Applying social network analysis to stakeholder analysis in Japan’s natural resource governance: two endangered species conservation activity cases

References

• Aasetre J. 2006. Perceptions of communication in Norwegian forest management. For Pol and Econ. 8:81–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adger WN. 2003. Social capital, collective action and adaptation to climate change. Econ Geog. 79:387–404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armitage DR, Plummer R, Berkes F, Arthur RI, Charles AT, Davidson-Hunt IJ, Diduck AP, Doubleday NC, Johnson DS, Marschke M, et al. 2009. Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Front Ecol Environ. 7:95–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnstein SR. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. J Amer Inst Plan. 35:216–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkes F. 2009. Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manag. 90:1692–1702.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodin Ö, Prell C. 2011. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Borg R, Toikka A, Primmer E. 2015. Social capital and governance: a social network analysis of forest biodiversity collaboration in Central Finland. For Pol Econ. 50:90–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Everett MG. 2000. Models of core/periphery structures. Soc Net. 21:375–395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Foster PC. 2003. The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology. J Manag. 29:991–1013.
   Google Scholar
• Calvet-Mir L, Maestre-Andrés S, Molina JL, Van den Bergh J. 2015. Participation in protected areas: a social network case study in Catalonia, Spain. Ecol Soc. 20:45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson L, Sandström A. 2008. Network governance of the commons. Int J Commons. 2:33–54.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman J. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. Amer J Soc. 94:95–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crona B, Hubacek K. 2010. The right connections: how do social networks lubricate the machinery of natural resource governance?. Ecol Soc. 15:18. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art18/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies AL, White RM. 2012. Collaboration in natural resource governance: reconciling stakeholder expectations in deer management in Scotland. J Environ Manag. 112:160–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Lopez TT. 2001. Stakeholder management for conservation projects: a case study of Ream National Park. Cambodia Environ Manag. 28:47–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dougill AJ, Fraser EDG, Holden J, Hubacek K, Prell C, Reed MS, Stagl S, Stringer LC. 2006. Learning from doing participatory rural research: lessons from the Peak District National Park. J Agr Econ. 57:259–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernstson H, Barthel S, Andersson E, Borgström ST. 2010. Scale-crossing brokers and network governance of urban ecosystem services: the case of Stockholm. Ecol Soc. 15:28. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art28/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernstson H, Sörlin S, Elmqvist T. 2008. Social movements and ecosystem services: the role of social network structure in protecting and managing urban green areas in Stockholm. Ecol Soc. 13:39. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art39/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-Amado LR, Pérez MR, Iniesta-Arandia I, Dahringer G, Reyes F, Barrasa S. 2012. Building ties: social capital network analysis of a forest community in a biosphere reserve in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecol Soc. 17:3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grilli G, Garegnani G, Poljanec A, Ficko A, Vettorato D, De Meo I, Paletto A. 2015. Stakeholder analysis in the biomass energy development based on the experts’ opinions: the example of Triglav National Park in Slovenia. Folia Forest Polonia. 57:173–186.
   Google Scholar
• Grimble R, Wellard K. 1997. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agr Sys. 55:173–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanneman RA, Riddle M. 2005. Introduction to social network methods. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Hanneman/publication/235737492_Introduction_to_social_network_methods/links/0deec52261e1577e6c000000.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hatakeyama T. 2006. Lecture of nature conservation law. 2nd ed. Sapporo: Hokkaido University Press. Japanese.
