Place-based learning and community stewardship: A framework for facilitating community engagement
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Community stewardship involves active participation and responsibility from local residents in collectively caring for and managing their shared environment and its resources. The essential role of community stewardship lies in its capacity to foster sustainable behaviours, empowering communities to make informed decisions, and driving positive, lasting impacts towards a more environmentally conscious future. A key challenge presented in much of the related literature is how to engage citizens in community stewardship initiatives. This article aims to address this challenge by exploring the theoretical and practical aspects of community stewardship, using the Heritage Keepers national initiative in Ireland as a case study. The article navigates the complexities of community stewardship, acknowledging diverse perspectives within communities and the importance of scale in stewardship activities. It explores the intersection of place-based learning and stewardship, emphasising the need for a holistic approach.
The article is based on a five-year practitioner-led doctoral project undertaken while the primary author was embedded in a community stewardship initiative in the west of Ireland. Various methodologies are employed that reflect both practitioner and community-based research principles. The methodology and findings presented were guided by the central research question: How can place-based learning enhance community stewardship? Emerging from the empirical research conducted as part of a change-oriented community-university research initiative, this article presents a practical framework to support the process of community stewardship. Specifically, the article identifies five key elements central to the community stewardship process; these include: Care, Knowledge, Facilitation, Agency, and Action. Enhancing and under-pinning each of these is Collective Action. By synthesising these elements, the framework offers valuable insights for researchers and practitioners seeking to implement similar community stewardship initiatives, moving community stewardship beyond a conceptualisation to a series of sequential and operational steps that can be implemented across a variety of contexts.
Article Details
Issue
Section
Authors who submit articles to this journal from 31st March 2014 for publication, agree to the following terms:
a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Open Access Citation Advantage Service). Where authors include such a work in an institutional repository or on their website (ie. a copy of a work which has been published in a UTS ePRESS journal, or a pre-print or post-print version of that work), we request that they include a statement that acknowledges the UTS ePRESS publication including the name of the journal, the volume number and a web-link to the journal item.
d) Authors should be aware that the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License permits readers to share (copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the work) for any purpose, even commercially, provided they also give appropriate credit to the work, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. They may do these things in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests you or your publisher endorses their use.
For Volume 6 (2013) and before, the following copyright applied:
Articles published by UTSePress are protected by copyright which is retained by the authors who assert their moral rights. Authors control translation and reproduction rights to their works published by UTSePress. UTSePress publications are copyright and all rights are reserved worldwide. Downloads of specific portions of them are permitted for personal use only, not for commercial use or resale. Permissions to reprint or use any materials should be directed to UTSePress.
References
Ardoin, N. M. (2014). Exploring Sense of Place and Environmental Behavior at an Ecoregional Scale in Three Sites. Ecology, 42(3), 425–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s
Bennett, E. M., Solan, M., Biggs, R., McPhearson, T., Norström, A. V., Olsson, P., Pereira, L.,
Bennett, N. J., Whitty, T. S., Finkbeiner, E., Pittman, J., Bassett, H., Gelcich, S., & Allison, E. H. (2018). Environmental Stewardship: A Conceptual Review and Analytical Framework. Environmental Management, 61(4), 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0993-2
Berkes, F. (2009). Indigenous ways of knowing and the study of environmental change. In Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand (Vol. 39, Issue 4, pp. 151–156). https://doi.org/10.1080/03014220909510568
Author. (2023)
Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the “value-action gap” in environmental policy: Tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4(3), 257–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839908725599
Bonnett, M. (2023). Environmental consciousness, nature and the philosophy of education : matters arising. Environmental Education Research, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2225807
Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In Defense of Being “Native”: The Case for Insider Academic Research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106289253
Campbell, L. K., Svendsen, E. S., & Roman, L. A. (2016). Knowledge Co-production at the Research–Practice Interface: Embedded Case Studies from Urban Forestry. Environmental Management, 57(6), 1262–1280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0680-8
Carnell, R., & Mounsey, C. (2022). Stewardship and the Future of the Planet; Promise and Paradox. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003219064
Couceiro, D., Hristova, I. R., Tassone, V., Wals, A., & Gómez, C. (2023). Exploring environmental stewardship among youth from a high-biodiverse region in Colombia. Journal of Environmental Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2023.2238649
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Dawson, N. M., Coolsaet, B., Sterling, E. J., et. al. (2021). The role of indigenous peoples and local communities in effective and equitable conservation. Ecology and Society, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12625-260319
Foster-Fishman, P. G., Fitzgerald, K., Brandell, C., Nowell, B., Chavis, D., & Van Egeren, L. A. (2006). Mobilizing residents for action: The role of small wins and strategic supports. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38(3–4), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-006-9081-0
Friis, C., Hernández-Morcillo, M., Baumann, M., Coral, C., Frommen, T., Ghoddousi, A., Loibl, D., & Rufin, P. (2023). Enabling spaces for bridging scales: scanning solutions for interdisciplinary human-environment research. Sustainability Science, 18(3), 1251–1269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01271-3
Gallay, E., Marckini-Polk, L., Schroeder, B., & Flanagan, C. (2016). Place-Based Stewardship Education: Nurturing Aspirations to Protect the Rural Commons. Peabody Journal of Education, 91(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2016.1151736
Grilli, G., & Curtis, J. (2021). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviours: A review of methods and approaches. In Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (Vol. 135). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110039
Gulliver, R. E., Star, C., Fielding, K. S., & Louis, W. R. (2022). A systematic review of the outcomes of sustained environmental collective action. Environmental Science and Policy, 133, 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.03.020
Hajer, M., Nilsson, M., Raworth, K., Bakker, P., Berkhout, F., de Boer, Y., Rockström, J., Ludwig,
K., & Kok, M. (2015). Beyond cockpit-ism: Four insights to enhance the transformative potential of the sustainable development goals. Sustainability (Switzerland), 7(2), 1651–1660. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7021651
Haverkamp, J. (2021). Where’s the Love? Recentring Indigenous and Feminist Ethics of Care for Engaged Climate Research. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, 14(2). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/ijcre.v14i2.7782
Hughes, C. (1999). Facilitation in Context: Challenging some basic principles. Studies in Continuing Education, 21(1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037990210102
Huoponen, A. (2023). From concern to behavior: barriers and enablers of adolescents’ pro-environmental behavior in a school context. Environmental Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2180374
Jans, L. (2021). Changing environmental behaviour from the bottom up: The formation of pro-environmental social identities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101531
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Kothe, E. J., Ling, M., North, M., Klas, A., Mullan, B. A., & Novoradovskaya, L. (2019). Protection motivation theory and pro-environmental behaviour: A systematic mapping review. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(4), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12271
Kruijf, J. V. de, Verbrugge, L., Schröter, B., den Haan, R. J., Cortes Arevalo, J., Fliervoet, J., Henze, J., & Albert, C. (2022). Knowledge co-production and researcher roles in transdisciplinary environmental management projects. Sustainable Development, 30(2), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2281
Lopez, C. W., & Weaver, R. (2023). What influences where volunteers practice environmental stewardship? The role of scale(s) in sorting stewards. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 66(9), 1983–2008. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2022.2049596
Massey, D. (2004). The responsibilities of place. In Local Economy (Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 97–101). https://doi.org/10.1080/0269094042000205070
Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2005). Who is driving development? Reflections on the transformative potential of asset-based community development. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 26(1), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2005.9669031
McFarlane, C. (2009). Translocal assemblages: Space, power and social movements. Geoforum, 40(4), 561–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.05.003
Moser, S., & Bader, C. (2023). Why do people participate in grassroots sustainability initiatives? Different motives for different levels of involvement. Frontiers in Sustainability, 3(994881). https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2022.994881
Nelson, S. M., Ira, G., & Merenlender, A. M. (2022). Adult Climate Change Education Advances Learning, Self‐Efficacy, and Agency for Community‐Scale Stewardship. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031804
Nelson, T., & McFadzean, E. (1998). Facilitating problem-solving groups: facilitator competences. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 19(2), 72–82.
