Paper long abstract:

In the fields of environmental policy and nature conservation it is more are less accepted that various civil society organizations, other societal groups and scientists should cooperate in some way. This paper argues that there is a strong need for 'boundary objects', concepts and practices whose meaning is flexible enough to be acceptable to different parties and strong enough to bring and hold these parties together. However, the use of boundary objects needs reflection

In this paper we analyze the development of several boundary objects. One example is the concept of 'natural limits' and the practice known as the 'hands on the tap approach', which were used to resolve the conflict on gas exploitation in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Large companies, governmental agencies and NGO's accepted the need of certain limits to prevent ecosystems damage. The precise meaning of natural limits was a matter of discussion. Another example is a new method of collecting mussel seed as part of a transition to sustainable mussel fishery, which is accepted by both fishermen and nature conservationists. Also in other contexts,for instance water management, standard setting, wildlife management and rcological restoration, boundary objects appeared to be useful. However, they do not operate in a societal vacuum and not all boundary objects may function successfully. We will discuss the need to evaluate the relationship between different aspects of boundary objects: values, knowledge, practices and social structures, including the concept of power.