   Google Scholar
• Holt AR, Moug P, Lerner DN. 2012. The network governance of urban river corridors. Ecol Soc. 17:25.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas A, Saarinen N, Saarikoski H, Leskinen LA, Hujala T, Tikkanen J. 2010. Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for regional forest programmes in Finland. For Pol Econ. 12:213–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauber TB, Decker DJ, Kunth BA. 2008. Social networks and the community-based natural resource management. Environ Manag. 42:677–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lienert J, Schnetzer F, Ingold K. 2013. Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. J Environ Manag. 125:134–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier C, Lindner T, Winkel G. 2014. Stakeholders’ perception of participation in forest policy: a case study from Baden-Württemberg. Land Use Pol. 39:166–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandarano LA. 2009. Social network analysis of social capital in collaborative planning. Soc Nat Resour. 22:245–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev. 22:853–886.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mushove P, Vogel C. 2005. Heads or tails?: stakeholder analysis as a tool for conservation area management. Glob Environ Chan. 15:184–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newig J, Günther D, Pahl-Wostl C. 2010. Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecol Soc. 15:24. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art24/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodin Ö, Crona BI. 2008. Management of natural resources at the community level: exploring the role of social capital and leadership in a rural fishing community. World Devel. 36:2763–2779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodin Ö, Crona BI. 2009. The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference?. Glob Environ Chan. 19:366–374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodin Ö, Crona BI, Ernstson H. 2006. Social networks in natural resource management: what’s there to learn from a structural perspective?. Ecol Soc. 11:r2. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paletto A, Balest J, Demeo I, Giacovelli G, Grilli G. 2016. Power of forest stakeholders in the participatory decision making process: a case study in Northern Italy. Acta Silv Lign Hung. 12:9–22.
   Google Scholar
• Paletto A, Hamunen K, De Meo I. 2015. Social network analysis to support stakeholder analysis in participatory forest planning. Soc Nat Resour. 28:1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M. 2009. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour. 22:501–518.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretty J. 2003. Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science. 302:1912–1914.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretty J, Ward H. 2001. Social capital and the environment. World Devel. 29:209–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastogi A, Badola R, Hussain SA, Hickey GM. 2010. Assessing the utility of stakeholder analysis to protected areas management: the case of Corbett National Park, India. Biol Cons. 143:2956–2964.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed MS. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Cons. 141:2417–2431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Prell C, Quinn CH, Stringer LC. 2009. Who’s in and why?: a typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag. 90:1933–1949.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romanelli A, Massone HE, Escalante AH. 2011. Stakeholder analysis and social-biophysical interdependencies for common pool resource management: la Brava Wetland (Argentina) as a case study. Environ Manag. 48:462–474.
   Google Scholar
• Sandström A. 2011. Social networks, joint image building, and adaptability: the case of local fishery management. In: Ö B, Prell C, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; p. 288–321.
   Google Scholar
• Sandström A, Carlsson L. 2008. The performance of policy networks: the relation between network structure and network performance. Pol Stud J. 36:497–527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandström A, Rova C. 2010a. The network structure of adaptive governance: a single case study of a fish management area. Int J of Commons. 4:528–551.
   Google Scholar
• Sandström A, Rova C. 2010b. Adaptive co-management networks: a comparative analysis of two fishery conservation areas in Sweden. Ecol Soc. 15:14. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art14/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider M, Scholz J, Lubell M, Mindruta D, Edwardsen M. 2003. Building consensual institutions: networks and the National Estuary Program. Amer J Pol Sci. 47:143–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott J. 2000. Social network analysis. 2nd ed. London: Sage Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka A. 2006. Stakeholder analysis of river restoration activity for eight years in a river channel. Biodiv Cons. 15:2787–2811.
   Google Scholar
• Turnhout E, Van Bommel S, Aarts N. 2010. How participation creates citizens: participatory governance as performative practice. Ecol Soc. 15:26. Available from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art26/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman S, Faust K. 1994. Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yamaki K. 2015. Network governance of endangered species conservation: a case study of Rebun Lady’s-Slipper. J Nat Cons. 24:83–92.
   Google Scholar
• Yamaki K, Shoji Y, Hayashi M. 2011. Governance of natural resource management: a case of Rebun Lady-slipper conservation. J For Econ. 57:2–11 (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Young JC, Jordan A, Searle KR, Butler A, Chapman DS, Simmons P, Watt AD. 2013. Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation?. Biol Cons. 158:359–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar