared Frames to Tackle Within-Frame Conflicts Over Sustainability Issues. J Bus Ethics 178:757–782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04789-1CrossRef

Titel: Elephants in the Room — Analyzing Local Discourses for Sustainable Management of Bannerghatta National Park, South India
verfasst von: Lingaraj G. Jayaprakash
Gordon M. Hickey
Publikationsdatum: 16.05.2024
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Environmental Management
Print ISSN: 0364-152X
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-01980-8