The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.
Social Learning for Collaborative Natural Resource Management
Abstract
This article contributes to understanding about the potential and limitations of social learning for collaborative natural resource management. Participants in a deliberative planning process involving a state agency and local communities developed common purpose and collaborative relationships, two requisites of comanagement. Eight process characteristics fostered social learning: open communication, diverse participation, unrestrained thinking, constructive conflict, democratic structure, multiple sources of knowledge, extended engagement, and facilitation. Social learning is necessary but not sufficient for collaborative management. Other requisites for comanagement, including capacity, appropriate processes, appropriate structures, and supportive policies, are necessary to sustain joint action.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE OF SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., & Norberg, J. (2005) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511 · Cited by 5,814
Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems
Lebel, L., Anderies, J. M., Campbell, B., Folke, C., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hughes, T. P., & Wilson, J. (2006) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-01606-110119 · Cited by 1,377
Metadata
- Authors
- Schusler, T. M., Decker, D. J., & Pfeffer, M. J.
- Venue
- Society & Natural Resources
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Published
- 2003-04-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 309-326
- ISSN
- 0894-1920 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1990351148
- Cited by
- 674
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social Learning for Collaborative Natural Resource Management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/08941920309158
- The paper
- Schusler, T. M., Decker, D. J., & Pfeffer, M. J. (2003). Social Learning for Collaborative Natural Resource Management. Society & Natural Resources. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920309158
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
