Staff Publications

Staff Publications

  • external user (warningwarning)
  • Log in as
  • language uk
  • About

    'Staff publications' is the digital repository of Wageningen University & Research

    'Staff publications' contains references to publications authored by Wageningen University staff from 1976 onward.

    Publications authored by the staff of the Research Institutes are available from 1995 onwards.

    Full text documents are added when available. The database is updated daily and currently holds about 240,000 items, of which 72,000 in open access.

    We have a manual that explains all the features 

    Records 1 - 20 / 33

    • help
    • print

      Print search results

    • export

      Export search results

    Check title to add to marked list
    Doing different things – or doing things differently? : Outcome of the consultation process NLandscape, Five years landscapes – what have we learned?
    Oosten, C.J. van; Roosendaal, Lotte ; Mulerrins, J.L. ; Brasser, André - \ 2020
    Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research (WCDI-20-092 ) - 36 p.
    Capable to govern landscape restoration? Exploring landscape governance capabilities, based on literature and stakeholder perceptions
    Oosten, Cora van; Runhaar, Hens ; Arts, Bas - \ 2019
    Land Use Policy (2019). - ISSN 0264-8377
    Balanced outcomes - Capabilities - Challenges - Governance - Landscape - Legitimacy - Restoration

    Scholars, planners and practitioners worldwide are increasingly recognising that landscape governance is a promising approach for restoring forested landscapes and simultaneously achieving ecological, economic and social objectives. Because of its integrative nature, landscape governance involves actors who restore landscapes while operating in different economic and policy sectors and at various scales. Consequently, the governance of landscape restoration is typically associated with multi-stakeholder dialogue and negotiation on the different types and forms of restoration, and what these mean in terms of necessary trade-offs. In this article we consider landscape governance to be an indispensable element of landscape restoration that deserves specific attention in the restoration debate. Despite the growing body of literature on the challenges faced in landscape restoration, literature on the role of landscape governance in overcoming these challenges is scarce. Scholars often refer to the importance of the capabilities of the landscape actors involved, but without specifying the capabilities required, which actors require them and why. This article aims to fill this knowledge gap by analysing landscape restoration from a governance perspective, focusing on the key challenges faced by landscape governance and the key capabilities required by landscape actors to overcome them. To define landscape governance capabilities, and to identify their dimensions and categorisations, we consult the literature on landscape governance and on capability. We complement this literature review with our empirical data on the landscape governance capabilities as perceived by landscape professionals engaged in landscape restoration projects and programmes. Based on both, we develop an analytical framework that specifies some of the typical capabilities required for addressing the challenges faced by landscape governance aiming to achieve well-balanced and long-lasting landscape restoration legitimately. The framework not only helps fill a knowledge gap but can also be used to structure the debate on landscape restoration by elucidating landscape governance in various contexts.

