Adaptive collaborative management of community forests in Asia ...
Adaptive collaborative management of community forests in Asia ...
Adaptive collaborative management of community forests in Asia ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Chapter 2: <strong>Adaptive</strong> Collaborative Management: A Conceptual Model • 19<br />
Learn<strong>in</strong>g among stakeholders<br />
It appears obvious that managers must base their decisions on learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
How is the ‘learn<strong>in</strong>g among stakeholders’ <strong>in</strong> ACM different from the normal<br />
learn<strong>in</strong>g carried out by all managers? One difference is that ACM requires<br />
that those <strong>in</strong>volved seek and apply knowledge actively and deliberately,<br />
rather than <strong>in</strong>cidentally or passively. For example, forest managers can<br />
identify uncerta<strong>in</strong>ties (such as nursery <strong>management</strong> techniques for bamboo)<br />
while <strong>in</strong> the plann<strong>in</strong>g processes and then fill <strong>in</strong> those knowledge gaps <strong>in</strong><br />
the plann<strong>in</strong>g or implementation stage <strong>of</strong> their work (through analysis <strong>of</strong><br />
past and ongo<strong>in</strong>g <strong>management</strong> experiences and outcomes). Thus learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />
is an <strong>in</strong>tentional outcome <strong>of</strong> the manag<strong>in</strong>g process, and it is fed back <strong>in</strong>to<br />
that process. In a traditional <strong>management</strong> process, learn<strong>in</strong>g tends to be<br />
a by-product <strong>of</strong> the <strong>management</strong> activities, and it may or may not be<br />
<strong>in</strong>ternalised, whereas <strong>in</strong> ACM, the learn<strong>in</strong>g process (and the uptake <strong>of</strong> the<br />
learn<strong>in</strong>g) becomes part <strong>of</strong> the <strong>management</strong> rout<strong>in</strong>e—that is, it becomes<br />
<strong>in</strong>stitutionalised.<br />
In ACM, learn<strong>in</strong>g also means that forest managers actively seek to adjust<br />
and improve their exist<strong>in</strong>g knowledge, <strong>in</strong>crementally sharpen<strong>in</strong>g and<br />
enhanc<strong>in</strong>g their understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the forest system. One example <strong>of</strong> this<br />
would be stakeholders build<strong>in</strong>g and apply<strong>in</strong>g an ongo<strong>in</strong>g monitor<strong>in</strong>g and<br />
feedback process.<br />
It also <strong>in</strong>cludes learn<strong>in</strong>g at a higher level rather than simply the learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>of</strong> facts, the k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g that enables stakeholders to reframe their<br />
perspectives—or some part <strong>of</strong> their worldview. This level <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g can be<br />
understood as ‘transformative learn<strong>in</strong>g’ (Van der Veen 2000; Loev<strong>in</strong>sohn<br />
et al. 2000). One example would be the use <strong>of</strong> shared ‘learn<strong>in</strong>g questions’<br />
by forest managers about their own governance processes, reflections and<br />
ultimately shifts <strong>in</strong> ways <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>teract<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, as implied <strong>in</strong> the above paragraphs, one significant attribute <strong>of</strong><br />
learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> an ACM approach is that it is not only <strong>in</strong>dividual learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong><br />
facts, but also (and especially) social learn<strong>in</strong>g—a process <strong>in</strong> which ‘multiple<br />
stakeholders br<strong>in</strong>g together their different knowledge, experiences,<br />
perspectives, values and capacities for a process <strong>of</strong> communication and<br />
critical reflection as a means <strong>of</strong> jo<strong>in</strong>tly understand<strong>in</strong>g and address<strong>in</strong>g shared<br />
challenges and potential options’ (McDougall et al. 2002:28). Although this<br />
adds complexity to the process, it also potentially adds richness because <strong>of</strong>