IAS_6.4.4.5_785

Governance approaches themselves can be a significant source of conflict in invasive species management, particularly when various groups of influencers or interested stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples and local communities are not consulted, their knowledge is not taken into account, or they are not involved in implementation actions that affect them (Crowley et al., 2017a; Estévez et al., 2015; Lynch, 2020). Adaptive-collaborative management benefits from good governance, and vice versa. Plummer et al. (2013) examined the literature on adaptive collaborative management for governance content and found multiple relationships: among others, good governance is necessary to facilitate adaptive collaborative management, which helps facilitate a shift to good governance and can operationalize governance, while stressing multi-level, multi-sector and multi-stakeholder and Indigenous Peoples and local communities engagement (section 6.7). Common themes that emerge include the need for: accountability and legitimacy, the involvement of diverse stakeholder groups and Indigenous Peoples and local communities and bridging organizations, the need to achieve organizational fit, interplay and scale; for adaptiveness, flexibility and learning, as well as social learning and knowledge sharing (drawn together in section 6.7).
In addition to giving citizens and stakeholders a voice in decisions that affect them, it is claimed that collaborative approaches to environmental governance can reduce conflict, build trust and facilitate learning among citizens and stakeholders, increasing the likelihood that decisions are implemented on the ground and over the long-term (e.g., Beierle, 2002; De Vente et al., 2016; Derak et al., 2018; M. S. Reed, 2008; M. S. Reed et al., 2018). However, stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples and local communities involvement can only be successful when tailored to the problem and context (section 6.4.1). In some cases, stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples and local communities need to be involved in “deeper, two-way, co-productive engagement (possibly over long time-scales)” (Shackleton, Adriaens, et al., 2019). This may be the case, for example, when coordination of the management of biological invasions occurs across multiple land tenures or land-use settings (Bryce et al., 2011; Shackleton et al., 2015), or where cooperation problems are evident and thus the potential for conflict or lack of cooperation is high. These conditions may call for stakeholder and Indigenous Peoples and local communities’ involvement in the co-design or co-development of risk assessments, strategies and management approaches, co-creation of knowledge and co-implementation.
Several factors seem to be key to the success of adaptive-collaborative governance for biological invasions. One of them is the breadth of involvement of stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples and local communities, ensuring that all stakeholders with influence and interests are included lends governance the legitimacy it needs for policy implementation. Another factor is the deliberative and transparent nature of the collaborative process, as well as its ability to account for and manage power imbalances and conflicts (Newig et al., 2018). Finally, high levels of social interaction among the participating actors favour positive outcomes and help to build commitments, knowledge and trust (S. M. Alexander et al., 2018; Bodin, 2017; Newig et al., 2018). These in turn are instrumental for collectively addressing coordination and collaboration problems. In other words, one key factor that is needed to achieve successful collective action is to build appropriate governance networks where relevant actors, individuals and/or organizations are included and engaged with each other (DeFries & Nagendra, 2017). Other critical factors that affect the effectiveness of networks include consensus around goals and the need for “network competencies,” or specializations, among the network’s participants, such as research competence (Lubell et al., 2017).
Engagement with stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples and local communities is therefore an essential element of integrated governance of biological invasions (section 6.7). While it may not be possible, due to time or resource constraints, to develop effective adaptive-collaborate governance networks, deep stakeholder and Indigenous Peoples and local communities engagement can be built into any governance and policy development approach.