Participative Multi-level Governance Schemes for Common Landscape Management in Austria: A Transaction Costs Analysis

Abstract

"European cultural landscapes are highly valued for their ecological, productive, recreational and cultural functions. Related streams of benefits, however, do stop neither at national boundaries nor at those of private properties. Therefore, multiple governance levels are involved in regulating landscape development (from the European convention on landscape development or the international Convention on Biological Diversity to local informal agreements on landscape management). A recently completed PhD thesis analysed multi-level co-management schemes in Austria that shift some effort for decision-making from public to private actors. Based on transaction cost theory, we analyse the efforts, benefits and risks of participation as perceived by the individuals involved. Two Cultural Landscape Projects of Lower Austria, two local steering groups in Natura 2000-areas in Tyrol and a LIFE-Nature Project in Salzburg served as case studies. Besides explorative interviews, a survey of participants of the analysed project teams and steering groups respectively, problem centred interviews with drop-outs, interviews with process leaders, observation and document analysis were applied and their results triangulated regarding intra- and inter-case consistency and validity. All case studies indicated a positive evaluation of the collaboration and the perceived benefit (e.g. contributing to nature protection, bringing in ones own knowledge and experiences), an adequate effort for process activities and relative low risks of participation (e.g., lacking agreements on procedures and scope for decision-making, missing implementation of decisions and dominating individuals). However, half of the active participants would not spend more time for this collaboration. The results showed a significant positive correlation between time effort and benefits and significant negative correlations between effort and risks as well as benefits and risks. A comparison of professionally involved participants and volunteers highlighted disproportional high opportunity costs of volunteers. Volunteers also tended to benefit less from their participation. Moreover the bigger part of interviewed dropouts did not have the feeling to be able to benefit from the participation and estimated significant higher risks than the active participants. Finally, we present some recommendation for more successful multi-level landscape governance."