Contesting and integrating multiple ways of knowing in collaborative natural resource governance

Authors: LEVY, MOLLY - Boise State University; HILLIS, VICKEN - Boise State University; Wilmer, Hailey; Porensky, Lauren; PELLATZ, DAVE - Thunder Basin Grasslands Prairie Ecological Association; SOM CATELLANO, REBECCA - Boise State University

Submitted to: Environmental Management
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 7/2/2026
Publication Date: 7/22/2026
Citation: Levy, M.C., Hillis, V., Wilmer, H., Porensky, L.M., Pellatz, D., Som Catellano, R. 2026. Contesting and integrating multiple ways of knowing in collaborative natural resource governance. Environmental Management. 76. Article 256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-026-02558-2.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-026-02558-2

Interpretive Summary: Natural resource management often relies on collaborative governance. However, it is difficult to integrate diverse viewpoints and forms of knowledge from different actors. This study investigates how stakeholders engage with scientific, experiential, and administrative ways of knowing (WoKs) and focuses on WoKs within a collaborative public rangelands management context in the Thunder Basin ecoregion of Wyoming, USA. Methods include qualitative interviews, a focus group, and participant observation. Findings suggest that roles, values, and social positions shape how knowledge is created and used. Research on WoKs can help improve collaborations. This study demonstrates that it is important to recognize how knowledge is produced, negotiated, and used in decision-making.

Technical Abstract: Collaborative governance is increasingly used to address complex natural resource issues, yet integrating diverse knowledge systems remains a persistent challenge. This study investigates how stakeholders engage with scientific, experiential, and administrative ways of knowing (WoKs) in a collaborative effort to manage public rangelands in the Thunder Basin ecoregion of Wyoming, USA. Applying a qualitative case study approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews, a focus group, and participant observation to examine how different WoKs inform land management goals, shape perceptions of knowledge legitimacy, and influence attitudes toward collaboration. Findings indicate that knowledge is strategically interpreted and relationally constructed through participants’ institutional roles, values, and social positions. While collaboration created opportunities for mutual learning, it also surfaced tensions around credibility, authority, and representation. Stakeholders who embraced epistemic humility and treated knowledge as a tool for governance were better positioned to foster integration. These findings highlight the importance of attention to power dynamics, institutional norms, and the relational work necessary to support inclusive and effective governance. The insights from this case contribute to a growing recognition that meaningful collaboration requires moving beyond stakeholder diversity to critical engagement with how knowledge is produced, negotiated, and used in decision-making.