Social network analysis and the implications for Pontocaspian biodiversity conservation in Romania and Ukraine: A...

Romania and Ukraine share the Black Sea coastline, the Danube Delta and associated habitats, which harbor the endemic, aquatic Pontocaspian biota. Currently, this biota is diminishing both in numbers of species and their abundance because of human activities, and its future persistence strongly depends on the adequacy of conservation measures. Romania and Ukraine have a common responsibility to address the conservation of Pontocaspian biodiversity. The two countries, however have different socio-political and legal conservation frameworks, which may result in differences in the social network structure of stakeholder institutions with different implications for Pontocaspian biodiversity conservation. Here, we study the social network structure of stakeholder organizations involved in conservation of Pontocaspian biodiversity in Romania and the implications of network structure for conservation outcomes. Then we compare the findings from Romania to an earlier similar study from Ukraine. We apply a mix of qualitative and quantitative social network analysis methods to combine the content and context of the interactions with relational measures. We show that Pontocaspian biodiversity plays a minor and mostly incidental role in the inter-organizational interactions in Romania. Furthermore, there is room for improvement in the network structure through e.g. more involvement of governmental and nongovernmental organizations and increased motivation of central stakeholders to initiate conservation actions. Social variables, such as lack of funding, hierarchical, non-inclusive system of conservation governance and continuous institutional reforms in the public sector are consequential for the network relations and structure. Social network of stakeholders in Ukraine is more connected and central stakeholders utilize their favorable positions. However, neither in Ukraine is the Pontocaspian biodiversity a driver of organizational interactions. Consequently, both networks translate into sub-optimal conservation actions and the roads to optimal conservation are different. We end with sketching out conservation implications and recommendations for improved national and cross-border conservation efforts.