    AsaseFest – Nature Based Solutions : Workshop report
    Krijgsman, Amanda ; Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2019
    Ghana : Global Landscapes Forum (GLF) - 2 p.
    Types of innovation needed to achieve productive and sustainable landscapes
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2019
    WURcast
    system innovation - landscape - landscape analysis
    From product to place
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2018
    Corrigendum to Strategies for achieving environmental policy integration at the landscape level. A framework illustrated with an analysis of landscape governance in Rwanda
    Oosten, Cora van; Uzamukunda, Assumpta ; Runhaar, Hens - \ 2018
    Environmental Science & Policy 84 (2018). - ISSN 1462-9011 - 1 p.
    The authors regret the mistakes that occurred in the table on page 67. The published version does not show the relation between the strategies employed and the actors involved. While in reality, with regard to productive bricolage (category 1) diversification of land use is mainly employed by farmers and companies; while those allowing for diversification/intensification of land use are the district staff. With regard to institutional bricolage (category 2), the actors informally changing the rules are the companies, while the actors providing institutional space for dialogue are the district staff and authorities. And with regard to institutional entrepreneurship (category 3) the actors formalising dialogue are the district authorities while those institutionalising partnerships are the national authorities.
    Strategies for achieving environmental policy integration at the landscape level. A framework illustrated with an analysis of landscape governance in Rwanda
    Oosten, Cora van; Uzamukunda, Assumpta ; Runhaar, Hens - \ 2018
    Environmental Science & Policy 83 (2018). - ISSN 1462-9011 - p. 63 - 70.
    Institutional entrepreneurship - Institutional/productive bricolage - Landscape governance - Landscape restoration - Policy incoherence - Policy integration
    Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) refers to the incorporation of environmental concerns into sectoral policies in order to reduce policy incoherence and achieve synergies to more effectively address environmental problems such as environmental degradation. Landscape governance can be considered as a specific, spatial manifestation of EPI: it aims to balance agricultural production, nature conservation and livelihood needs at the landscape level through multi-stakeholder decision making. Despite their common focus on policy conflicts, both concepts have been elaborated in largely isolated bodies of literature, while little is known about their common concern of how actors at the landscape level deal with these policy conflicts. This paper addresses this under-explored theme, by drawing from both EPI and landscape governance theories, and adding new insights from institutional and innovation literature. We develop a framework specifying how actors at local, district and national levels deal with policy conflicts and employ strategies to overcome them. We illustrate the analytical framework with a case from Rwanda, where landscape restoration has become a new policy area which has brought sectoral policy conflicts to the fore. We characterise these policy conflicts, and analyse the ways in which local, district and national actors manage to overcome them, by using the landscape as a functional regulatory space for policy integration. What we learn from this case is that EPI is not just designed at national levels by formally assigned policy makers, but it happens in landscapes where landscape actors define their priorities and set hierarchically defined policy objectives to their hand. They flexibly fit in and conform to existing rules yet informally combining these to suit their spatial context; or they entrepreneurially stretch and transform the rules, while seeking alliances with policy makers to have the outcomes institutionalised. In both cases they contribute to solving policy conflicts in both the horizontal and the vertical sense. By doing so, we show the usefulness of the framework for identifying policy conflicts and contributing to policy integration at the landscape level.
    From product to place - Spatializing governance in a commodified landscape
    Oosten, C.J. van; Moeliono, Moira ; Wiersum, K.F. - \ 2018
    Environmental Management 62 (2018)1. - ISSN 0364-152X - p. 157 - 169.
    This article analyzes the potential for landscape governance in large-scale commodity landscapes in Indonesia.
    It conceptualizes landscape governance as the spatialization of governance, which entails the interplay between natural-spatial conditions of place, public-private actor constellations, and policy responses. The article presents the case of a commodified oil palm landscape in West Kalimantan, where a potentially new type of landscape
    governance is emerging out of the experimental activities of an ecologically responsible commercial enterprise. It describes the development of a multifunctional concession
    as a process of productive bricolage involving the creative combination of different land uses within a single productive space. It also describes how such a multifunctional
    concession does not fit into existing policies, which are sectorally defined and embedded in sticky institutional frames. The formation of new public–private institutional
    arrangements needed for the development of multifunctional concessions is a difficult process, as it requires an alignment of contrasting discourses and an integration of
    sectorally-defined policy frames. If successful, it might facilitate the transition from multifunctional concessions to multifunctional landscapes. Such a fundamental change in
    land use and production relations however requires intensive stakeholder engagement and policy dialog. Indonesia’s continuous decentralization process offers opportunities
    for this, as it increasingly provides institutional space at the landscape level, for public and private actors to explore common concerns, and craft public–private arrangements specific to the landscape.
    Participatory Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation of Multi-Stakeholder Platforms in Integrated Landscape Initiatives
    Kusters, Koen ; Buck, Louise ; Graaf, Maartje de; Minang, Peter ; Oosten, Cora van; Zagt, Roderick - \ 2018
    Environmental Management 62 (2018)1. - ISSN 0364-152X - p. 170 - 181.
    Evaluation - Landscape approach - Monitoring - Multi-stakeholder platform - Planning

    Integrated landscape initiatives typically aim to strengthen landscape governance by developing and facilitating multi-stakeholder platforms. These are institutional coordination mechanisms that enable discussions, negotiations, and joint planning between stak4eholders from various sectors in a given landscape. Multi-stakeholder platforms tend to involve complex processes with diverse actors, whose objectives and focus may be subjected to periodic re-evaluation, revision or reform. In this article we propose a participatory method to aid planning, monitoring, and evaluation of such platforms, and we report on experiences from piloting the method in Ghana and Indonesia. The method is comprised of three components. The first can be used to look ahead, identifying priorities for future multi-stakeholder collaboration in the landscape. It is based on the identification of four aspirations that are common across multi-stakeholder platforms in integrated landscape initiatives. The second can be used to look inward. It focuses on the processes within an existing multi-stakeholder platform in order to identify areas for possible improvement. The third can be used to look back, identifying the main outcomes of an existing platform and comparing them to the original objectives. The three components can be implemented together or separately. They can be used to inform planning and adaptive management of the platform, as well as to demonstrate performance and inform the design of new interventions.

