This article explores the role of park rangers’ social networks in two national parks in Sub-Saharan Africa and suggests that the way that actors connect shape conservation outcomes. We do this against the backdrop of how conservation worldwide has moved away from state-centric top-down approaches towards management structures that includes a wide range of stakeholders spanning multiple administrative levels and sectors. This trend entails challenges as well as opportunities for conservation management. The theoretical framework of the study is given by social capital theory and the notion that the structure of social networks – more specifically the three network features of bonding, bridging, and linking – relate to the presence of institutional trust and rule compliance. The findings indicate that the structure of social networks, in particular the different forms of social capital in those networks, matters for the way they function. The result indicates that bridging and linking ties positively relate to institutional trust and rule compliance. These social networks form a basis for building institutional trust in areas where trust towards government tends to be low. Managers should think about these structures when they implement conservation policy. We recommend to 1) foster structures where park rangers connect to a wide range of actors and thus resources, information, and knowledge 2) include park rangers in the decision making for a more efficient and sustainable management, and 3) build bridges that reach the local communities to facilitate institutional trust and encourage voluntary compliance.

Database for the wildlife research project 'Adaptiva, effektiva och legitima förvaltningsystem?En inventering av aktuell kunskap om viltförvaltningen i Norden', funded by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Naturvårdsverket).

This article deepens our understanding of the preconditions for policy-oriented learning in conflictive marine conservation, provides an analytical framework for further studies and formulates recommendations for practitioners on what to consider when establishing protected areas. Our seas are under increasing pressure but lag behind in protection. Climate change, intensifying use and biodiversity loss challenge current practises and imply trade-offs between conservation and use. While nature conservation ranks high internationally, national protection attempts often result in controversies, with actors aligning in opposing advocacy coalitions—for and against the proposals. Policy-oriented learning is one way to overcome controversies. It involves processes whereby actors gain new knowledge and experiences, leading to changed beliefs about the problems and possible solutions. We aimed to explore and explain policy-oriented learning through a comparative longitudinal case study of two Swedish national park planning processes with different outcomes: Koster Sea national park, established 2009, and Sankt Anna archipelago remaining without park. Which characteristics related to context, actors and processes influence policy-oriented learning in conflictive marine conservation processes? The results suggest that a set of complementary factors explain the different outcomes. First, learning is facilitated by contexts where actors from both coalitions depend on the resource and its protection and have experience of collaboration, and where conservation planning is well integrated with other governance processes. Second, engaged key actors with moderate views facilitating interactions and able to identify common interests and deescalate conflicts are important — supported, third, by various forums allowing exchange of knowledge and learning across coalitions.

This paper explores policy change in Swedish coastal and marine conservation, identifying advocacy coalition factors—focusing internal and external events, policy learning, and negotiated agreements—that explain divergent outcomes in disputed national park planning processes. A longitudinal study, covering three decades of three planning processes, indicates that all factors matter. External and internal events, combined with policy learning or negotiated agreements, constituted the main change pathways. We noted that events' influence on learning and agreements was facilitated by policy brokers and mediated through new venues and altered actor strategies. The findings indicated that competing coalitions' policy beliefs influenced the specific routes taken and underlined the centrality of governmental actors to different outcomes. The study illustrates how political conflicts occur and are addressed in environmental governance, generates insights critical to implementing international and national conservation policy, and builds theoretical knowledge of pathways to policy change in disputed policy processes.

This paper addresses how the design of collaborative regimes influences markers of legitimacy in Swedish water- and large carnivore governance. Based on institutional analysis and statistical analysis of survey data, the study examines two systems with different types of collaborative designs and compares them in relation to markers of legitimacy, in terms of perceived process quality, policy agreement and policy acceptance among the involved decision-making actors and concerned organizations. The findings show how the design of collaboration influences some, but not all, explored markers of legitimacy. First, the categories of actors involved; whom they are accountable to; and the authority given to the collaborative forums, effect perceptions of influence, the possibility of reaching joint agreements and the degree of policy agreement among involved decision-makers. Second, the findings indicate that the degree of policy agreement among concerned organizations is unaffected by differences in institutional design. Third, the degree of policy acceptance among involved decision-making actors and concerned organizations was unaffected by institutional design and notably high in both systems. The results both verify and develop previous research findings and the message to policymakers is to carefully consider the design when introducing new collaborative forums, including whom to invite, in what role, and with what mandate.

How do different multi-level governance models influence the adaptive capacity of environmental management? This paper examines the connection between different types of governance models, distinguished by diverse institutional features, and elements of adaptive capacity. The task is undertaken through a comparative study of two differently organized management systems within the same national context: Swedish water and large carnivore management. The systems’ governance models are defined through an institutional analysis of polycentric features, logics of design and knowledge arrangements. Assessments of adaptive capacity are based on survey data describing the involved actors' perceptions of the knowledge base, use of an experimental approach and the presence of learning. The empirical results suggest that institutional features influence some, but not all, elements of adaptive capacity. The results lend support to the idea that polycentric governance models, based on an ecological rationale, sustain participation in knowledge mobilization, support the use of an experimental approach and promote learning to a larger extent than more centralized and hierarchical governance models do; while there is no connection between governance model and the perceived reliability of knowledge base. The study contributes to environmental governance research, policy and practice by evaluating the adaptive capacity of current water and wildlife management systems in Sweden and by increasing our knowledge about how different governance models influence the adaptive capacity in environmental management.