Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30879271›Full record

ArticleAmbio2020

Are bottom-up approaches good for promoting social-ecological fit in urban landscapes?

Johan P Enqvist, Maria Tengö, Örjan Bodin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johan P EnqvistStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B, 10691, Stockholm, Sweden. johan.enqvist@su.se.
Maria TengöStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B, 10691, Stockholm, Sweden.
Örjan BodinStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B, 10691, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bottom-up approaches are often presented as a remedy to environmental governance problems caused by poorly aligned social institutions and fragmented ecosystems. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence demonstrating how such social-ecological fit might emerge and help achieve desirable outcomes. This paper combines quantitative social-ecological network analysis with interviews to investigate whether bottom-up approaches in lake governance improve the fit. We study groups of residents seeking to improve management of a network of lakes in Bengaluru, India. Results show that 23 'lake groups' collaborate in a way that aligns with how lakes are hydrologically connected, thus strengthening the social-ecological fit. Three groups founded around 2010 have mobilized support from municipal officers and introduced an ecosystem-based approach to lake management that recognizes their ecological functions and dependence on, the broader hydrological network. These groups have also changed how other lake groups operate: groups founded after 2010 are more collaborative and more prone to contribute to social-ecological fit compared to the older lake groups. This paper demonstrates the utility of a theoretically informed method for examining the impact of bottom-up approaches, which, we argue, is important for a more informed perspective on their relevance and potential contribution to urban environmental governance.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemEnvironmental PolicyIndiaLakesBottom-up approachesEnvironmental governanceGlobal SouthNetwork analysisSocial–ecological fitUrban lakes

Identifiers

PMID30879271
PMCPMC6888795
OpenAlexW2921399219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.