You are warmly invited to the upcoming RIHN Seminar:
|Date:||May 20th, 2016 (Friday) 15:00 - 17:00|
|Place:||Seminar Room 3 & 4, RIHN( → Access)|
|Title:||Considering individual transformative learning outcomes through natural resource and environmental managemen|
|Abstract||Through growing experience in applying sustainability practices, many now recognize the importance of individual and social learning to achieving sustainability outcomes. An important subset of the learning-for-sustainability approach investigates individual learning and social action through transformative learning theory. Over the last two decades a small group of researchers from the Universities of Manitoba and Winnipeg have contributed to this literature in a number of ways through empirical investigations that have considered contexts such as formal environmental assessment, producing or purchasing local organic food, water management and agricultural extension, local resource management committees, farmer field schools, conservation and development, and participatory irrigation management. In this seminar two papers will be presented to engender discussion, both considering learning through the lens of environmental assessment. This focus is not meant to limit broader discussion about learning in and through sustainability practices in natural resource and environmental management.|
Individual learning through strategic environmental assessment in Kenya
A. John Sinclair, Heidi Walker and Harry Spaling
Kenya was among the first countries in sub-Saharan Africa to formally provide for strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Due to its potential for considering sustainability principles early in decision processes and integrating these into policies, plans and programs, SEA creates a potentially important arena for conversation and learning amongst stakeholders. This research examined two selected SEA case studies to identify the individual learning outcomes attributable to participation in SEA and to consider whether learning outcomes led to social action on sustainability at the community level. Despite some learning conditions being unfulfilled due to weak participatory processes, examples of instrumental, communicative, and transformative learning were identified through a focus group and semi-structured interviews with community participants and public officials. For example, we found that instrumental learning outcomes coalesced around obtaining new skills and information, but data also revealed references to determining cause and effect relationships and task-oriented problem solving. In relation to communicative learning participants cited examples of acquired insights into intra- and inter-community relationships, the importance of information sharing, and the identified need to work together to achieve goals. We also found transformative outcomes that resulted in shifts in one's perceived notion of self or one's relationship with broader societal or environmental surroundings. Some of the learning outcomes identified in the research led to individual and social actions that contribute to sustainability.
Fostering learning and resilience through adaptive management in EA follow-up: The case of three Canadian assessments
Patricia Fitzpatrick and Alan P. Diduck
Abstract:ive impacts prior to construction, scrutiny of the project should not end with project approval. Adopting a robust approach to adaptive management in the design and implementation of follow-up and monitoring programs can foster purposeful learning which continues throughout the lifecycle of the project. The purpose of this presentation is to examine the adaptive management - learning nexus as realized in three recent Canadian assessments: Manitoba Hydro's Bipole III project, Manitoba Hydro's Keeyask Development Project, and Enbridge's Line Three Replacement project. We begin by briefly introducing the evaluative framework against which we measured the espoused approach to adaptive management in follow-up and monitoring plans, following the plan-do-evaluate & learn cycle. Of particular importance are criteria which emphasize transparency in post-approval decisions, and clear mechanisms for learning from monitoring programs.
Our experience shows that there is significant variation with respect to how companies approach adaptive management in the design of follow-up and monitoring programs. One company's proposals reflected adaptive management during the planning stages, although mechanisms during subsequent stages were less clear. The second company's emphasis on compliance monitoring resulted in a relative absence of robust mechanisms for adaptive management post-construction. Thus implementation relies on clear, comprehensive recommendations by reviewers and subsequent licensing conditions by the regulator. Although adaptive management can be used to foster learning, a critical first step is to ensure cross-sector recognition of learning and adaptive management, and subsequent implementation of best practice.
|Contact:||Creation and Sustainable Governance of New Commons through Formation of Integrated Local Environmental Knowledges