James Butler

James Butler


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2015 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EOElisa Oteros-Rozas
Elisa Oteros-Rozas
BMBerta Martín-López
Berta Martín-López
TDTim Daw
Tim Daw
EBErin L. Bohensky
Erin L. Bohensky
JBJames Butler
James Butler
SVSandra P. Vilardy
Sandra P. Vilardy
Oteros-Rozas, E., B. Martín-López, T. Daw, E. L. Bohensky, J. Butler, R. Hill, J. Martin-Ortega, A. Quinlan, F. Ravera, I. Ruiz-Mallén, M. Thyresson, J. Mistry, I. Palomo, G. D. Peterson, T. Plieninger, K. A. Waylen, D. Beach, I. C. Bohnet, M. Hamann, J. Hanspach, K. Hubacek, S. Lavorel and S. Vilardy 2015. Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research: insights and experiences from 23 case studies. Ecology and Society 20(4):32.http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07985-200432

4 July 2015 in Coastal Management
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JBJames Butler
James Butler
RWR. M. Wise
R. M. Wise
TST. D. Skewes
T. D. Skewes
EBE. L. Bohensky
E. L. Bohensky
NPN. Peterson
N. Peterson
WRW. Rochester
W. Rochester
Climate adaptation planning provides an opportunity to enhance the adaptive capacity of stakeholders across multiple levels. However, reviews of standard top-down and bottom-up approaches indicate that the value of multistakeholder involvement is not fully recognized or incorporated into guidelines. Focusing on provinces in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea within the Coral Triangle region, we present a novel integrated top-down and bottom-up planning approach. Based on Participatory Systemic Inquiry the process involves three stages of workshops intentionally designed to promote social learning, knowledge exchange, empowerment and social networks among multilevel stakeholders. Stage 1 workshops engage government, nongovernment and science stakeholders at the provincial level to analyze sub-districts' vulnerability and design appropriate adaptation strategies. Stage 2 engages local government, non-government and community stakeholders within vulnerable sub-districts identified in Stage 1. Stage 3 combines Stage 1 and 2 stakeholders to refine adaptation strategies and design action plans for sub-districts. Evaluation demonstrated that different stakeholder groups' perceptions of community adaptation needs varied significantly, justifying the approach. In terms of adaptive capacity, the primary outcome for all stakeholder groups was innovative ideas, suggesting that social learning and knowledge exchange had occurred. Empowerment was a secondary outcome. We discuss how the approach could be further refined.

1 January 2012 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JBJames Butler
James Butler
ATAlifereti Tawake
Alifereti Tawake
TSTim Skewes
Tim Skewes
LTLavenia Tawake
Lavenia Tawake
VMVic McGrath
Vic McGrath
Butler, J. R. A., A. Tawake, T. Skewes, L. Tawake, and V. McGrath. 2012. Integrating traditional ecological knowledge and fisheries management in the Torres Strait, Australia: the catalytic role of turtles and dugong as cultural keystone species. Ecology and Society 17(4): 34. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05165-170434

1 September 2015 in Journal of Environmental Management
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JBJames Butler
James Butler
Juliette YoungJuliette Young
Juliette Young
IMI.A.G. McMyn
I.A.G. McMyn
BLB. Leyshon
B. Leyshon
IGI.M. Graham
I.M. Graham
CWC. Warburton
C. Warburton
By linking iterative learning and knowledge generation with power-sharing, adaptive co-management (ACM) provides a potential solution to resolving complex social-ecological problems. In this paper we evaluate ACM as a mechanism for resolving conservation conflict using a case study in Scotland, where seal and salmon fishery stakeholders have opposing and entrenched objectives. ACM emerged in 2002, successfully resolving this long-standing conflict. Applying evaluation approaches from the literature, in 2011 we interviewed stakeholders to characterise the evolution of ACM, and factors associated with its success over 10 years. In common with other ACM cases, triggers for the process were shifts in slow variables controlling the system (seal and salmon abundance, public perceptions of seal shooting), and exogenous shocks (changes in legal mandates, a seal disease outbreak). Also typical of ACM, three phases of evolution were evident: emerging local leadership preparing the system for change, a policy window of opportunity, and stakeholder partnerships building the resilience of the system. Parameters maintaining ACM were legal mechanisms and structures, legal power held by government, and the willingness of all stakeholders to reach a compromise and experiment with an alternative governance approach. Results highlighted the critical role of government power and support in resolving conservation conflict, which may constrain the extent of local stakeholder-driven ACM. The evaluation also demonstrated how, following perceived success, the trajectory of ACM has shifted to a 'stakeholder apathy' phase, with declining leadership, knowledge exchange, stakeholder engagement, and system resilience. We discuss remedial actions required to revive the process, and the importance of long term government resourcing and alternative financing schemes for successful conflict resolution. Based on the results we present a generic indicator framework and participatory method for the longitudinal evaluation of ACM applied to conservation conflict resolution.

1 January 2016 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NANick Abel
Nick Abel
RWRussell M. Wise
Russell M. Wise
MCMatthew Colloff
Matthew Colloff
BWBrian H. Walker
Brian H. Walker
JBJames Butler
James Butler
DODeborah O'Connell
Deborah O'Connell
Abel, N., R. M. Wise, M. J. Colloff, B. H. Walker, J. R. A. Butler, P. Ryan, C. Norman, A. Langston, J. M. Anderies, R. Gorddard, M. Dunlop, and D. O’Connell. 2016. Building resilient pathways to transformation when “no one is in charge”: insights from Australia's Murray-Darling Basin. Ecology and Society 21(2):23.http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-08422-210223

1 January 2013 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EBErin L. Bohensky
Erin L. Bohensky
JBJames Butler
James Butler
JDJocelyn Davies
Jocelyn Davies
Bohensky, E. L., J. R. A. Butler, and J. Davies. 2013. Integrating indigenous ecological knowledge and science in natural resource management: perspectives from Australia. Ecology and Society 18(3): 20. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05846-180320