1 / 21

The case of Diaccia Botrona Wetland Nature Reserve

The case of Diaccia Botrona Wetland Nature Reserve. PhD Students: Adele Del Sordi and Fabiana Sacchetti Course of “Decisional Processes and Public Policy” Professor: Bruno Dente PhD Programme in “Political Systems and Institutional Change” – XXIII cycle A.Y. 2008/09

lynsey
Télécharger la présentation

The case of Diaccia Botrona Wetland Nature Reserve

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The case of Diaccia Botrona Wetland Nature Reserve PhD Students: Adele Del Sordi and Fabiana Sacchetti Course of “Decisional Processes and Public Policy” Professor: Bruno Dente PhD Programme in “Political Systems and Institutional Change” – XXIII cycle A.Y. 2008/09 IMT Institute for Advanced Studies, Lucca

  2. The phases • 1976 – March 1990 • March 1990 – May 1993 • May 1993 – February 1996

  3. First phase: 1976 – March 1990 • Main problem: whether to transform the Diaccia Botrona marshlands into a protected area • Stake: status and management of the area (if) • Pattern of interaction: confrontation

  4. First phase: 1976 – March 1990 (2) List of actors

  5. First phase: 1976 – March 1990 (3) List of actors

  6. First phase: 1976 – March 1990 (4) The form of the network Judicial Authorities Federcaccia Ministry of Environment Private Businesses Ministry of Finance Provincial Gov’t of Grosseto WWF LIPU Local authorities European Community Environmental associations Density: Σκi/n2-n = 18/(112-11) = 0.16

  7. First phase: 1976 – March 1990 (5) Complexity = 3 x 4 = 12

  8. Second phase: March 1990 – May 1993 • Main problem: find the most appropriate solution for transforming the Diaccia Botrona marshlands into a protected area • Stake: status and management of the area (how) • Pattern of interaction: bargaining

  9. Second phase: March 1990 – May 1993 (2) List of actors

  10. Second phase: March 1990 – May 1993 (3) List of actors

  11. Second phase: March 1990 – May 1993 (4) The form of the network Federcaccia EU Commissioner LIPU WWF Local authorities Provincial Gov’t of Grosseto Ministry of Environment Regional Gov’t of Tuscany Green Party Constitutional Court Density: Σκi/n2-n = 20/(102-10) = 0.22

  12. Second phase: March 1990 – May 1993 (4) Complexity = 4 x 5 = 20

  13. Third phase: May 1993 – Feb 1996 • Main problem: given the consensus reached on the idea of protecting the area, the problem is how to implement the conservation of the Diaccia Botrona marshlands • Stake: implementation of the conservation program, including a social and economic development plan of the area • Pattern of interaction: bargaining/collaboration

  14. Third phase: May 1993 – Feb 1996 (2) List of actors

  15. Third phase: May 1993 – Feb 1996 (3) List of actors

  16. Third phase: May 1993 – Feb 1996 (4) The form of the network Arcicaccia Federcaccia Ministry of Environment WWF Provincial Gov’t of Grosseto Local authorities Judicial Authorities Regional Gov’t of Tuscany Density: Σκi/n2-n = 15/(82-8) = 0.27

  17. Third phase: May 1993 – Feb 1996 (5) Complexity = 3 x 5 = 15

  18. Critical factors for decisional success • Initial conditions: • Non turbulent environment (+) • No plenty of resources for the promoter (-) • No collaboration between actors (-) • Zero-sum game (-) but potentially turning into a positive-sum game because it is a regulatory policy (concentrated costs and distributed benefits) the benefits of the winners can be much higher than the costs of the losers.

  19. Strategies for decisional success • Manipulating the pattern of interaction • From confrontation to bargaining/collaboration • First phase: just unilateral initiatives of the opposing parts directed to the competent bodies • Then: Public Meeting (1990), attempts of coordination after Rutelli’s ordinance (1993), Public Meeting (Aug 1993), Protocol of Agreement (March 1994)

  20. Strategies for decisional success (2) • Manipulating the stake • Enlargement of the stake from a simple “preservation of the area” to a larger “protection”, including a social and economic development plan and the granting of an hunting area.

  21. Strategies for decisional success (3) • Manipulating the network • Increasing the Density (0.16 0.2 0.27) through the organization of collective events involving the main actors in order to rapproach their positions and overcome the mistrust • The increase of Complexity is not a crucial factor but plays a marginal role • On the contrary, a critical factor is that in the II phase the local authorities enter the scene with a new role (ally promoter/director), with the change of the stake and the inclusion of a socio-economic development plan

More Related