TY - JOUR
T1 - “Everyone Has a Truth”
T2 - Forms of Ecological Embeddedness in an Interorganizational Context
AU - Baudoin, Lucie
AU - Arenas, D.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research has benefitted from the financial support of the FI-AGAUR grant (Grant credentials 2018 FI_B 00258, 2019 FI_B1 00166 and 2020 FI_B2 00127). This research project has been reviewed and approved by ESADE ethics committee (Approval numbers RE01-003-2018 and RE01-003-2018-rev1).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.
PY - 2023/6
Y1 - 2023/6
N2 - Environmental issues involve a wide range of actors often brought together in processes of collaborative environmental governance. Nonetheless, such actors frequently disagree on the definition of these issues. Even sharing an environmental concern does not preclude disagreements. This paper takes the concept of ecological embeddedness—so far analyzed in a single community—to explore differences of views among actors involved in collaborative environmental governance. It does so by pursuing a qualitative study of French River Basin Committees. Our findings show that Basin Committee members take radically different approaches to ecological matters and therefore put forward opposing diagnoses and prognoses of their shared ecological context. We identify three dimensions of ecological embeddedness that are critical for collaborative governance, namely: ecological engagement; ecological ontology; and ecological knowledge. Our results indicate that different forms of ecological embeddedness can fuel long-lasting disagreements despite members’ shared appreciation of collaboration. This is especially so if the deliberations focus on ‘facts’—with actors pitting their ecological knowledge against one another—without facilitating discussions on ecological engagement and ontology.
AB - Environmental issues involve a wide range of actors often brought together in processes of collaborative environmental governance. Nonetheless, such actors frequently disagree on the definition of these issues. Even sharing an environmental concern does not preclude disagreements. This paper takes the concept of ecological embeddedness—so far analyzed in a single community—to explore differences of views among actors involved in collaborative environmental governance. It does so by pursuing a qualitative study of French River Basin Committees. Our findings show that Basin Committee members take radically different approaches to ecological matters and therefore put forward opposing diagnoses and prognoses of their shared ecological context. We identify three dimensions of ecological embeddedness that are critical for collaborative governance, namely: ecological engagement; ecological ontology; and ecological knowledge. Our results indicate that different forms of ecological embeddedness can fuel long-lasting disagreements despite members’ shared appreciation of collaboration. This is especially so if the deliberations focus on ‘facts’—with actors pitting their ecological knowledge against one another—without facilitating discussions on ecological engagement and ontology.
KW - Collaborative governance
KW - Deliberation
KW - Ecological embeddedness
KW - Environmental disputes
KW - Scientific knowledge
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133709344&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10551-022-05187-x
DO - 10.1007/s10551-022-05187-x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85133709344
SN - 0167-4544
VL - 185
SP - 263
EP - 280
JO - Journal of Business Ethics
JF - Journal of Business Ethics
IS - 2
ER -