Newman, L., & Dale, A. (2005). The role of agency in sustainable local community development. Local Environment, 10(5), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830500203121
Nordhaus, T., & Shellenberger, M. (2009, November 16). Apocalypse fatigue: Losing the public on climate change. Yale Environment 360. https://e360.yale.edu/features/apocalypse_fatigue_losing_the_public_on_climate_change
Oinonen, I., Seppälä, T., & Paloniemi, R. (2023). How does action competence explain young people’s sustainability action? Environmental Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2241675
Ojala, M. (2017). Hope and anticipation in education for a sustainable future. Futures, 94, 76-84.
Pascual, U., McElwee, P. D., Diamond, S. E., Ngo, H. T., Bai, X., Cheung, W. W. L., Lim, M., Steiner, N., Agard, J., Donatti, C. I., Duarte, C. M., Leemans, R., Managi, S., Pires, A. P. F., Reyes-García, V., Trisos, C., Scholes, R. J., & Pörtner, H. O. (2022). Governing for Transformative Change across the Biodiversity-Climate-Society Nexus. BioScience, 72(7), 684–704. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biac031
Peçanha Enqvist, J., West, S., Masterson, V. A., Haider, L. J., Svedin, U., & Tengö, M. (2018). Stewardship as a boundary object for sustainability research: Linking care, knowledge and agency. In Landscape and Urban Planning (Vol. 179, pp. 17–37). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.07.005
Peters, G. J. Y., Ruiter, R. A. C., & Kok, G. (2013). Threatening communication: A critical re-analysis and a revised meta-analytic test of fear appeal theory. Health Psychology Review, 7(SUPPL1). https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2012.703527
Pretty, J. (2011). Interdisciplinary progress in approaches to address social-ecological and ecocultural systems. Environmental Conservation, 38(2), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000937
Relph, E. (2008). Senses of place and emerging social and environmental challenges. In Sense of place, health and quality of life (pp. 51-64). Routledge.
Saunders, C. (2013). Environmental Networks and Social Movement Theory. Bloomsbury Academic.
Sharples, M., Taylor, J., Vavoula, G., & Giasemi, V. A. (2006). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age. In The Sage Handbook of Elearning Research (pp. 221–247). https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190276
Smith, G., & Sobel, D. (2010). Bring It Home. Educational Leadership, 68(1), 38–43.
Sockhill, N. J., Dean, A. J., Oh, R. R. Y., & Fuller, R. A. (2022). Beyond the ecocentric: Diverse values and attitudes influence engagement in pro-environmental behaviours. People and Nature, 4(6), 1500–1512. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10400
Stoknes, P. E. (2014). Rethinking climate communications and the “psychological climate paradox.” Energy Research and Social Science, 1, 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.03.007
Tait, A. (2021). Climate Psychology and its Relevance to Deep Adaptation. In J. Bendell & R. Read (Eds.), DEEP ADAPTATION Navigating the Realities of Climate Chaos (pp. 105–123). Polity Press.
Toomey, A. H. (2023). Why facts don’t change minds: Insights from cognitive science for the improved communication of conservation research. Biological Conservation, 278, 109886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109886
Tsevreni, I. (2011). Towards an environmental education without scientific knowledge: an attempt to create an action model based on children's experiences, emotions and perceptions about their environment. Environmental Education Research, 17(1), 53-67.
West, S., Haider, L. J., Masterson, V., Enqvist, J. P., Svedin, U., & Tengö, M. (2018). Stewardship, care and relational values. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 35, 30-38.