Laserfiche WebLink
Revised: 7/26/2007 <br />Annotated Bibliography <br /> <br />Institutional Analysis, Partnership, Collaboration, and Consensus Literature <br /> <br />Blomquist, W., T. Heikkila, and E. Schlager. 2004. Building the Agenda for Institutional <br />Research in Water Resources Management . Journal of the American W ater Resources <br />Association. <br />This paper offers recommendations for studying water institutions in a <br />comparative context. It includes methodological recommendations and topics for <br />comparative institutional research. The example of conjunctive management is <br />used to illustrate the importance of institutional factors in water management. <br /> <br />Blumenthal, D. and J. L. Jannink. 2000. A classification of collaborative management <br />methods . Conservation Ecology 4(2): 13 [online] <br />http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss2/art13 . <br />This paper compares methods that have been developed to facilitate collaboration. <br />It uses a framework for comparing collaborative management methods based on <br />five criteria: participation, institut ional analysis, simplification of the natural <br />resources, spatial scale, and stages in the process of natural resource management. <br />This framework is applied to six commonly used collaborative methods: soft <br />systems analysis, adaptive management, ecosystem m anagement, agroecosystem <br />analysis, rapid rural appraisal, and participatory rural appraisal. <br /> <br />The “Institutional Analysis” section of this chapter identifies five aspects of <br />institutional structure that lead to institutional success for collaborative decis ion - <br />making. These include: 1) a well - defined group of stakeholders, with legitimate <br />stakes in management of the natural resource and sufficient autonomy to act on <br />their decisions; 2) a balance of power among those stakeholders; 3) financial <br />resources to s ustain the institution; 4) sanctions to encourage cooperation once <br />decisions have been made; and 5) mechanisms for resolving conflict. <br /> <br />Hecox, Eric. 2003. Chapter Two: Theory and Practice of Collaborative Watershed <br /> <br />Partnerships . Thesis Chapter, Indiana Uni versity. <br />This chapter is a literature review of stakeholder partnerships, collaboration and <br />consensus processes. <br /> <br />Kenney, D. S. 2000. Arguing About Consensus . Natural Resources Law Center, <br />University of Colorado School of Law. <br />This paper examines the argum ents for and against collaborative groups. It <br />provides a comprehensive assessment of the benefits and drawbacks to <br />collaborative and consensus based processes as opposed to traditional problem - <br />solving approaches. The paper examines threats and opportunit ies that <br />partnerships create for representative democracy. <br /> <br />1 <br />