A Relational Approach to Landscape Stewardship: Towards a New Perspective for Multi-Actor Collaboration

Jessica Cockburn, Eureta Rosenberg, Athina Copteros, Susanna Francina (Ancia) Cornelius, Notiswa Libala, Liz Metcalfe and Benjamin van der Waal
Additional contact information
Jessica Cockburn: Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa
Eureta Rosenberg: Environmental Learning Research Centre, Department of Education, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa
Athina Copteros: Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa
Susanna Francina (Ancia) Cornelius: Living Lands, P.O. Box 2153, Clareinch 7740, South Africa
Notiswa Libala: Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa
Liz Metcalfe: Living Lands, P.O. Box 2153, Clareinch 7740, South Africa
Benjamin van der Waal: Geography Department, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa

Land, 2020, vol. 9, issue 7, 1-20

Abstract: Landscape stewardship is increasingly understood within the framing of complex social-ecological systems. To consider the implications of this, we focus on one of the key characteristics of complex social-ecological systems: they are relationally constituted, meaning that system characteristics emerge out of dynamic relations between system components. We focus on multi-actor collaboration as a key form of relationality in landscapes, seeking a more textured understanding of the social relations between landscape actors. We draw on a set of ‘gardening tools’ to analyse the boundary-crossing work of multi-actor collaboration. These tools comprise three key concepts: relational expertise, common knowledge, and relational agency. We apply the tools to two cases of landscape stewardship in South Africa: the Langkloof Region and the Tsitsa River catchment. These landscapes are characterised by economically, socio-culturally, and politically diverse groups of actors. Our analysis reveals that history and context strongly influence relational processes, that boundary-crossing work is indeed difficult, and that doing boundary-crossing work in smaller pockets within a landscape is helpful. The tools also helped to identify three key social-relational practices which lend a new perspective on boundary-crossing work: 1. belonging while differing, 2. growing together by interacting regularly and building common knowledge, and 3. learning and adapting together with humility and empathy.

Keywords: boundary-crossing; integrated landscape management; multi-stakeholder collaboration; relational agency; relationality; social-ecological systems (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/7/224/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/7/224/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:7:p:224-:d:383128

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().