Finding shared solutions in landscape or natural resource management through social learning: A quasi-experimental evaluation in an Alpine region.

Context: The implementation of landscape-management decisions is often blocked because actors disagree in their perception of the problem at hand. These conflicts can be explained with the concept of problem framing, which argues that actors' problem perspectives are shaped by their interests. Recent literature suggests that social learning through deliberative processes among actors enables shared solutions to complex landscape-management conflicts. Methods: To examine these assumptions, a participatory process on integrated water-resource-management in a Swiss Alpine region was systematically evaluated using a quasi-experimental intervention-research design. The involved actors' problem perspectives were elicited before and after the participatory processes using qualitative interviews and standardized questionnaires. Furthermore, a standardized survey was sent to a sample of regional residents (N = 2000) after the participatory process to measure the diffusion of actors' social learning to the wider public. Results: The data analysis provided systematic evidence that a convergence of involved actors' problem perspectives, which were found to differ considerably before the intervention, had taken place during the participatory process. Furthermore, it determined diffusion effects of actors' social learning to the wider public in terms of its attitude towards participatory regional planning. Conclusions: The findings confirm the expected mechanism of social learning through deliberative processes and demonstrate it as a promising approach to implementing landscape-management decisions successfully. The catalyzing role of shared interests among actors suggests that landscape-management decisions should be implemented by participatory integrated planning on the regional level, which would require a new, strategic role of regional institutions.

Forming social capital--does participatory planning foster trust in institutions?

Participatory planning that includes interest groups and municipal representatives has been presented as a means to deal with the increasing difficulty to reach arrangements due to progressively scarce land resources. Under dispute is whether collaborative forms of planning augment social capital or whether they might actually cause the destruction of such a valuable social commodity. In this paper we focus on trust in institution as a specific dimension of social capital because we argue that this is one of the effects the convenors of such participatory planning procedures are most interested in. We pursue a pre-post design and survey advisory group members of five on-going river-related planning processes in Switzerland. Controlling for generalised trust, we investigate how trust in institutions is affected over time by the quality of such processes and the degree of participation they offer. We find that generalised trust is highly correlated with initial levels of trust and so is process quality. Particularly the latter finding challenges the usually assumed direction of causality according to which process quality influences trust building. Additionally, we find a positive (non-significant) effect of process quality on changes in trust, while a higher degree of participation rather seems to hinder trust building. We suppose this indicates that under the conditions of limited time and resources more attention should be paid to how to improve the quality of participatory processes than putting much effort in increasing the degree of participation.