Power, influence and structure in Natura 2000 governance networks. A comparative analysis of two protected areas in...

Successful management of complex social-ecological landscapes overlapping Natura 2000 sites requires collaboration between various actors such as law enforcement agencies, NGOs and enterprises. Natura 2000 governance is stimulated by central actors (e.g., Natura 2000 administrators), with successes and failures of management activities depending on the capacity of the network leader to implement a collaborative approach to environmental governance. By using social network analysis, we analysed the cooperation, information flow and capacity for collective action within Natura 2000 governance networks within two Romanian protected areas: Lower Siret Floodplain and Iron Gates Natural Park. The two networks represent protected areas managed by different types of organisations (i.e., Lower Siret Floodplain - by an NGO, Iron Gates Natural Park - by a public entity). Taking into consideration that NGOs may favour an adaptive co-management, while the public bodies may take a top-down management approach, we hypothesize that Lower Siret Floodplain will have a more cohesive and collaborating network compared to Iron Gates Natural Park, and that there will be a greater representation of private and NGO sector in the network coordinated by Lower Siret Floodplain. Contrary to our expectations, the results show that collaboration patterns are similar in the two networks, although they are governed by two different types of institutions, both being less participative than expected, with low involvement of NGOs and private stakeholders. Furthermore, Lower Siret Floodplain network is surprisingly more centralized around a small number of public authorities, and the pre-existing power of public bodies likely inhibit the capacity of the NGO to collaborate with private stakeholders. We also found lower collaboration levels between actors in the network periphery with other organisations from the same cluster, denoting a clear top-down approach of the management in both networks. Our findings suggest that delegating the protected areas administration to NGOs, a solution to increase the use of co-management in protected areas, does not solve the poor representation of private stakeholders.