    Landscape governance - Integrating policies at the landscape level
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2017
    Landscape governance assessment in Rulindo District, Rwanda : Report of a workshop, Government of Rwanda
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2017
    Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations
    Philippine Landscape Governance learning event Palawan, October 2017 – Report
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2017
    Tropenbos International, Forest Foundation Philippines, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
    Implementing multiple objectives in restoration practice : Inauguration of Jaboury Ghazoul, Prince Bernhard Chair
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2017
    Landscape governance – a framework for assessing and developing landscape governance capabilities
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2017
    Strengthening Landscape Governance Capacities in Bhutan : Worksop Report, UWICE-Bumthang, Bhutan, 13–19 March, 2017
    Oosten, C.J. van; Dorji, Tashi ; Rathore, Brij ; Pradhan, Nawraj ; Choigey, Tenzin - \ 2017
    Kathmandu : International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development - 21
    Landscape Approaches : A State-of-the-Art Review
    Arts, Bas ; Buizer, Marleen ; Horlings, Lumina ; Ingram, Verina ; Oosten, Cora Van; Opdam, Paul - \ 2017
    Annual Review of Environment and Resources 42 (2017). - ISSN 1543-5938 - p. 439 - 463.
    Boundary concept - Conservation and development - Landscape governance - Sense of place - Social-ecological networks - T-shaped interdisciplinary model
    Landscape approaches have become en vogue in the past couple of decades. Originating from nineteenth-century landscape geography, this renewed popularity since the 1980s is fueled by debates on-among others-nature conservation, landscape restoration, ecosystem services, competing claims on land and resources, sectorial land-use policies, sustainable development, and sense of place. This review illuminates the ambition and potential of these landscape approaches for interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration. To show this, we work with a T-shaped interdisciplinary model. After a short history of the landscape approaches, we dive into their key dimensions-from ecology to economics and culture to politics. Thereafter, we bring these dimensions together again and reflect on the integrative potential of landscape approaches for offering common ground to various disciplines and sectors. Two examples of applications are also dealt with: a landscape governance framework and a landscape capability framework.
    Reflection of a collective learning journey : Strengthening KCCEM to build the capacity of Conservation professionals in the Albertine Rift Region NICHE/RWA/025
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2016
    Centre for Development Innovation (Report CDI-16-014 ) - 130
    training - learning - professional competence - colleges - development - nature conservation - wildlife conservation - environmental management - tourism - rwanda - opleiding - leren - vakbekwaamheid - colleges - ontwikkeling - natuurbescherming - wildbescherming - milieubeheer - toerisme - rwanda
    Together with our support team from the Netherlands (Wageningen University), South Africa (South African Wildlife College) and Cameroon (Ecole de Faune) we embarked upon this journey of supporting the Kitabi College of Conservation and Environmental Management in Rwanda (KCCEM). The major building blocks of this learning journey are the development of a business model, the development of organisational capacity to implement the model, and the development of a range of products and services to be delivered with quality. All these three components operationalised within the policy frameworks and institutional context of Rwanda’s conservation, tourism and environmental management sector.
    Reflections on the IPBES Capacity Building Forum 2015 – Opportunities for Dutch support
    Oosten, C.J. van - \ 2016
    Wageningen : Centre for Development Innovation
    From Product to Place: A landscape approach to governing agri-food systems
    Oosten, C.J. van; Bodegom, A.J. van - \ 2014
    In: The food puzzle: pathways to securing food for all / Achterbosch, T.J., van Dorp, M., van Driel, W.F., Groot, J.J., van der Lee, J., Verhagen, A., Bezlepkina, I., Wageningen : Wageningen UR - ISBN 9789462571921 - p. 48 - 50.
    Governing Forest Landscape Restoration : Cases from Indonesia
    Oosten, C.J. van; Gunarso, P. ; Koesoetjahjo, I. ; Wiersum, F. - \ 2014
    Forests 5 (2014)6. - ISSN 1999-4907 - p. 1143 - 1162.
    governance
    Forest landscape restoration includes both the planning and implementation of measures to restore degraded forests within the perspective of the wider landscape. Governing forest landscape restoration requires fundamental considerations about the conceptualisation of forested landscapes and the types of restoration measures to be taken, and about who should be engaged in the governance process. A variety of governance approaches to forest landscape restoration exist, differing in both the nature of the object to be governed and the mode of governance. This paper analyses the nature and governance of restoration in three cases of forest landscape restoration in Indonesia. In each of these cases, both the original aim for restoration and the initiators of the process differ. The cases also differ in how deeply embedded they are in formal spatial planning mechanisms at the various political scales. Nonetheless, the cases show similar trends. All cases show a dynamic process of mobilising the landscape’s stakeholders, plus a flexible process of crafting institutional space for conflict management, negotiation and decision making at the landscape level. As a result, the landscape focus changed over time from reserved forests to forested mosaic lands. The cases illustrate that the governance of forest landscape restoration should not be based on strict design criteria, but rather on a flexible governance approach that stimulates the creation of novel public-private institutional arrangements at the landscape level.
    Check title to add to marked list
    << previous | next >>

    Show 20 50 100 records per page

     
    Please log in to use this service. Login as Wageningen University & Research user or guest user in upper right hand corner of this page.