The catalogue contains study descriptions in various languages. The system searches with your search terms from study descriptions available in the language you have selected. The catalogue does not have ‘All languages’ option as due to linguistic differences this would give incomplete results. See the User Guide for more detailed information.
The impacts of trust, cost and risk on collaboration in environmental governance
Creator
Bodin, Örjan (Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University)
Schultz, Lisen (Stockholm University)
Plummer, Ryan (Brock University)
Armitage, Derek (University of Waterloo)
Baird, Julia (Brock University)
Study number / PID
snd1147-1-1 (SND)
https://doi.org/10.5878/y0q4-8w20 (DOI)
Data access
Open
Series
Not available
Abstract
1. Collaborative approaches to environmental governance are drawing increased interest in research and practice. In this article we investigate the structure and functioning of actor networks engaged in collaboration.
2. We specifically seek to advance understanding of how and why collaborative networks are formed as actors engage in addressing two broad classes of collective action problems: coordination and cooperation. It has been proposed that more risk-prone cooperative problems favor denser and more cohesive bonding network structures, whereas less risky coordination problems favor sparser and more centralized bridging structures.
3. Recent empirical findings however cast some doubts on these assumptions. In building on previous work we propose and evaluate a set of propositions in order to remedy these ambiguities. Our propositions build on the assumption that bridging structures could, if actors’ experience sufficient levels of trust in the collaborative process, adequately support both cooperation and coordination problems.
4. Our empirical investigation of four UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Reserves gives initial support for our assumptions, and suggest that bridging structures emerge when actors have trust in the collaborative endeavor, and/or when the cost of collaborative failure is deemed low. While caution is warranted due to data limitations, our findings contribute to improved policies and guidelines on how to stimulate and facilitate more effective collaborative approaches to environmental governance.
The dataset contains four networks (one per MAB reserve). The data is further described in the published paper. For each network, there are several files. The files are formatted for the program MPnet. One file per network is the sociomatrix (rows and columns are nodes, and the values in the matrix are the links between the nodes). Several other files, per network, contain node attributes (further described in the published paper). The order of...
Terminology used is generally based on DDI controlled vocabularies: Time Method, Analysis Unit, Sampling Procedure and Mode of Collection, available at CESSDA Vocabulary Service.
Methodology
Data collection period
01/01/2014 - 01/01/2015
Country
Sweden, Canada
Time dimension
Cross-section
Analysis unit
Group
Individual
Universe
Participants in four Man and Biosphere reserves
Sampling procedure
Total universe/Complete enumeration
Kind of data
Not available
Data collection mode
Self-administered questionnaire
Funding information
Funder
Swedish Research Council
Grant number
2012-5498
Access
Publisher
Swedish National Data Service
Publication year
2020
Terms of data access
Access to data through SND. Data are freely accessible.