Stakeholder perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation in Lake Pandin: implications for integrated environmental governance

Abstract

Freshwater lake restoration increasingly depends on governance systems that effectively integrate institutional capacity with community participation; however, limited empirical evidence explains how stakeholders perceive these governance mechanisms within small-lake ecosystems. This study examined stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, integrated environmental governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration in Lake Pandin, San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines. Using a quantitative descriptive–correlational design, data were collected from 140 purposively selected stakeholders through a validated questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation, and multiple linear regression. The findings revealed that stakeholders perceived ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, integrated environmental governance, and lake ecosystem restoration as highly evident. Regression analysis demonstrated that citizen participation significantly predicted integrated environmental governance, whereas ecological policy effectiveness did not independently predict governance outcomes. At the dimensional level, community-based restoration activities, public engagement in decision-making, and policy enforcement emerged as the strongest contributors to perceived governance effectiveness. Correlation analysis further showed significant positive relationships among ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, integrated environmental governance, and perceived restoration outcomes, with multi-stakeholder collaboration exhibiting the strongest association. These findings indicate that effective freshwater ecosystem restoration is more strongly associated with participatory, collaborative, and adaptive governance than with institutional policy mechanisms alone. Because the study is based on stakeholder perceptions, the findings should be interpreted as assessments of governance effectiveness rather than direct ecological measurements. The study advances environmental governance scholarship by proposing a context-sensitive, perception-informed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework that integrates institutional coordination, stakeholder participation, and adaptive management to strengthen governance and support sustainable restoration in community-managed freshwater lake ecosystems.

Introduction

Freshwater lake ecosystems worldwide are increasingly threatened by anthropogenic pressures such as pollution, land-use change, deforestation, unsustainable tourism, agricultural intensification, and climate-related disturbances. These pressures degrade water quality, reduce biodiversity, alter ecosystem functioning, and diminish the ecological services that freshwater lakes provide to surrounding communities. As socio-ecological systems, freshwater lakes support biodiversity conservation, water security, fisheries, recreation, ecotourism, and local livelihoods, making their sustainable management a global environmental priority (Arthington et al., 2023; Katusiime and Schütt, 2020; Cianci-Gaskill et al., 2024). Consequently, the long-term sustainability of these ecosystems depends not only on ecological restoration initiatives but also on effective environmental governance that integrates institutional capacity, adaptive policy implementation, and meaningful stakeholder participation.

Ecological policy effectiveness plays a fundamental role in environmental governance by translating environmental legislation into concrete conservation and restoration actions. Effective governance mechanisms including policy enforcement, financial support, and regulatory compliance provide the institutional foundation necessary for protecting freshwater ecosystems, improving environmental quality, and sustaining restoration initiatives. Strong policy enforcement discourages environmentally harmful practices, adequate financial support enables restoration and monitoring programs, while regulatory compliance promotes accountability among government agencies, local communities, and resource users (Baste, 2021; Huambachano et al., 2025; Mekouar, 2024). Nevertheless, environmental policies alone rarely guarantee successful ecological outcomes. Their effectiveness depends on institutional capacity, inter-agency coordination, stakeholder cooperation, adequate financial resources, and the extent to which governance mechanisms respond to local environmental conditions (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Ogunkan, 2022; Liu et al., 2023; Johnstone, 2023; McElwee et al., 2024).

Beyond institutional mechanisms, citizen participation has become a cornerstone of contemporary environmental governance because it strengthens policy legitimacy, transparency, accountability, and collective stewardship of natural resources. Public engagement in environmental decision-making, community-based restoration activities, and environmental awareness programs enable local communities to contribute knowledge, monitor environmental conditions, and participate actively in ecosystem restoration. Previous studies have demonstrated that collaborative governance enhances restoration outcomes by fostering shared responsibility and strengthening institutional legitimacy (Cheng et al., 2022; Kosamu et al., 2022; Yadav et al., 2022). However, meaningful participation extends beyond simply creating opportunities for involvement. Effective participatory governance requires transparent institutions, sustained organizational support, equitable stakeholder representation, and governance structures capable of translating community input into environmental decision-making and policy implementation.

While environmental governance has traditionally been evaluated using ecological indicators and policy implementation outcomes, increasing attention has been given to stakeholder perceptions as an important dimension of governance assessment. Governance processes such as institutional coordination, transparency, accountability, collaboration, and participation are experienced directly by the individuals and organizations responsible for implementing, supporting, and complying with environmental policies. Consequently, stakeholders’ perceptions provide valuable insights into the legitimacy, responsiveness, and perceived effectiveness of governance systems, particularly where objective ecological improvements require many years to become observable (Hampton-Smith et al., 2024; OECD, 2023; Newig et al., 2023). Perception-based assessments do not replace ecological monitoring or policy evaluation; rather, they complement objective indicators by capturing how governance interventions are understood and experienced by those directly involved in environmental management. Understanding these perceptions is particularly important because stakeholder confidence influences policy acceptance, compliance, collaborative behavior, and long-term commitment to ecosystem conservation.

In the Philippines, freshwater lake ecosystems are increasingly affected by rapid urbanization, tourism development, agricultural expansion, and competing resource demands that threaten ecological integrity and environmental sustainability. One notable example is Lake Pandin, a freshwater crater lake in San Pablo City, Laguna, recognized for its ecological significance, community-based ecotourism, and local conservation initiatives. Despite its environmental and socio-economic importance, Lake Pandin faces multiple governance challenges, including increasing tourism pressure, improper solid waste disposal, nutrient loading from surrounding agricultural activities, resource overutilization, overlapping institutional responsibilities, and limited financial and technical resources for environmental management (Cianci-Gaskill et al., 2024). These challenges highlight the importance of understanding not only how governance mechanisms are implemented but also how they are perceived by the diverse stakeholder groups responsible for managing, supporting, and benefiting from lake conservation initiatives.

Existing research has consistently demonstrated the importance of ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation in promoting environmental governance and ecosystem restoration. However, previous studies have predominantly examined policy implementation, regulatory compliance, ecological restoration, or citizen participation as separate dimensions of environmental management (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Cheng et al., 2022; Kosamu et al., 2022; Brillo, 2023a; Brillo, 2023c; Cianci-Gaskill et al., 2024). Comparatively fewer studies have investigated how different stakeholder groups perceive the effectiveness of ecological policies, participatory governance, and integrated environmental governance within a unified analytical framework, particularly in small freshwater lake ecosystems in developing countries. Furthermore, limited empirical evidence exists regarding the relationships among stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, integrated environmental governance, and perceived ecosystem restoration outcomes. This gap constrains the development of context-specific governance strategies that recognize both institutional performance and stakeholder experiences in environmental management (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023).

Recognizing that stakeholder perceptions constitute an important component of governance evaluation, this study examines how key stakeholder groups perceive ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG), and lake ecosystem restoration in Lake Pandin, San Pablo City, Laguna. Specifically, the study assesses stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness in terms of policy enforcement, financial support, and regulatory compliance; evaluates perceived citizen participation through public engagement in decision-making, community-based restoration activities, and environmental awareness; and examines the statistical relationships among these perceived governance constructs. Rather than evaluating objective ecological conditions or directly measuring policy performance, the study investigates stakeholders’ assessments of governance effectiveness using perception-based survey data collected from multiple stakeholder groups.

This study contributes to environmental governance scholarship in several ways. First, it provides a comprehensive multi-stakeholder assessment of perceived environmental governance by integrating the perspectives of local government officials, community members, non-governmental organizations, environmental experts, researchers, and private-sector stakeholders directly involved in lake management. Second, it extends previous governance research by examining the relationships among perceived ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration within a single analytical framework. Finally, the study proposes a context-sensitive, perception-informed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework that may assist policymakers, environmental managers, and local communities in strengthening collaborative governance for freshwater lake restoration. Because the findings are derived from stakeholders’ perceptions measured through structured survey responses, the results should be interpreted as assessments of governance experiences rather than direct measurements of ecological condition or policy effectiveness.

Scope and limitations of the study

This study investigates how stakeholders directly involved in lake governance including local government officials, community members, nongovernmental organization (NGO) representatives, environmental experts and researchers, and private sector stakeholders perceive the effectiveness of ecological restoration initiatives in Lake Pandin, San Pablo City, Laguna. By incorporating perspectives from multiple stakeholder groups with distinct roles in environmental governance, policy implementation, conservation, and resource utilization, the study provides a multi-stakeholder assessment of the institutional and community factors shaping ecosystem restoration. This approach enables a more comprehensive evaluation of governance dynamics than relying on the perspectives of a single stakeholder group.

However, the study is limited to the geographic context of Lake Pandin, which may influence the transferability of findings to other lake ecosystems with different socio-ecological conditions. Rather than a limitation, this case-specific focus provides an in-depth understanding of governance dynamics within a localized freshwater system. Furthermore, the study relies primarily on self-reported survey data, which may be subject to response biases such as social desirability and perception-based evaluation. As such, the findings reflect stakeholders’ perceptions of restoration outcomes rather than direct ecological measurements. Additionally, while the study focuses on governance and participation factors, it does not fully account for broader external influences such as climate variability, regional policy shifts, or large-scale environmental changes that may also affect restoration outcomes.

Review of related literature

This study synthesizes existing literature on ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation as key determinants of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. It integrates both global and local perspectives to examine how institutional governance mechanisms and community engagement interact to support sustainable environmental management, particularly in freshwater ecosystems such as Lake Pandin. In the Philippine, small lake systems are understood as complex socio-ecological environments where governance is shaped by the dynamic interaction of development, conservation, and stakeholder interests.

Environment governance in freshwater lake systems

Freshwater lake ecosystems are increasingly recognized as complex socio-ecological systems whose sustainability depends on effective environmental governance that integrates ecological conservation, institutional coordination, and stakeholder participation. Governance within freshwater systems extends beyond environmental protection by balancing ecological integrity with socioeconomic development, community livelihoods, and sustainable resource utilization. Consequently, effective lake governance requires coordinated action among government agencies, local communities, civil society organizations, and private-sector stakeholders to address environmental challenges while ensuring long-term ecosystem sustainability.

Studies on small lakes in the Laguna de Bay region, including Lake Pandin, indicate that governance structures are generally collaborative yet institutionally centralized. Local communities actively participate in conservation and ecotourism initiatives; however, major environmental decisions continue to be led primarily by government institutions (Brillo, 2017). This governance arrangement reflects the broader conceptualization of lake governance as an interaction among people, development, conservation, and government, with government serving as the principal coordinating institution responsible for balancing ecological protection and socioeconomic development (Brillo, 2023a).

Within the Philippine context, governance effectiveness varies considerably among freshwater lake systems. While lakes such as Lake Pandin have demonstrated notable improvements through community-based conservation and ecotourism initiatives, differences in policy implementation, institutional coordination, financial capacity, and stakeholder engagement continue to influence restoration success across freshwater ecosystems. These variations emphasize that sustainable lake management requires governance systems that effectively integrate institutional mechanisms with active stakeholder participation within specific local contexts (Brillo, 2023b; Brillo, 2023c).

Ecological policy effectiveness in environmental governance

Ecological policy effectiveness is widely recognized as one of the primary institutional foundations of environmental governance because it determines the extent to which environmental legislation is translated into practical conservation and restoration actions. Effective governance depends on several interrelated institutional mechanisms, including policy enforcement, financial support, and regulatory compliance, which collectively strengthen environmental protection and ecosystem restoration (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Obiorah et al., 2025).

Policy enforcement plays a critical role in promoting compliance with environmental laws, fisheries regulations, land-use policies, and pollution control measures designed to protect freshwater ecosystems. Consistent enforcement discourages illegal fishing, improper waste disposal, and unsustainable land-use practices that threaten ecological restoration and long-term environmental sustainability (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Liu et al., 2023; Brillo, 2023b). However, effective enforcement often remains constrained by limited institutional capacity, inadequate financial and technical resources, fragmented inter-agency coordination, and competing socioeconomic priorities (Es’haghi et al., 2022). Strengthening enforcement systems through participatory monitoring and stakeholder collaboration can improve regulatory compliance by enhancing institutional legitimacy and community support for environmental conservation (Dong et al., 2022; Lakshmisha and Thiel, 2023). These findings reinforce governance perspectives emphasizing that institutional authority must be complemented by adequate operational capacity to ensure effective environmental regulation.

Financial support likewise constitutes a fundamental component of ecological policy effectiveness because environmental restoration requires sustained investment in habitat rehabilitation, environmental monitoring, watershed management, and conservation programs. Insufficient financial resources frequently constrain restoration interventions, policy implementation, stakeholder engagement, and long-term ecosystem management, thereby reducing the effectiveness of restoration initiatives (Poikane et al., 2024; Arthington et al., 2023). Existing studies further emphasize that diversified financing mechanisms, including public-private partnerships and community-based investments, are essential for sustaining long-term ecological restoration and environmental governance (Makwinja et al., 2022). In many small freshwater lake systems, financial limitations remain a major institutional challenge affecting both conservation and development programs.

Regulatory compliance further strengthens ecological policy effectiveness by encouraging government agencies, organizations, and resource users to adhere to environmental standards and conservation regulations (Liu et al., 2023; Ogunkan, 2022). Compliance, however, depends not only on enforcement but also on institutional legitimacy, stakeholder awareness, and collaborative governance. Consequently, integrated governance systems that combine regulatory authority with stakeholder participation are more likely to address compliance gaps and strengthen long-term environmental management (Lakshmisha and Thiel, 2023; Ogwu et al., 2025). Collectively, these institutional mechanisms demonstrate that ecological policy effectiveness depends not only on the existence of environmental policies but also on the governance capacity required for their successful implementation.

Citizen participation and collaborative governance

Beyond institutional mechanisms, citizen participation has emerged as a fundamental component of environmental governance because it promotes transparency, legitimacy, accountability, and collaborative decision-making. Public engagement enables local communities to contribute their knowledge, experiences, and priorities to environmental planning while strengthening public trust and institutional legitimacy. Studies consistently demonstrate that participatory governance contributes to more context-specific and sustainable environmental management by improving cooperation among diverse stakeholder groups (Poikane et al., 2024; Spears et al., 2022).

Community-based restoration activities represent one of the most visible forms of citizen participation. Activities such as habitat rehabilitation, watershed protection, water quality monitoring, waste management, and conservation initiatives foster local ownership of environmental programs while strengthening both ecological resilience and community stewardship. These participatory initiatives are most effective when supported by strong institutional coordination, transparent governance structures, and multi-stakeholder collaboration (Kosamu et al., 2022; Mammadova et al., 2022).

Within small freshwater lake systems such as Lake Pandin, community participation through ecotourism and conservation initiatives has been identified as an important contributor to successful environmental management, although its effectiveness is often influenced by institutional decision-making processes and governance capacity (Brillo, 2017). Effective citizen participation therefore requires more than opportunities for involvement; it also depends on governance systems that recognize community knowledge, encourage shared decision-making, and incorporate stakeholder inputs into environmental policy implementation.

Environmental awareness and education further reinforce citizen participation by improving ecological literacy and encouraging environmentally responsible behavior. Education programs empower communities to participate actively in conservation activities, strengthen long-term stewardship, and cultivate greater public support for environmental protection (Zhai et al., 2025). Collectively, these findings suggest that collaborative governance emerges through the interaction of institutional capacity and active citizen participation, thereby creating more resilient and adaptive environmental management systems.

Stakeholder perceptions as a governance assessment tool

Recent environmental governance research recognizes that stakeholder perceptions constitute an important dimension of governance assessment because governance processes are experienced directly by individuals and organizations responsible for implementing, complying with, and benefiting from environmental policies. Unlike ecological indicators that measure environmental conditions, perception-based assessments examine how stakeholders evaluate policy implementation, institutional coordination, transparency, participation, and governance effectiveness. These subjective evaluations provide valuable evidence regarding the legitimacy, responsiveness, and social acceptability of governance systems, particularly in community-based environmental management where collaboration among multiple actors is essential (Hampton-Smith et al., 2024).

Stakeholder perceptions influence environmental governance in several ways. Positive perceptions of governance institutions promote public trust, strengthen compliance with environmental regulations, encourage participation in restoration activities, and facilitate long-term collaboration among government agencies, local communities, and civil society organizations. Conversely, negative perceptions may reduce stakeholder engagement, weaken institutional legitimacy, and limit the effectiveness of environmental programs regardless of the existence of formal policies (OECD, 2023). Consequently, perception-based governance studies have become increasingly important because they complement objective ecological assessments by explaining how governance interventions are understood and experienced by the people directly involved in environmental management.

Nevertheless, perception-based assessments possess inherent limitations. Responses obtained through structured questionnaires represent subjective judgments that may be influenced by personal experiences, expectations, organizational affiliation, or social desirability bias. Therefore, perceptions should not be interpreted as direct evidence of ecological improvement or policy effectiveness. Rather, they provide an important social dimension of governance evaluation that can be integrated with ecological monitoring and policy performance indicators to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of environmental governance (Newig et al., 2023). This perspective is particularly relevant for community-managed freshwater ecosystems such as Lake Pandin, where governance depends not only on institutional arrangements but also on stakeholder trust, collaboration, and continued participation in conservation initiatives.

Accordingly, the present study adopts a perception-based approach to examine how different stakeholder groups assess ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and lake ecosystem restoration. By focusing on stakeholders’ perceptions, the study complements existing governance literature that has traditionally emphasized institutional performance and ecological outcomes, thereby providing a more comprehensive understanding of governance within small freshwater lake systems.

Integrated environmental governance

Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) provides a comprehensive framework that links institutional mechanisms and participatory processes. Key components of IEG include institutional coordination and policy integration, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and transparency and accountability mechanisms. These elements collectively enhance governance effectiveness by facilitating coordinated decision-making, resource sharing, and stakeholder trust (Lakshmisha and Thiel, 2023; Peters et al., 2023; Metcalfe et al., 2022; Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023). Similarly, adaptive and integrative governance frameworks emphasize the need for flexible, inclusive, and performance-based systems that can respond to complex environmental challenges (Cookey et al., 2016).

Research synthesis and gap

The reviewed literature consistently demonstrates that ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, and Integrated Environmental Governance contribute to sustainable environmental management and ecosystem restoration. Previous studies have examined policy implementation, regulatory compliance, stakeholder participation, governance structures, and ecological restoration across various environmental contexts (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Kosamu et al., 2022; Brillo, 2023a; 2023c; Cianci-Gaskill et al., 2024). However, these studies have largely emphasized institutional arrangements or ecological outcomes, with comparatively limited attention given to how different stakeholder groups perceive the effectiveness of governance systems. Moreover, few studies have simultaneously examined stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration within a unified analytical framework, particularly in community-managed freshwater lake ecosystems in developing countries.

This gap is important because stakeholder perceptions influence governance legitimacy, policy acceptance, collaborative behavior, and long-term environmental stewardship. Understanding how stakeholders evaluate governance mechanisms therefore provides valuable insights that complement objective ecological assessments and institutional performance indicators. Addressing this gap, the present study examines the relationships among stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration in Lake Pandin. The findings are expected to contribute to the development of a context-sensitive, perception-informed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework that may support collaborative environmental management in freshwater lake systems.

Theoretical framework

This study is anchored on three complementary theoretical perspectives: Resilience Theory (Burnside et al., 2022; Holling, 2022), Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), and Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023). Collectively, these theories provide a multidimensional framework for understanding how stakeholders perceive ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and lake ecosystem restoration within the context of freshwater environmental management. Rather than directly measuring ecological conditions or objectively evaluating policy performance, the present study examines stakeholders’ perceptions of these governance dimensions. Consequently, these theoretical perspectives explain not only how governance systems function but also how governance processes are experienced, interpreted, and evaluated by individuals and organizations directly involved in environmental management.

Resilience Theory explains the capacity of ecological and social systems to absorb disturbances, adapt to changing environmental conditions, and maintain essential ecological functions over time (Burnside et al., 2022; Holling, 2022). Within freshwater ecosystems, resilience is reflected in the ability of lakes and surrounding communities to recover from environmental degradation while sustaining ecosystem services and biodiversity. Restoration initiatives including habitat rehabilitation, watershed management, pollution control, and water quality improvement are intended to strengthen this adaptive capacity and promote long-term ecosystem sustainability.

From a governance perspective, resilience depends not only on ecological interventions but also on the effectiveness of institutions responsible for planning, coordinating, and implementing restoration initiatives. However, improvements in ecosystem resilience often require long periods before they become evident through objective ecological indicators. Consequently, stakeholders who regularly participate in environmental management provide valuable insights into whether governance interventions are perceived as strengthening ecosystem resilience and restoration efforts. In this study, Resilience Theory therefore provides the conceptual basis for examining stakeholders’ perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes, recognizing that these perceptions represent evaluations of governance experiences rather than direct ecological measurements.

Meanwhile, Social Capital Theory emphasizes that trust, social networks, cooperation, and collective action enable communities to achieve shared societal goals (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015). Within environmental governance, strong social capital facilitates collaboration among government agencies, local communities, civil society organizations, researchers, and private-sector stakeholders, thereby strengthening environmental stewardship and improving collective responses to environmental challenges.

Citizen participation, reflected through public engagement in decision-making, community-based restoration activities, and environmental awareness, represents the practical expression of social capital within environmental governance. Previous studies demonstrate that communities characterized by higher levels of trust, cooperation, and civic engagement are more likely to support conservation initiatives, comply with environmental regulations, and participate actively in restoration programs. Consequently, stakeholders’ perceptions of participation provide important evidence regarding the quality of collaborative governance and institutional legitimacy.

Within the present study, Social Capital Theory explains why stakeholders’ perceptions of citizen participation are important indicators of governance effectiveness. Rather than measuring participation solely through participation frequency or attendance in environmental activities, the study recognizes that stakeholders’ evaluations of participation reflect broader judgments regarding inclusiveness, transparency, collaboration, and collective responsibility within environmental governance systems.

Moreover, Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) Theory provides the overarching framework for understanding how institutional mechanisms and stakeholder participation collectively contribute to sustainable environmental management. The theory emphasizes that effective governance emerges through the integration of institutional coordination, policy implementation, stakeholder collaboration, transparency, accountability, and adaptive decision-making (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023). Complementary governance literature similarly argues that environmental management requires adaptive, participatory, and multi-level institutional arrangements capable of responding to complex socio-ecological challenges (Lemos and Agrawal, 2006).

Within freshwater ecosystems such as Lake Pandin, governance effectiveness depends not only on formal institutional arrangements but also on how governance processes are experienced by stakeholders responsible for implementing, supporting, and complying with environmental policies. Institutional coordination, policy integration, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and accountability mechanisms become meaningful only when stakeholders perceive these governance processes as responsive, transparent, and effective. Consequently, stakeholder perceptions provide valuable evidence regarding the social legitimacy and perceived effectiveness of integrated environmental governance systems.

Accordingly, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory serves as the principal theoretical lens of this study by linking stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation with their perceptions of governance effectiveness and perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. The theory supports the proposition that environmental governance is strengthened through the interaction of institutional mechanisms and collaborative participation, while recognizing that the present study evaluates stakeholders’ assessments of these governance processes rather than objectively measuring ecological performance.

Collectively, the three theoretical perspectives establish the conceptual foundation of the study. Resilience Theory explains the ecological objective of environmental governance by emphasizing adaptive capacity and long-term ecosystem sustainability. Social Capital Theory explains how collaborative relationships, trust, and stakeholder participation strengthen governance processes. Integrated Environmental Governance Theory integrates these institutional and participatory dimensions into a comprehensive governance framework that supports coordinated environmental management.

More importantly, the integration of these theories provides a clear justification for adopting a perception-based research approach. Governance processes including policy implementation, institutional coordination, transparency, accountability, and stakeholder participation—are experienced directly by the individuals responsible for environmental management. Consequently, stakeholders’ perceptions constitute an important source of evidence regarding governance effectiveness because they capture how governance mechanisms are understood, experienced, and evaluated within the local context. Although these perceptions do not represent direct measurements of ecological conditions or policy performance, they provide valuable insights into the social dimensions of environmental governance that complement objective ecological assessments.

Accordingly, this study applies these theoretical perspectives to examine the statistical relationships among stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes in Lake Pandin. This theoretical foundation establishes a clear conceptual bridge between the literature review, the perception-based survey methodology, and the analytical framework employed in the study.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework of the study, which explains the hypothesized relationships among stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG), and perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes in Lake Pandin. Anchored in Resilience Theory, Social Capital Theory, and Integrated Environmental Governance Theory, the framework recognizes that governance effectiveness is examined through the perceptions of stakeholders who are directly involved in environmental management rather than through objective ecological measurements or independent policy evaluations.

FIGURE 1

The first independent variable, Perceived Ecological Policy Effectiveness, refers to stakeholders’ assessments of how effectively environmental policies support freshwater ecosystem restoration and environmental management. It is operationalized through three dimensions: Policy Enforcement which reflects stakeholders’ perceptions of the consistency, appropriateness, and implementation of environmental regulations; Financial Support, which represents perceived adequacy of financial resources allocated for restoration, monitoring, and conservation initiatives; and Regulatory Compliance, which reflects stakeholders’ perceptions of adherence to environmental laws and regulations by government agencies, organizations, and resource users.

The second independent variable, Perceived Citizen Participation, represents stakeholders’ assessments of community involvement in environmental governance and restoration activities. This construct is measured through Public Engagement in Decision-Making, Community-Based Restoration Activities, and Environmental Awareness and Education. These dimensions collectively capture the extent to which respondents perceive environmental governance as participatory, collaborative, and supportive of community stewardship.

The mediating variable, Perceived Lake Ecosystem Restoration Outcomes, represents stakeholders’ assessments of environmental improvements associated with governance and restoration initiatives. This construct is measured through Water Quality Improvement, Habitat Rehabilitation, and Ecosystem Sustainability and Resilience. These indicators reflect respondents’ perceptions of restoration progress and long-term ecological sustainability rather than direct ecological measurements derived from environmental monitoring.

Perceived Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) functions as the dependent variable that links institutional and participatory governance mechanisms to perceived restoration outcomes. It is operationalized through Institutional Coordination and Policy Integration, Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration, and Transparency and Accountability Mechanisms. These dimensions represent stakeholders’ evaluations of governance processes responsible for coordinating environmental management, integrating institutional actions, and promoting collaborative decision-making.

The framework proposes that stakeholders who perceive ecological policies as more effective and citizen participation as more meaningful are also more likely to perceive Integrated Environmental Governance as stronger and, consequently, report more favorable perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. Because the study relies on perception-based survey data, the proposed relationships represent associations among stakeholders’ evaluations of governance processes rather than direct causal relationships or objective evidence of ecological improvement. The framework therefore provides a perception-informed model for understanding how institutional mechanisms and participatory governance are experienced by multiple stakeholder groups within the context of freshwater lake management.

Methodology

Research design

This study employed a quantitative descriptive-correlational research design to examine stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG), and perceived lake ecosystem restoration in Lake Pandin, San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines. The study investigated the relationships among these perceived governance constructs using survey data collected from stakeholders directly involved in lake management. Rather than objectively assessing ecological conditions or policy implementation, the study focused on stakeholders’ evaluations of governance effectiveness based on their experiences and involvement in environmental management.

The study measured Perceived Ecological Policy Effectiveness through policy enforcement, financial support, and regulatory compliance; Perceived Citizen Participation through public engagement in decision-making, community-based restoration activities, and environmental awareness; Perceived Integrated Environmental Governance through institutional coordination, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and transparency and accountability; and Perceived Lake Ecosystem Restoration Outcomes through water quality improvement, habitat rehabilitation, and ecosystem sustainability and resilience.

Participants

The study was conducted in Lake Pandin, San Pablo City, Laguna, Philippines, a freshwater ecosystem recognized for its ecological significance, ecotourism value, and community-based conservation initiatives. The target population comprised key stakeholders directly involved in lake governance, environmental management, and restoration activities. A purposive sampling technique was employed to ensure that respondents possessed the knowledge, experience, and decision-making capacity necessary to provide informed perspectives on ecological governance and restoration.

In Table 1, a total of 140 respondents participated in the study. Stakeholders were selected based on their role, level of involvement, influence, legitimacy, and direct participation in lake ecosystem management, consistent with stakeholder identification principles used in environmental governance research. Survey questionnaires were administered through both online (email or digital forms) and offline (printed questionnaires) modes to maximize accessibility and response rates.

Participants were selected because they represent the principal stakeholder groups with legitimate interests, varying levels of influence, and direct responsibilities in the governance and restoration of Lake Pandin. Their inclusion ensured that the study captured diverse perspectives from policy implementation, scientific expertise, community participation, civil society engagement, and private sector involvement. This multi-stakeholder approach strengthens the credibility of the findings by incorporating viewpoints from actors who both influence and are affected by ecological governance and restoration initiatives.

Research instrument

The primary research instrument used in this study was a structured survey questionnaire designed to measure perceived ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, lake ecosystem restoration outcomes, and Integrated Environmental Governance indicators. The instrument consisted of three parts: Part I gathered the demographic profile of the respondents, Part II included perception-based items measured using a Likert scale, and Part III contained open-ended questions that allowed respondents to express their views on challenges, opportunities, and recommendations related to environmental governance and restoration initiatives.

A four-point Likert scale was employed in Part II, with response options ranging from 4 (Strongly Agree), 3 (Agree), 2 (Disagree), to 1 (Strongly Disagree). Mean scores were computed to represent the average perception of respondents for each indicator. The interpretation of mean values followed these ranges: 3.25–4.00 indicating Very High or Very Effective, 2.50–3.24 indicating High or Effective, 1.75–2.49 indicating Low or Less Effective, and 1.00–1.74 indicating Very Low or Not Effective. This scaling approach is consistent with common practices in Likert-based survey research and provides a systematic basis for interpreting stakeholder perceptions of governance effectiveness and lake ecosystem restoration outcomes.

Validity of the instrument

The validity of the research instrument was established through multiple procedures. Content validity was assessed by a panel of five experts comprising specialists in environmental governance, freshwater ecosystem management, environmental policy, quantitative research methodology, and community-based environmental management. Their expertise ensured that the questionnaire adequately represented the study constructs, was contextually appropriate, and aligned with the research objectives. Based on their recommendations, revisions were made to improve the clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness of the instrument.

Construct validity was established by aligning the questionnaire items with the theoretical framework and operational definitions of the study variables. Criterion-related validity was supported by comparing the instrument with established measures used in previous environmental governance and ecosystem restoration studies.

Reliability test

Reliability testing was conducted to assess the internal consistency of the research instrument. A pilot test involving 10 stakeholders with characteristics similar to the target respondents, but excluded from the final sample, was conducted prior to the main data collection. Cronbach’s alpha was used to evaluate internal consistency, with a minimum acceptable value of 0.70. Based on the pilot test results and participant feedback, ambiguous or inconsistent items were revised to improve the clarity and reliability of the instrument before its final administration. This process ensured that the instrument produced stable and reliable responses for measuring governance and participation variables.

Data gathering procedure

Prior to data collection, ethical clearance and formal approval to conduct the study were obtained from the university research office, the San Pablo City Local Government Unit (LGU), and the relevant Lake Pandin management and community organizations. Coordination meetings were conducted with the concerned authorities to explain the purpose of the study, identify the target participants, and determine the most appropriate schedule and mode of questionnaire administration. All participants were informed about the objectives of the study, the voluntary nature of their participation, and the confidentiality of their responses. Written informed consent was obtained before participation.

Following the approval process, the validated survey questionnaire was administered to purposively selected stakeholders through face-to-face distribution of printed questionnaires to ensure accessibility and maximize participation. A total of 150 questionnaires were distributed among local government officials, community members, non-governmental organization representatives, environmental experts and researchers, and private sector stakeholders involved in the governance and restoration of Lake Pandin.

Respondents were given sufficient time to complete the questionnaire at their convenience. To improve participation and minimize non-response, two follow-up reminders were sent at 1-week intervals to respondents who had not yet completed the survey. At the end of the data collection period, 140 completed questionnaires were retrieved, representing a 93.3% response rate which was considered adequate for the statistical analyses conducted in the study.

Upon retrieval, all questionnaires were reviewed for completeness and consistency. Responses were assigned numerical codes, encoded into IBM SPSS Statistics, and subjected to data cleaning procedures, including checking for missing values, duplicate responses, and encoding errors. The finalized dataset was then prepared for descriptive, correlational, and mediation analyses to examine the relationships among ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, integrated environmental governance, and lake ecosystem restoration outcomes.

Statistical treatment of data

Descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation) were used to summarize stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance, and perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient was employed to determine the strength and direction of the relationships among the study variables, while multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the predictive influence of perceived ecological policy effectiveness and perceived citizen participation on Integrated Environmental Governance. These parametric analyses were performed using composite scores derived from multiple Likert-scale items, an approach that has been shown to be robust for such data under commonly satisfied assumptions (Norman, 2010). Although alternative approaches such as Multi-Criteria Analysis have been recommended for evaluating environmental management alternatives (Lindfors, 2021), they were not adopted because the objective of this study was to examine statistical relationships among stakeholders’ perceptions rather than to prioritize or rank environmental management options. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.05.

Ethical considerations

This study established ethical standards in conducting research involving human participants. Prior to data collection, permission was obtained and all participants was informed about the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of their participation, and their right to withdraw from the research at any time without any consequences. Informed consent was secured before administering the survey questionnaires and conducting interviews. The confidentiality and anonymity of respondents were strictly maintained by ensuring that personal identifiers are not included in the data analysis and reporting of results. All collected data was used solely for academic and research purposes and was stored securely to prevent unauthorized access. The study ensures respect for participants’ rights, privacy, and dignity throughout the research process.

Results and discussion

This section presents the findings on perceived ecological policy effectiveness, perceived citizen participation, and perceived Integrated Environmental Governance in relation to perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes in Lake Pandin. Descriptive and inferential analyses were used to examine the levels, relationships, and influences among variables. The results were discussed in relation to existing literature and relevant theoretical frameworks, with emphasis on stakeholder perceptions rather than direct ecological measurements.

The findings in Table 2 indicate that stakeholders perceived ecological policy effectiveness in Lake Pandin to be very effective (M = 3.65, SD = 0.49), suggesting that respondents generally viewed existing environmental policies as supportive of lake conservation and restoration. Because these findings are based on stakeholder perceptions, they should be interpreted as evaluations of governance experiences rather than objective assessments of policy performance or ecological condition.

Among the dimensions, Policy Enforcement obtained the highest mean score (M = 3.66, SD = 0.49), indicating that respondents perceived environmental regulations to be consistently implemented and appropriate for local environmental conditions. Financial Support (M = 3.64, SD = 0.50) and Regulatory Compliance (M = 3.64, SD = 0.48) also received very effective ratings, suggesting that stakeholders viewed adequate resource allocation and adherence to environmental regulations as important and complementary components of effective environmental governance. The consistently high ratings across all three dimensions indicate that respondents generally expressed confidence in the institutional mechanisms supporting lake management.

These findings are consistent with previous studies emphasizing that effective policy enforcement, sustained financial investment, and regulatory compliance are fundamental to successful environmental governance and freshwater ecosystem restoration (Arthington et al., 2023; Lindenmayer et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2023; Obiorah et al., 2025; Ogwu et al., 2025). From the perspective of Integrated Environmental Governance Theory, favorable stakeholder perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness reflect confidence in the institutional capacity to coordinate environmental protection and restoration initiatives. Likewise, Resilience Theory suggests that strong governance institutions enhance the adaptive capacity of socio-ecological systems by supporting coordinated responses to environmental challenges (Burnside et al., 2022; Holling, 2022).

While respondents expressed positive perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, these findings should not be interpreted as direct evidence of successful policy implementation or ecological improvement. Rather, they indicate that stakeholders generally viewed existing governance mechanisms as appropriate and supportive of lake restoration. Future studies should complement perception-based assessments with objective environmental indicators, such as water quality monitoring, biodiversity assessments, and policy implementation evaluations, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of governance effectiveness.

Table 3 presents stakeholders’ perceptions of citizen participation in the environmental governance of Lake Pandin. The overall mean of 3.59 (SD = 0.54) indicates a very high level of participation, suggesting that respondents generally perceived citizens as actively engaged in environmental governance and lake restoration initiatives. Because these findings are based on stakeholders’ perceptions, they should be interpreted as evaluations of participatory governance rather than objective measures of the actual extent or effectiveness of community participation.

Among the dimensions, Community-Based Restoration Activities (M = 3.59, SD = 0.54) and Environmental Awareness and Education (M = 3.59, SD = 0.54) received the highest ratings, indicating that respondents perceived active community involvement in conservation initiatives and environmental education as important strengths of Lake Pandin’s governance system. Public Engagement in Decision-Making also received a very high rating (M = 3.58, SD = 0.53), suggesting that stakeholders generally believed they had meaningful opportunities to participate in environmental planning and governance processes. The consistently high ratings across all dimensions indicate that respondents viewed citizen participation as an integral component of sustainable lake management.

These findings are consistent with previous studies emphasizing that meaningful citizen participation enhances transparency, accountability, institutional legitimacy, and collaborative environmental governance (Kosamu et al., 2022; Spears et al., 2022). Community-based restoration initiatives strengthen environmental stewardship by encouraging shared responsibility for ecosystem conservation, while environmental awareness programs improve ecological literacy and promote sustainable environmental practices (Mammadova et al., 2022; Zhai et al., 2025). Similarly, studies on Lake Pandin have shown that community participation through ecotourism and conservation initiatives has contributed to collaborative freshwater lake management, although institutional coordination remains essential for sustaining long-term environmental outcomes (Brillo, 2017; Brillo, 2023a; Brillo, 2023c).

From the perspective of Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), these findings suggest that respondents perceived trust, cooperation, and collective action as important characteristics of environmental governance in Lake Pandin. Likewise, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023) emphasizes that effective governance depends on meaningful collaboration among government institutions, communities, and other stakeholders. The positive perceptions observed in this study therefore reflect respondents’ confidence in participatory governance mechanisms that support collaborative environmental management.

Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted within the context of the study’s design. The results represent stakeholders’ perceptions of citizen participation rather than objective evidence of the actual level, quality, or effectiveness of participation. Individual experiences, expectations, and stakeholder roles may influence these evaluations. Future research should integrate perception-based assessments with qualitative interviews, participation records, and observational evidence to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of citizen participation in freshwater environmental governance.

Table 4 presents stakeholders’ perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes in Lake Pandin. The overall mean of 3.66 (SD = 0.48) indicates that respondents perceived restoration outcomes to be very effective, suggesting generally favorable evaluations of the environmental improvements associated with lake management initiatives. Because these findings are based on stakeholders’ perceptions, they should be interpreted as assessments of restoration experiences rather than objective measurements of ecological condition or restoration success.

Among the three dimensions, Ecosystem Sustainability and Resilience obtained the highest mean score (M = 3.77, SD = 0.42), indicating that respondents perceived the lake ecosystem to possess a strong capacity to sustain ecological functions and adapt to environmental challenges. Habitat Rehabilitation also received a very effective rating (M = 3.62, SD = 0.49), suggesting positive stakeholder evaluations of conservation efforts aimed at protecting biodiversity and restoring ecological habitats. Water Quality Improvement obtained a similarly favorable rating (M = 3.58, SD = 0.53), reflecting respondents’ perceptions that initiatives addressing pollution control, watershed management, and environmental monitoring have contributed positively to lake management. The consistently high ratings across all dimensions suggest that stakeholders generally viewed ongoing restoration initiatives as beneficial to the long-term sustainability of Lake Pandin.

These findings are consistent with previous studies emphasizing that freshwater ecosystem restoration depends on integrated management approaches that combine water quality protection, habitat conservation, and adaptive governance to strengthen ecosystem resilience (Cooke et al., 2023; Jin et al., 2022; Masese et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2024). Research has shown that successful restoration requires sustained conservation efforts, continuous environmental monitoring, and coordinated stakeholder participation to maintain ecological integrity over time. In Lake Pandin, the positive stakeholder perceptions may reflect the visible outcomes of community-based conservation initiatives and collaborative governance that have supported the protection and sustainable use of the lake’s natural resources (Brillo, 2017; Brillo, 2023a; Brillo, 2023c).

From the perspective of Resilience Theory (Burnside et al., 2022; Holling, 2022), the high rating for ecosystem sustainability and resilience suggests that respondents perceived restoration efforts as strengthening the adaptive capacity of the lake’s socio-ecological system. Likewise, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023) emphasizes that effective ecosystem restoration depends on coordinated institutional actions, stakeholder collaboration, and adaptive management. The favorable perceptions observed in this study therefore indicate that respondents generally viewed existing governance mechanisms as supportive of long-term environmental sustainability.

Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with appropriate caution because they represent stakeholders’ perceptions rather than objective ecological measurements. Although respondents expressed favorable evaluations of restoration outcomes, the study did not directly assess environmental indicators such as water quality parameters, biodiversity indices, or habitat condition. Future research should integrate perception-based assessments with ecological monitoring and environmental performance indicators to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of lake ecosystem restoration.

Table 5 presents the multiple linear regression analysis examining whether stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation significantly predict their perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG). The regression model was statistically significant, F (2, 137) = 115.109, p < 0.001, indicating that the combined predictors significantly explained variations in stakeholders’ perceptions of IEG. The model yielded an R² of 0.610 (Adjusted R² = 0.605), indicating that approximately 61.0% of the variation in perceived Integrated Environmental Governance was explained by the two predictor variables.

Among the predictors, Perceived Citizen Participation emerged as the only statistically significant predictor of perceived Integrated Environmental Governance (β = 0.748, B = 0.622, t = 13.861, p < 0.001). This finding suggests that respondents who reported higher levels of perceived citizen participation also tended to report stronger perceptions of integrated environmental governance. In contrast, Perceived Ecological Policy Effectiveness was not a statistically significant predictor (β = 0.094, B = 0.087, t = 1.736, p = 0.085), indicating that after accounting for citizen participation, stakeholders’ perceptions of policy effectiveness did not independently explain additional variation in their perceptions of integrated environmental governance.

These findings suggest that respondents placed greater importance on participatory governance than on institutional policy mechanisms when evaluating the effectiveness of integrated environmental governance in Lake Pandin. Active public engagement, community-based restoration activities, and environmental awareness may have provided stakeholders with more visible and direct experiences of governance than formal policy implementation alone. This interpretation is consistent with Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), which emphasizes that trust, collaboration, and collective action strengthen governance by fostering cooperation among stakeholders. Likewise, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023) highlights that collaborative governance depends on meaningful stakeholder participation, institutional coordination, and shared decision-making.

