Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The transforming capacity of collaborative institutions: belief change and coalition reformation in conflicted wildlife management
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1631-0591
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7646-1813
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1685-5527
2018 (English)In: Journal of Environmental Management, ISSN 0301-4797, E-ISSN 1095-8630, Vol. 226, p. 226-240Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this study is to examine the transformative capacity of top-down imposed collaborative institutions on participants’ beliefs and coordination patterns. First, do collaborative arenas enhance learning in terms of belief change and belief convergence among participating actors? Second, what types of beliefs are changed and, third, how are changes in beliefs reflected in the formation of coalitions? To answer these questions, a longitudinal study encompassing three collaborative decision-making arenas in the highly adversarial system for wildlife management in Sweden is performed. The empirical analysis indicates both stability and change within the new management system that confirms, as well as challenges, the theoretical assumptions guiding the analysis. While beliefs overall are rather stable, we note, surprisingly, how some participants’ more normatively oriented policy core beliefs have been slightly modified over time. A more expected result was that these adjustments in normative policy core beliefs were accompanied by a reformed coalition structure within the studied decision-making arenas. The study contributes to our understandings of policy beliefs and coalitions in conflicted policy areas; it underlines the mixed results of collaborative institutions found in previous research; yet, lends a modest support in favor of the transformative capacity of collaborative institutions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018. Vol. 226, p. 226-240
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Research subject
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-70307DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.07.073OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-70307DiVA, id: diva2:1237679
Note

Validerad;2018;Nivå 2;2018-08-16 (andbra)

Available from: 2018-08-09 Created: 2018-08-09 Last updated: 2018-08-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Lundmark, CarinaMatti, Simon

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lundmark, CarinaMatti, SimonSandström, Annica
By organisation
Social Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Environmental Management
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf