Interdependent Social-Ecological Systems and Adaptive Governance 153facilitating the flow of information and knowledge from multiple sources to be
applied in the local context of ecosystem management. Social networks often
emerge as self-organizing processes (i.e. not implemented by external pressure)
involving key persons who share some common interests although they represent
different stakeholder groups (McCay, 2002). Leadership has been showed to be of
great significance for public network management. Network leadership and guid-
ance is very different from the command and control of hierarchical management
(Agranoff and McGuire, 2001). It requires steering for the network to hold together
(Bardach, 1998) and a balancing of social forces and interests that enables self-or-
ganization (Kooiman, 1993).
However, social-ecological systems that rely on one or a few key stewards might
be vulnerable to change. This is exemplified by Peterson (2002) who describes the
management of the long-leaf pine forest in Florida and how the desirable state or
the stability domain of the forest is maintained by fire as a main structuring vari-
able. Fire frequency has decreased in the area and long-leaf pine forest ecosystems
therefore risk entering into other less desirable ecosystem states. The forest is within
a military base and an air force general has been a key steward for maintaining the
forest through active burning. When the general left his position, a new general
who did not share the interests and convictions of his predecessor replaced him.
However, some of the personnel who had taken an active part in ecosystem man-
agement had developed knowledge and affection for the long-leaf pine forests.
They also used a scientist’s model of forest dynamics to successfully convince the
new general of the importance of fire management for maintaining the desirable
stability domain of a long-leaf pine forest ecosystem. This example shows how
structures and processes such as social networks can provide a social memory of
ecosystem management that sustains adaptive capacity in times of change.
The strength of networks depends on the ability of the key persons to exchange
information with other stakeholders, identify common interests and gather sup-
port for such interests (e.g. ecosystem management) within their own organization
or stakeholder group. Bardach (1998) describes how leaders play different roles in
systems of strategic interaction which include eliciting common goals, creates an
atmosphere of trust, brokers organizational and individual contributions, and
deploys energies in accord with some strategic plan. Organizations that do not
appear to have much in common may develop crucial links thanks to these key
persons who form the nodes of different, loosely connected, networks. In his sem-
inal paper, Granovetter (1973) argued that weak ties, i.e. the bridges between dif-
ferent stakeholder groups, may be the most valuable for generating new knowledge
and identifying new opportunities and hence create a macro effect: ‘those to whom
we are weakly tied are more likely to move in circles different from our own and will
thus have access to information different from that which we receive’ (p1371).
Applied to ecosystem management, we argue that a loosely connected network
involving a diversity of stakeholders is important for gathering different types of
ecological knowledge, build moral and political support (legitimacy) from ‘non-
environmental’ sectors, and attain legal and financial support from various institutions