The findings are also consistent with previous studies reporting that citizen participation enhances environmental governance by improving transparency, accountability, and collaborative environmental management (Kosamu et al., 2022; Spears et al., 2022; Mammadova et al., 2022). Although ecological policy effectiveness remains an essential institutional foundation for environmental governance (Akhtar-Khavari and Telesetsky, 2022; Liu et al., 2023), its non-significant regression coefficient suggests that respondents may perceive policy implementation as effective only when accompanied by active community participation and collaborative governance processes. This finding does not diminish the importance of environmental policies; rather, it indicates that within the context of Lake Pandin, stakeholders’ evaluations of governance are more strongly associated with participatory experiences than with institutional policy mechanisms alone.

Because the study is based on stakeholders’ perceptions, the regression results should be interpreted as statistical associations among perceived governance constructs rather than evidence of causal relationships or objective governance performance. Future studies should integrate perception-based survey data with objective indicators of policy implementation, institutional performance, and ecological condition to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of integrated environmental governance.

To complement the first regression model, a second-tier analysis was conducted as shown in Table 6 to examine the relative contribution of the individual dimensions of Perceived Ecological Policy Effectiveness and Perceived Citizen Participation to Perceived Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG). Whereas Model 1 assessed the predictive effects of the two higher-order constructs, Model 2 identified the specific institutional and participatory dimensions that explained stakeholders’ perceptions of governance. This analysis provides more detailed evidence for identifying which governance mechanisms are perceived as most important in supporting integrated environmental governance.

The regression model was statistically significant (F = 74.777, p < 0.001) and explained 75.8% of the variance in stakeholders’ perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance (R² = 0.758; Adjusted R² = 0.748), indicating that the six governance dimensions collectively explained a substantial proportion of respondents’ evaluations of governance.

Among the predictors, Community-Based Restoration Activities emerged as the strongest significant predictor (β = 0.539, p < 0.001), followed by Public Engagement in Decision-Making (β = 0.259, p < 0.001), Policy Enforcement (β = 0.243, p = 0.001), and Environmental Awareness and Education (β = 0.225, p < 0.001). These findings suggest that respondents who perceived stronger community involvement, greater participation in environmental decision-making, more effective policy enforcement, and higher levels of environmental awareness also tended to report stronger perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance.

In contrast, Financial Support (β = −0.074, p = 0.177) and Regulatory Compliance (β = −0.109, p = 0.168) were not statistically significant predictors after controlling for the other governance dimensions. This finding suggests that stakeholders may perceive financial resources and regulatory compliance as important enabling conditions for environmental management, but not as independent factors influencing their overall evaluation of governance once participatory processes and policy enforcement are considered. The non-significant coefficients may also indicate that respondents experience financial support and regulatory compliance indirectly through visible community activities and institutional actions rather than as separate governance mechanisms.

The prominence of Community-Based Restoration Activities highlights the central role of grassroots participation in shaping stakeholders’ perceptions of governance. Restoration activities provide tangible opportunities for community involvement, strengthen local stewardship, and reinforce shared responsibility for environmental conservation. Similarly, Public Engagement in Decision-Making indicates that inclusive governance processes enhance stakeholders’ confidence in environmental institutions by promoting transparency, accountability, and responsiveness to local concerns. Environmental Awareness and Education further contribute by improving ecological literacy and encouraging sustained participation in conservation initiatives.

These findings are consistent with Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), which emphasizes that trust, cooperation, and collective action are fundamental to effective governance. Likewise, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023) suggests that governance is strengthened through institutional coordination and meaningful stakeholder collaboration. The significance of community participation dimensions in this study supports these theoretical perspectives by indicating that respondents associated stronger governance with participatory and collaborative environmental management. Previous studies similarly report that community participation enhances environmental governance by strengthening institutional legitimacy, transparency, and long-term conservation outcomes (Dong et al., 2022; Kosamu et al., 2022; Makwinja et al., 2022; Obiorah et al., 2025).

Overall, the findings indicate that participatory governance dimensions were more strongly associated with stakeholders’ perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance than institutional dimensions alone. Rather than suggesting that institutional mechanisms are unimportant, the results imply that respondents placed greater emphasis on governance processes that provide direct opportunities for community involvement and collaboration. From a management perspective, these findings support strengthening community-based restoration programs, expanding participatory decision-making, and sustaining environmental education while maintaining effective policy enforcement. However, because the analysis is based on stakeholders’ perceptions obtained through a cross-sectional survey, the regression coefficients should be interpreted as statistical associations among perceived governance constructs rather than evidence of causal relationships or objective governance performance.

Relationship of Perceived ecological policy effectiveness, Perceived citizen participation, and Integrated environmental governance to Perceived Lake Ecosystem restoration outcomes

Table 7 presents the Pearson correlation analysis examining the relationship between stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness and their perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. The analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between the overall constructs (r = 0.572, p < 0.001), indicating a strong association between respondents’ evaluations of ecological policy effectiveness and their perceptions of restoration outcomes. Specifically, stakeholders who perceived environmental policies as more effective also tended to perceive more favorable restoration outcomes. Because these findings are derived from perception-based survey data, the observed relationship should be interpreted as an association between stakeholders’ evaluations rather than evidence of a causal relationship or objective ecological improvement.

Among the individual dimensions, Regulatory Compliance demonstrated the strongest positive relationship with perceived restoration outcomes (r = 0.489, p < 0.001), followed by Financial Support (r = 0.452, p < 0.001) and Policy Enforcement (r = 0.418, p < 0.001). Although all three dimensions exhibited moderate positive relationships, the findings suggest that respondents associated compliance with environmental regulations, adequate financial resources, and consistent policy implementation with more favorable perceptions of ecosystem restoration. The moderate correlation coefficients further indicate that while ecological policy effectiveness is an important component of restoration, stakeholders also recognize that restoration outcomes are influenced by additional ecological, institutional, and social factors beyond policy implementation alone.

These findings are consistent with previous studies emphasizing that effective policy implementation, sustained financial investment, and regulatory compliance provide the institutional foundation necessary for successful ecosystem restoration and long-term environmental sustainability (Lindenmayer et al., 2022; Ogunkan, 2022; Obiorah et al., 2025). Adequate financial resources enable restoration activities, environmental monitoring, and conservation programs, while regulatory compliance strengthens accountability and supports the consistent implementation of environmental policies. Collectively, these governance mechanisms create enabling conditions that foster stakeholder confidence in restoration initiatives.

From the perspective of Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023), the positive relationships observed in this study suggest that respondents perceived coordinated institutional mechanisms as closely associated with successful environmental governance and restoration. Similarly, Resilience Theory (Burnside et al., 2022; Holling, 2022) proposes that adaptive governance supported by effective institutional arrangements enhances the capacity of socio-ecological systems to respond to environmental disturbances and sustain long-term ecological functioning. The findings therefore indicate that stakeholders generally associated stronger governance mechanisms with more positive perceptions of restoration outcomes.

Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted within the context of the study’s design. The correlations represent statistical associations among stakeholders’ perceptions rather than direct evidence that ecological policy effectiveness improves lake ecosystem restoration. Likewise, the study did not directly measure environmental indicators such as water quality, biodiversity, or habitat condition. Future research should integrate perception-based assessments with ecological monitoring, environmental performance indicators, and longitudinal studies to determine whether favorable stakeholder perceptions correspond to measurable improvements in ecosystem condition.

Table 8 presents the Pearson correlation analysis examining the relationship between stakeholders’ perceptions of citizen participation and their perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. The analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between the overall constructs (r = 0.471, p < 0.001), indicating that respondents who perceived higher levels of citizen participation also tended to report more favorable perceptions of restoration outcomes. Although the relationship was classified as weak based on the adopted interpretation scale, the positive correlation suggests that participatory governance is meaningfully associated with stakeholders’ evaluations of lake restoration. Because the findings are derived from perception-based survey data, the observed relationship should be interpreted as an association among stakeholders’ evaluations rather than evidence of a causal relationship or objective ecological improvement.

Among the dimensions, Community-Based Restoration Activities demonstrated the strongest relationship with perceived restoration outcomes (r = 0.569, p < 0.001), followed by Public Engagement in Decision-Making (r = 0.538, p < 0.001). Both dimensions exhibited strong positive relationships, indicating that respondents associated active community involvement and inclusive governance processes with more favorable perceptions of ecosystem restoration. Environmental Awareness and Education also showed a significant positive relationship (r = 0.484, p < 0.001), although the association was comparatively weaker, suggesting that environmental education contributes to restoration primarily by strengthening ecological awareness and encouraging environmentally responsible behavior rather than directly influencing stakeholders’ evaluations of restoration outcomes.

