The hard life of collaborative governance in protected areas: a comparative analysis between Cuenca Alta and Mincio regional parks

Collaborative Governance (CG) is an inclusive governing approach involving diverse actors in deliberative and multilateral policy making processes (Ansell and Gash 2008; Huang 2020). In the realm of protected areas, CG is often seen as an effective mode to manage or mitigate conflicting interests underlying the management of resource-rich and environmentally significant territories (Fisher et al. 2020; Ulibarri 2023). To this extent, in many European countries, such as Spain and Italy, various configurations of CG have spread in the management of protected areas, geared towards addressing emerging controversial issues through face-to-face confrontation, trust-building and the sharing of common medium and long-term policy goals. The underlying hypothesis of decentralisation is that ad hoc management bodies on a local scale, in collaboration with local governments and non-institutional actors, are more effective in ensuring the protection of areas and less permeable to private interests than centralised patterns (Mukhlis and Perdana 2022). Nonetheless, challenges arise in balancing citizens' and businesses' freedom to invest in these areas while maintaining biodiversity preservation. Conflicts among regional governments, municipalities, farmers, real estate entities, and environmental associations threaten CG stability (Fisher et al. 2020; Ulibarri 2023). Despite theoretical focus on environmental protection policies, empirical studies exploring factors influencing CG configurations in protected areas are limited. The paper conducts a comparative analysis of two regional parks, Cuenca Alta del Manzanares Park and Parco del Mincio, using Most Similar System Design. Indeed, despite similar contexts, these parks exhibit distinct CG patterns – hierarchical in Cuenca Alta and characterized by face-to-face dialogue and negotiation in Mincio Park. The paper addresses research questions on contextual factors leading to different CG arrangements and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of these governance styles. To this end, it is structured into five sections, covering the theoretical framework, methodology, case studies, factors influencing CG effectiveness, and the characteristics of the two governance styles. The conclusion highlights the potential for in-depth CG analysis in protected areas management to contribute to policy and governance studies.