13 Transcending the Loading Dock Paradigm—Rethinking …
259
project itself (bound by contract), as this increases the likelihood that research results
will be adopted after the end of the project cycle (Lux et al. 2019). Numerous studies
on transdisciplinary research indicate that an early and continuous involvement of
practitioners in the research process (e.g. mutual problem definition, co-design of
the research process) correlate with the higher societal impact of (transdisciplinary)
research (Lux et al. 2019; Jong et al. 2016).
For SLM, such intermediaries are introduced as “key actors of land use” (KALU).
In the model, they constitute both the main addressee of external T&I actions and
the co-producers of knowledge in internal T&I activities. KALU can be individuals
or (representatives of) institutions that play a decisive or influential role in the land
use context such as.
(a) individuals or collective institutions that possess direct decisive power over land
use options on a given plot (e.g. farmers, agricultural enterprises, forest owners,
land owners in general).
(b) institutions that steer land use by setting the legislative and regulative framework
of land use in a given spatial context (e.g. planning authorities, administrations).
(c) institutions that influence land use by setting decisive context conditions and/or
incentives for land use decisions (e.g. markets, politics), and
(d) individuals or collective institutions that influence the societal discourse of land
use in society. The latter covers the full range of institutions such as NGOs,
political parties, professional organisations, the media, civil society actors,
businesses, and science-policy interface organisations. Individuals can also be
considered key actors, e.g. if they own the capacity and commitment to achieve
sustainable land use change in a given context or if they make a significant
contribution to filling crucial knowledge gaps to enhance the understanding of
the issue under investigation.
Identifying the “right” KALU is one of the key tasks in SLM. It requires a thorough stakeholder analysis that is backed up by scientific methods. The heterogeneity
of the actor landscape evolves from the way in which land governance is performed
in post-modern societies. Land as a commonality is the subject of an inextricable
network of different regulations and actors’ accesses and interests. A multitude of
institutions (usually at different scales; from international to local) may have a direct
or indirect impact on land use on a certain plot of land. In addition, context conditions such as market forces or environmental conditions such as climate change have
an indirect (if not direct) impact on land use practices. Also, as in most democratic
systems, significant changes in land use regulations presuppose democratic negotiation processes that can substantially extend project time schedules. In sum, every
change in this highly regulated action arena must consider the limiting borders, as
well as the enacting and supportive forces. Apart from the fact that this should be
part of an expectation management process conducted in every project at an early
stage, I suggest three strategic policy approaches (or impact pathways) that provide
orientation and support strategic project decisions for T&I.
Each approach constitutes an ideal path to influence land use decisions made by
KALUs. They should not be considered as an exclusive strategy that leaves other
259
project itself (bound by contract), as this increases the likelihood that research results
will be adopted after the end of the project cycle (Lux et al. 2019). Numerous studies
on transdisciplinary research indicate that an early and continuous involvement of
practitioners in the research process (e.g. mutual problem definition, co-design of
the research process) correlate with the higher societal impact of (transdisciplinary)
research (Lux et al. 2019; Jong et al. 2016).
For SLM, such intermediaries are introduced as “key actors of land use” (KALU).
In the model, they constitute both the main addressee of external T&I actions and
the co-producers of knowledge in internal T&I activities. KALU can be individuals
or (representatives of) institutions that play a decisive or influential role in the land
use context such as.
(a) individuals or collective institutions that possess direct decisive power over land
use options on a given plot (e.g. farmers, agricultural enterprises, forest owners,
land owners in general).
(b) institutions that steer land use by setting the legislative and regulative framework
of land use in a given spatial context (e.g. planning authorities, administrations).
(c) institutions that influence land use by setting decisive context conditions and/or
incentives for land use decisions (e.g. markets, politics), and
(d) individuals or collective institutions that influence the societal discourse of land
use in society. The latter covers the full range of institutions such as NGOs,
political parties, professional organisations, the media, civil society actors,
businesses, and science-policy interface organisations. Individuals can also be
considered key actors, e.g. if they own the capacity and commitment to achieve
sustainable land use change in a given context or if they make a significant
contribution to filling crucial knowledge gaps to enhance the understanding of
the issue under investigation.
Identifying the “right” KALU is one of the key tasks in SLM. It requires a thorough stakeholder analysis that is backed up by scientific methods. The heterogeneity
of the actor landscape evolves from the way in which land governance is performed
in post-modern societies. Land as a commonality is the subject of an inextricable
network of different regulations and actors’ accesses and interests. A multitude of
institutions (usually at different scales; from international to local) may have a direct
or indirect impact on land use on a certain plot of land. In addition, context conditions such as market forces or environmental conditions such as climate change have
an indirect (if not direct) impact on land use practices. Also, as in most democratic
systems, significant changes in land use regulations presuppose democratic negotiation processes that can substantially extend project time schedules. In sum, every
change in this highly regulated action arena must consider the limiting borders, as
well as the enacting and supportive forces. Apart from the fact that this should be
part of an expectation management process conducted in every project at an early
stage, I suggest three strategic policy approaches (or impact pathways) that provide
orientation and support strategic project decisions for T&I.
Each approach constitutes an ideal path to influence land use decisions made by
KALUs. They should not be considered as an exclusive strategy that leaves other