These findings are consistent with previous studies emphasizing that community participation strengthens environmental governance by fostering collective responsibility, local stewardship, and collaborative decision-making (Kosamu et al., 2022; Makwinja et al., 2022). Community-based restoration activities, including habitat rehabilitation, clean-up campaigns, and local environmental monitoring, provide visible opportunities for stakeholder involvement that reinforce confidence in restoration initiatives. Likewise, public engagement in environmental planning enhances transparency, accountability, and institutional legitimacy, while environmental education supports long-term conservation by improving ecological literacy and promoting sustainable environmental practices (Yadav et al., 2022).

From the perspective of Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), these findings suggest that respondents associated stronger trust, cooperation, and collective action with more favorable perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration. Similarly, Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023) emphasizes that effective environmental governance depends on meaningful stakeholder participation and collaborative institutional arrangements. The stronger correlations observed for community-based restoration activities and public engagement indicate that respondents placed greater importance on direct participation in governance processes than on environmental awareness alone when evaluating restoration outcomes.

Overall, the findings indicate that Perceived Citizen Participation was positively associated with Perceived Lake Ecosystem Restoration Outcomes, supporting the view that collaborative governance contributes to favorable stakeholder evaluations of environmental management. However, the relatively weaker overall correlation (r = 0.471) also suggests that restoration outcomes are likely influenced by additional institutional, ecological, and governance factors beyond citizen participation. Therefore, participatory governance should be considered one component of a broader environmental governance system rather than the sole contributor to restoration outcomes.

Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted within the context of the study’s design. The observed relationships represent statistical associations among stakeholders’ perceptions rather than objective evidence that citizen participation directly improves ecosystem quality. Future research should integrate perception-based assessments with ecological monitoring, biodiversity assessments, water quality analyses, and longitudinal environmental data to determine whether favorable stakeholder perceptions correspond to measurable improvements in freshwater ecosystem condition.

Table 9 presents the Pearson correlation analysis examining the relationship between stakeholders’ perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) and their perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration outcomes. The analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between the overall constructs (r = 0.632, p < 0.001), indicating a strong association between respondents’ evaluations of integrated environmental governance and their perceptions of restoration outcomes. Specifically, stakeholders who perceived governance systems as more coordinated, collaborative, and transparent also tended to report more favorable perceptions of lake ecosystem restoration. Because these findings are based on perception-based survey data, the observed relationship should be interpreted as a statistical association among stakeholders’ evaluations rather than evidence of a direct causal relationship or objectively measured ecological improvement.

Among the governance dimensions, Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration exhibited the strongest relationship with perceived restoration outcomes (r = 0.786, p < 0.001), representing a very strong positive association. This finding suggests that respondents regarded collaboration among government agencies, local communities, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, and private-sector stakeholders as the most important governance mechanism associated with successful lake restoration. Transparency and Accountability Mechanisms also demonstrated a strong positive relationship (r = 0.614, p < 0.001), indicating that respondents associated transparent governance processes and institutional accountability with more favorable restoration outcomes. Similarly, Institutional Coordination and Policy Integration showed a strong positive relationship (r = 0.549, p < 0.001), suggesting that coordinated institutional actions and integrated environmental policies were perceived as important components of effective environmental governance.

These findings are consistent with previous studies demonstrating that collaborative governance, institutional coordination, and transparent decision-making strengthen environmental management and support ecosystem restoration (Cheng et al., 2022; Dong et al., 2022; Kosamu et al., 2022). Multi-stakeholder collaboration facilitates knowledge sharing, resource mobilization, and collective decision-making, while institutional coordination minimizes policy fragmentation and promotes more coherent environmental management. Likewise, transparency and accountability strengthen public trust and encourage sustained stakeholder engagement, thereby reinforcing long-term environmental stewardship.

From the perspective of Integrated Environmental Governance Theory (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023), the strong relationships observed in this study suggest that respondents perceived governance effectiveness to depend on the integration of institutional coordination, collaborative partnerships, and transparent governance mechanisms. The particularly strong association between Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and perceived restoration outcomes underscores the central role of collaborative governance in addressing complex socio-ecological challenges. These findings are likewise consistent with Social Capital Theory (Putnam et al., 1994; Putnam, 2015), which emphasizes that trust, cooperation, and shared responsibility strengthen collective action and improve governance outcomes. Together, these theoretical perspectives suggest that respondents viewed collaborative governance as a key characteristic of effective environmental management in Lake Pandin.

Overall, the findings indicate that Perceived Integrated Environmental Governance was strongly associated with Perceived Lake Ecosystem Restoration Outcomes, with Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration emerging as the governance dimension most closely associated with favorable restoration perceptions. These results support the study’s conceptual framework by suggesting that respondents viewed collaborative governance, institutional coordination, and transparent decision-making as complementary elements of effective environmental management. From a management perspective, the findings highlight the importance of strengthening partnerships among government agencies, local communities, academic institutions, civil society organizations, and the private sector while maintaining transparent and accountable governance processes.

Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted within the context of the study’s design. The correlations represent statistical associations among stakeholders’ perceptions rather than objective evidence that integrated environmental governance directly improves ecosystem restoration. Moreover, the study did not measure ecological indicators such as water quality, biodiversity, or habitat condition. Future research should integrate perception-based assessments with ecological monitoring, environmental performance indicators, and longitudinal analyses to determine whether stronger governance systems correspond to measurable improvements in freshwater ecosystem condition.

Environmental governance framework to improve Lake ecosystem restoration outcomes

Figure 2 presents the proposed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework for Lake Ecosystem Restoration, which offers a structured, evidence-informed approach for improving restoration outcomes and sustainable management of freshwater ecosystems, particularly in Lake Pandin. While Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG) is an established theoretical perspective (Pambudi and Kusumanto, 2023), the framework presented in this study represents a contextualized application and operationalization of IEG principles based on empirical findings.

FIGURE 2

The inclusion of lake governance literature, particularly the works of (Brillo, 2017; Brillo, 2023), strengthens the theoretical grounding of the proposed framework by situating it within the established discourse on small lake governance in the Philippines. These studies emphasize the interaction among government, local communities, and development–conservation dynamics, which are reflected in the framework’s integration of ecological policy effectiveness and citizen participation. Furthermore, the incorporation of adaptive governance perspectives (Cookey et al., 2016) reinforces the framework’s emphasis on flexibility, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and performance-based governance. As such, the proposed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework is not only empirically derived but also theoretically anchored and contextually aligned with existing scholarship on lake governance, particularly in Lake Pandin.

The development of the framework is grounded in the study’s empirical findings, which indicate that stakeholders perceive citizen participation particularly community-based restoration activities and public engagement in decision-making as having a stronger association with integrated environmental governance than ecological policy effectiveness alone. Furthermore, the strong positive relationship between multi-stakeholder collaboration and perceived restoration outcomes informed the design of the framework’s governance mechanisms. These empirical findings provide the contextual basis for operationalizing IEG within the Lake Pandin setting.

The proposed framework integrates ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, and governance mechanisms into a context-sensitive model that may support adaptive and participatory environmental management.

The framework proposes that sustainable lake ecosystem restoration requires the integration of institutional mechanisms, participatory governance, and adaptive management strategies. It contributes to the literature by translating theoretical governance principles into a perception-informed, context-sensitive governance framework for freshwater lake management.

Practical implications

The findings of this study have practical implications for environmental governance, policy implementation, and freshwater lake management, particularly in community-managed lake systems such as Lake Pandin. The results indicate that stakeholders perceived citizen participation, especially community-based restoration activities and public engagement in decision-making, as being more closely associated with Integrated Environmental Governance than ecological policy effectiveness alone. These findings suggest that environmental managers and local government units may strengthen governance by complementing policy implementation with participatory mechanisms that encourage meaningful stakeholder involvement in planning, restoration, monitoring, and environmental stewardship.

The strong association between multi-stakeholder collaboration and perceived restoration outcomes further highlights the value of strengthening partnerships among government agencies, local communities, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and private-sector stakeholders. Formal coordination mechanisms, shared decision-making platforms, and collaborative monitoring initiatives may improve institutional coordination, facilitate knowledge exchange, and support more adaptive environmental governance.

Although ecological policy effectiveness was generally perceived positively, the regression findings indicate that policy implementation is perceived as more effective when accompanied by active citizen participation. This underscores the importance of integrating policy enforcement, financial support, and regulatory compliance with transparent governance, participatory monitoring, and sustained stakeholder engagement.

Finally, the proposed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework offers a context-sensitive, perception-informed reference for freshwater lake governance. While grounded in stakeholders’ evaluations rather than direct ecological measurements, the framework may assist policymakers, environmental managers, and local communities in strengthening institutional coordination, collaborative governance, and adaptive environmental management. Future applications may benefit from integrating stakeholder assessments with ecological monitoring to support evidence-informed environmental decision-making.

