Network Intensities and Power Disparities Influence Policy and Governance Outcomes in Large Carnivore Conservation

Large carnivore conservation (LCC) presents complex social–ecological challenges in environmental governance, yet limited research has examined how institutional design influences conservation outcomes. This study compares community-based conservation (CBC) in India’s tiger conservation with collaborative governance regimes (CGR) in Germany’s wolf conservation. We conducted a policy-network analysis using Net-Map interviews with formal policy actors involved in LCC governance (India: n = 21. Germany: n = 15). Network structures were analyzed across four tie categories—information-sharing, instructions, influence, and advice—while structural and perceived power distributions were compared across governance levels. Results show that information-sharing dominated governance interactions in both countries, whereas advice ties remained weak. India’s CBC exhibited ties concentrated largely within the forest department administration. Despite stronger local stakeholder integration, social justice framing affected direct inclusivity in policy decisions. Germany’s CGR demonstrated fragmented policy centers with most power concentrated at the German federal state levels. Environmental justice framing allows stronger influence by powerful non-state actors but alienates local stakeholders from policy decisions. Discrepancies between structural and perceived power were evident in both systems, highlighting participation–power disconnects within conservation governance. The findings suggest that effective and sustainable LCC governance requires stronger cross level coordination, institutionalized scientific advice mechanisms, and meaningful inclusion of local stakeholders in policy processes for sustainable LCC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainability
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su18136563
Primary Topic
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Network Intensities and Power Disparities Influence Policy and Governance Outcomes in Large Carnivore Conservation

Christine Fürst, John D. C. Linnell, Claudia Sattler, Hannes J Koenig et al.
Sustainability
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
article

Network Intensities and Power Disparities Influence Policy and Governance Outcomes in Large Carnivore Conservation

Christine Fürst, John D. C. Linnell, Claudia Sattler, Hannes J Koenig, Nimisha Srivastava, Ramesh Krishnamurthy
article en

Abstract

Large carnivore conservation (LCC) presents complex social–ecological challenges in environmental governance, yet limited research has examined how institutional design influences conservation outcomes. This study compares community-based conservation (CBC) in India’s tiger conservation with collaborative governance regimes (CGR) in Germany’s wolf conservation. We conducted a policy-network analysis using Net-Map interviews with formal policy actors involved in LCC governance (India: n = 21. Germany: n = 15). Network structures were analyzed across four tie categories—information-sharing, instructions, influence, and advice—while structural and perceived power distributions were compared across governance levels. Results show that information-sharing dominated governance interactions in both countries, whereas advice ties remained weak. India’s CBC exhibited ties concentrated largely within the forest department administration. Despite stronger local stakeholder integration, social justice framing affected direct inclusivity in policy decisions. Germany’s CGR demonstrated fragmented policy centers with most power concentrated at the German federal state levels. Environmental justice framing allows stronger influence by powerful non-state actors but alienates local stakeholders from policy decisions. Discrepancies between structural and perceived power were evident in both systems, highlighting participation–power disconnects within conservation governance. The findings suggest that effective and sustainable LCC governance requires stronger cross level coordination, institutionalized scientific advice mechanisms, and meaningful inclusion of local stakeholders in policy processes for sustainable LCC.

SustainabilityVol. 18(13)
German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (DE), Wildlife Institute of India (IN), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE), Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (DE), University of Inland Norway (NO), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NO), Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (DE)
European Commission, Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, Norges Forskningsråd, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.