Structure of the Dissertation

In what follows, the dissertation will proceed to test the hypotheses presented above and begin to address the practical and theoretical puzzles described earlier. The process for doing so is organized in the following manner. In Chapter Two, I will lay out some of the theoretical groundings that undergird the study. I draw upon theories of resilience that were originally developed in the ecological literature. These focus on how social-ecological systems respond to disturbances and view systems as having multiple equilibria. With changing conditions (the fast and slow variables in a system), systems can respond in nonlinear ways, resulting in unexpected changes in the system. When combined with similar theories of robustness, drawn from the engineering literature, this study focuses on the role of institutions in social-ecological systems. When these institutions are sufficiently robust or long-enduring, one can then begin to understand how the governance mechanisms of social-ecological systems respond to disturbances, the

39

adaptive capacity of a system in the face of different types of disturbances, and how responses vary with the type of disturbance. The chapter also draws upon theories of cooperation to see how governance systems that cross borders work together to solve mutual problems collectively. These theories seek to answer such questions as “when does cooperation emerge, and when do governments elect to respond unilaterally”. This leads the study to theories of governance and polycentricity. The notion of polycentricity supports the idea that successful institutions, however we choose to define success, match the level of the scale of effects of the situation that they try to manage. It is the governance version of the adage that we should “use the right tool for the job”. To close the chapter, a recent trend in the literature on adaptive governance will also be examined.

Chapter Three begins to discuss some of the methodology behind the study and introduces a typology for studying disturbances by drawing on the theories of the previous chapter. From hundreds of key informant interviews, the data show dozens of disturbances confronting the transboundary protected areas and institutional responses to the disturbances. By looking at the types of disturbances and when and where cross-border collaboration and

cooperation emerge, the chapter begins to test the first hypothesis regarding the types of

disturbances that engender cooperation and those that do not. By looking at several disturbances, both social and ecological, the study compares empirical results from what is expected from theory. Some of the disturbances have no formal response. Others have responses from one governmental group. Still others have more coordinated responses. Interesting findings emerge in comparing these response patterns between the two cases.

Chapter Four proceeds from the analysis in the previous chapter and starts to look at the two cases and where cooperation emerges in both. In doing so, we test the second and third hypotheses, comparing levels of operational and political cooperation between the two cases. Again, assessing the hypotheses comes from in-depth analyses of several disturbance-response events in both transfrontier parks. It draws on several of the most frequently mentioned disturbances. The study builds on these findings to delve into how bottom-up and top-down processes interact and influence social capital, institutional evolution, and cooperation. In doing so, the study intends to inform our understanding of robustness and long-enduring institutions and how different types of structures enable effective responses to some types of disturbances while struggling to deal with other disturbances.

The final chapter has three primary goals. First, it summarizes the findings from the previous chapters. Here, I revisit the key research questions and hypotheses. The chapter then re-examines the evidence for and against the hypotheses. Second, I make some broader

40

generalizations about polycentricity and multi-level governance, the robustness of institutions, how disturbance-response events influence institutional evolution, and conversely how

institutional evolution creates path dependency which in turn can lead to fragility in response to some types of disturbances. The study concludes by returning to some of the practical questions asked by park scientists and managers. The intent is to provide some insights into the governance of transboundary protected areas and to give preliminary answers to the questions of when, where, and how to work cooperatively across a border.

41

2. Chapter Two: Exploring Theories and Concepts in Transboundary

Conservation

“Institutions are like fortresses. They must be well-designed and manned” (Popper, 1966, p. 126).

“I have one great fear in my heart, that one day when they are turned to loving, they will find we are turned to hating.” Alan Paton, Cry the Beloved Country (p. 40)

In the pursuit of understanding how institutions change in response to disturbance, this thesis draws insight from multiple theoretical backgrounds. The foundation for this research is based on four theoretical approaches – theories of resilience and robustness, theoretical

perspectives of cooperation and coordination from several disciplines, game theory, and the concepts of polycentricity and adaptive governance within the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework. In this setting, I refer to theories as positing “relationships among the variables and mak[ing] predictions about likely outcomes” (Schlager, 1999, p. 240). By contrast, frameworks are devices to discern the elements and relationships between the elements within a system. The challenge emerges from drawing on ideas from diverse disciplines, some of which refer to worldviews and philosophies as theories. In what follows, theories will refer to explanations of phenomena that allow for prediction and that can ideally be tested. “Theories” that are more speculation or belief than testable explanation are labeled as concepts or ideas. The goal for this study of transboundary conservation is to connect theory to praxis empirically.

The core of the study draws upon the literature of resilience and robustness in examining how actors use institutions to respond to disturbance. An orthodox fit for any study of a complex social-ecological system, theories of resilience play a large part, particularly in examining the impacts of disturbance upon the system. Also, in differentiating between the two case studies, theories of resilience facilitate examining these cases as distinct states of similar systems. In this way, important control variables emerge from the data through the analysis, enabling insights previously hidden in the minutiae. As the heart of the study focuses on changing rules, norms, and strategies in response to these disturbances, recent developments on the robustness of institutions serve to highlight when and how man-made conventions for organizing social interactions and relationships in some places impede “progress” through inertia and resistance to change while at other times they may collapse and facilitate the transition to different institutional arrangements. These transitions can be partially explained by drawing on engineering ideas and

42

theories of robustness which enable us to see how people optimize institutions in the face of particular types of disturbances while becoming increasingly fragile and vulnerable to other types of disturbance. Studying the resilience of a social-ecological system and the robustness of long- enduring institutions, in turn, links directly to system sustainability, the central tenet of

biodiversity conservation.

The second theoretical approach uses theories and concepts of cooperation, coordination, and collaboration from both the international relations literature and the geography literature to understand the institutional responses mentioned above and to compare how, when, and to what extent cooperation between actors occurs as a reaction to various types of disturbances. Previous studies have demonstrated that cooperation in transboundary conservation depends on the creation of social capital and the building of trust through open communication, collectively working toward common goals, and focusing on realistic levels of collaboration (Zbicz, 1999; Fall, 2005). This study hopes to build upon these past works when used in conjunction with theories of robustness and resilience.

In expanding our theoretical grasp of institution building in transboundary conservation, game theoretic analysis provides a third conceptual approach not often used in studies of

conservation (Lejano, 2006). Using games as simplified metaphors for what happens in reality, we will attempt to explore and explain levels of policy level (collective-choice level) and operational level cooperation and multi-level games that interact between these two levels. Adaptations and transformations in responses to disturbance can arise as policy entrepreneurs help to reshape the games played.

The final theoretical approach used takes the opposite tack of the international relations theories mentioned earlier. By looking at the ground-up development of institutions and multiple seats of authority and sources of power, polycentricity links many of the theoretical findings of the above mentioned explorations within the IAD framework and aggregates them in such a way as to move towards actionable ways forward for managers and practitioners working from the local-level and expanding to broader levels of governance. One way forward uses adaptive governance as a foundation for future transboundary conservation advancement. According to Brunner et al. (2005), adaptive governance relies on open decision-making, local level support, multiple points of view, and the incorporation of science into management.