Literature Review
Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Management
Authors: Prell, Christina, Hubacek, Klaus, Reed, Mark (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)The increasing use of stakeholder analysis in natural resource management reflects a growing recognition that stakeholders can and should influence environmental decision making. Stakeholder analysis can be used to avoid inflaming conflicts, ensure that the marginalization of certain groups is not reinforced, and fairly represent diverse interests. We present a case study from the Peak District National Park in the United Kingdom, where we used social network analysis to inform stakeholder analysis. This information helped us identify which individuals and categories of stakeholder played more central roles in the network and which were more peripheral. This information guided our next steps for stakeholder selection. The article ends with a discussion on the strengths and limitations of combining social network analysis with stakeholder analysis. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
Prell_StakeholderSNAinResourceManagment_2009.pdf
Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Management
Authors: Prell, Christina, Hubacek, Klaus, Reed, Mark (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)The increasing use of stakeholder analysis in natural resource management reflects a growing recognition that stakeholders can and should influence environmental decision making. Stakeholder analysis can be used to avoid inflaming conflicts, ensure that the marginalization of certain groups is not reinforced, and fairly represent diverse interests. We present a case study from the Peak District National Park in the United Kingdom, where we used social network analysis to inform stakeholder analysis. This information helped us identify which individuals and categories of stakeholder played more central roles in the network and which were more peripheral. This information guided our next steps for stakeholder selection. The article ends with a discussion on the strengths and limitations of combining social network analysis with stakeholder analysis. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
Prell_StakeholderSNAinResourceManagment_2009.pdf
Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Management
Authors: Prell, Christina, Hubacek, Klaus, Reed, Mark (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)The increasing use of stakeholder analysis in natural resource management reflects a growing recognition that stakeholders can and should influence environmental decision making. Stakeholder analysis can be used to avoid inflaming conflicts, ensure that the marginalization of certain groups is not reinforced, and fairly represent diverse interests. We present a case study from the Peak District National Park in the United Kingdom, where we used social network analysis to inform stakeholder analysis. This information helped us identify which individuals and categories of stakeholder played more central roles in the network and which were more peripheral. This information guided our next steps for stakeholder selection. The article ends with a discussion on the strengths and limitations of combining social network analysis with stakeholder analysis. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
Prell_StakeholderSNAinResourceManagment_2009.pdf
Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification
Authors: Freeman, Linton (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)The intuitive background for measures of structural centrality in social networks is reviewed and existing measures are evaluated in terms of their consistency with intuitions and their interpretability. Three distinct intuitive conceptions of centrality are uncovered and existing measures are refined to embody these conceptions. Three measures are developed for each concept, one absolute and one relative measure of the centrality of positions in a network, and one relenting the degree of centralization of the entire network. The implications of these measures for the experimental study of small groups is examined. [Edit this posting]
http://leonidzhukov.net/hse/2014/socialnetworks/papers/freeman79-centrality.pdf
Freeman1979_CentralityinSocialNetworksConceptualClarification.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf
Toward a Network Perspective of the Study of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems
Authors: Janssen, Marco, Bodin, Orjan, Anderies, John, Elmqvist, Thomas, Ernstson, Henrik, McAllister, Ryan, Olsson, Per, Ryan, Paul (Uploaded by: Jocelyne Helbling)ABSTRACT. Formal models used to study the resilience of social-ecological systems have not explicitly included important structural characteristics of this type of system. In this paper, we propose a network perspective for social-ecological systems that enables us to better focus on the structure of interactions between identifiable components of the system. This network perspective might be useful for developing formal models and comparing case studies of social-ecological systems. Based on an analysis of the case studies in this special issue, we identify three types of social-ecological networks: (1) ecosystems that are connected by people through flows of information or materials, (2) ecosystem networks that are disconnected and fragmented by the actions of people, and (3) artificial ecological networks created by people, such as irrigation systems. Each of these three archytypal social-ecological networks faces different problems that influence its resilience as it responds to the addition or removal of connections that affect its coordination or the diffusion of system attributes such as information or disease. [Edit this posting]
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
Janssen2006_TowardNetworkPerspectiveofResilienceSES.pdf