Conclusion

This study examined stakeholders’ perceptions of ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, Integrated Environmental Governance (IEG), and perceived lake ecosystem restoration outcomes in Lake Pandin. The findings indicate that stakeholders generally perceived ecological policy effectiveness, citizen participation, and governance mechanisms as highly effective. Community-based restoration activities, public engagement in decision-making, and multi-stakeholder collaboration were more strongly associated with favorable perceptions of Integrated Environmental Governance and lake ecosystem restoration than institutional mechanisms alone.

The findings support Resilience Theory, Social Capital Theory, and Integrated Environmental Governance Theory by suggesting that effective freshwater lake governance is perceived as a combination of institutional coordination and collaborative participation. Because the study relied on perception-based, cross-sectional survey data, the findings should be interpreted as associations among stakeholders’ evaluations rather than objective evidence of ecological improvement or causal relationships.

Overall, the study contributes to the environmental governance literature by demonstrating the value of stakeholder perceptions as a complementary source of evidence for understanding governance processes in community-managed freshwater lake systems. The proposed Integrated Environmental Governance Framework extends existing governance perspectives by integrating institutional mechanisms, participatory governance, and adaptive management into a context-sensitive model that may guide future governance assessment, policy development, and freshwater lake management.

Recommendations

References

• 1

  Akhtar-KhavariA.TelesetskyA. (2022). “From protection to restoration: a challenge for environmental governance,” in Research Handbook on Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Law, 45–70. 10.4337/9781839108327.00008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 2

  ArthingtonA. H.TicknerD.McClainM. E.AcremanM. C.AndersonE. P.BabuS.et al (2023). Accelerating environmental flow implementation to Bend the curve of global freshwater biodiversity loss. Environ. Rev.32 (3), 387–413. 10.1139/er-2022-0126

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 3

  BasteI. A. (2021). Making Peace with Nature: A Scientific Blueprint to Tackle the Climate, Biodiversity and Pollution Emergencies. Available online at: https://www.sidalc.net/search/Record/oai:wedocs.unep.org:20.500.11822-34948/Description (Accessed April 4, 2026).

  • Google Scholar

• 4

  BrilloB. B. C. (2017). The politics of lake governance: Sampaloc lake, Pandin lake and Tadlac lake of the Laguna de Bay Region, Philippines. Asia-Pacific Soc. Sci. Rev.17 (1), 66–79. 10.59588/2350-8329.1123

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  BrilloB. B. C. (2023a). A conceptual framework for understanding Lake governance: lake’s people, development, conservation and government. Asia-Pacific Soc. Sci. Rev.23 (4), 55–66. 10.2139/ssrn.4675319

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BrilloB. B. C. (2023b). The government and Lake governance criteria for the seven crater Lakes of san pablo city, Laguna, Philippines. Lakes and Reservoirs Res. and Manag.28 (1), e12435. 10.1111/lre.12435

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  BrilloB. B. C. (2023c). Governance concepts, frameworks and Lake governance’s conceptualisation. Asian J. Water, Environ. Pollut.20 (6), 1–7. 10.3233/AJW230073

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  BurnsideW. R.PulverS.FiorellaK. J.AvolioM. L.AlexanderS. M. (2022). Foundations of Socio-Environmental Research: Legacy Readings with Commentaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 460–482.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 9

  ChengX.FangL.MuL.LiJ.WangH. (2022). Watershed eco-compensation mechanism in China: policies, practices and recommendations. Water14 (5), 777. 10.3390/w14050777

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 10

  Cianci-GaskillJ. A.KlugJ. L.MerrellK. C.MillarE. E.WainD. J.KramerL.et al (2024). A Lake management framework for global application: monitoring, restoring, and protecting Lakes through community engagement. Lake Reserv. Manag.40 (1), 66–92. 10.1080/10402381.2023.2299868

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 11

  CookeS. J.PiczakM. L.NyboerE. A.MichalskiF.BennettA.KoningA. A.et al (2023). Managing exploitation of freshwater species and aggregates to protect and restore freshwater biodiversity. Environ. Rev.32 (3), 414–437. 10.1139/er-2022-0118

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 12

  CookeyP. E.DarnsawasdiR.RatanachaiC. (2016). A conceptual framework for assessment of governance performance of Lake basins: towards transformation to adaptive and integrative governance. Hydrology3 (1), 12. 10.3390/hydrology3010012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 13

  DongM.LiuM.YinL.ZhouJ.SunD. (2022). Concept and practices involved in comprehensive river control based on the synergy among flood control, ecological restoration, and urban development: a case study on a valley reach of luanhe river in a semiarid region in north China. Water14 (9), 1413. 10.3390/w14091413

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 14

  Es’ haghiS. R.RezaeiA.KarimiH.AtaeiP. (2022). Institutional analysis of organizations active in the restoration of Lake Urmia: the application of the social network analysis approach. Hydrological Sci. J.67 (3), 328–341. 10.1080/02626667.2022.2026950

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  Hampton-SmithM.GurneyG. G.CinnerJ. E. (2024). A systematic review of equity perceptions and outcomes in marine conservation. Biol. Conserv.289, 110395. 10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110395

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 16

  HollingC. S. (2022). “Resilience and stability of ecological systems,” in Foundations of socio-environmental Research: Legacy Readings with Commentaries. Editors BurnsideW. R.PulverS.FiorellaK. J.AvolioM. L.AlexanderS. M. (Cambridge University Press), 460–482. 10.1017/9781009177856.038

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 17

  HuambachanoM.SotoG. R. N.MwampambaT. H. (2025). Making room for meaningful inclusion of Indigenous and local knowledge in global assessments: our experiences in the values assessment of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Ecol. Soc.30 (1). 10.5751/ES-15599-300116

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 18

  JinH.van LeeuwenC. H.TemminkR. J.BakkerE. S. (2022). Impacts of shelter on the relative dominance of primary producers and trophic transfer efficiency in aquatic food webs: implications for shallow Lake restoration. Freshw. Biol.67 (6), 1107–1122. 10.1111/fwb.13904

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 19

  JohnstoneI. (2023). Organisation for economic Co-operation and development (OECD). Yearb. Int. Environ. Law34 (1), yvae026. 10.1093/yiel/yvae026

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 20

  KatusiimeJ.SchüttB. (2020). Integrated water resources management approaches to improve water resources governance. Water12 (12), 3424. 10.3390/w12123424

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 21

  KosamuI. B. M.MakwinjaR.KaongaC. C.MengistouS.KaundaE.AlamirewT.et al (2022). Application of DPSIR and tobit models in assessing freshwater ecosystems: the case of Lake malombe, Malawi. Water14 (4), 619. 10.3390/w14040619

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 22

  LakshmishaA.ThielA. (2023). Legitimacy, shared understanding and exchange of resources: co-Managing Lakes along an urban–rural gradient in greater bengaluru metropolitan region, India. Environ. Manag.71 (3), 523–537. 10.1007/s00267-023-01795-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 23

  LemosM. C.AgrawalA. (2006). Environmental governance. Annu. Review Environment Resources31 (2006), 297–325. 10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042605.135621

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 24

  LindenmayerD. B.LaveryT.ScheeleB. C. (2022). Why we need to invest in large-scale, long-term monitoring programs in landscape ecology and conservation biology. Curr. Landsc. Ecol. Rep.7 (4), 137–146. 10.1007/s40823-022-00079-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 25

  LindforsA. (2021). Assessing sustainability with multi-criteria methods: a methodologically focused literature review. Environ. Sustain. Indic.12, 100149. 10.1016/j.indic.2021.100149

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  LiuT.YuL.ChenX.WuH.LinH.LiC.et al (2023). Environmental laws and ecological restoration projects enhancing ecosystem services in China: a meta-analysis. J. Environ. Manag.327, 116810. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116810

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 27

  MakwinjaR.MengistouS.KaundaE.AlamirewT. (2022). Willingness to pay for the ecological restoration of an inland freshwater shallow Lake: case of Lake malombe, Malawi. Heliyon8 (1), e08676. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08676

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 28

  MammadovaA.RedkinA.BeketovaT.SmithC. D. (2022). Community engagement in UNESCO biosphere reserves and geoparks: case studies from mount hakusan in Japan and Altai in Russia. Land11 (2), 227. 10.3390/land11020227

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 29

  MaseseF. O.WanderiE. W.NyangwesoH. N. (2025). Challenges and strategies for management and conservation of water resources and freshwater biodiversity in the Lake Victoria basin. Front. Conservation Sci.6, 1544429. 10.3389/fcosc.2025.1544429

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 30

  McElweeP. D.HarrisonP. A.van HuysenT. L.Alonso RoldánV.BarriosE.DasguptaP.et al (2024). Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on the Interlinkages Among Biodiversity, Water, Food and Health of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. 10.5281/zenodo.13850290

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 31

  MekouarM. A. (2024). Food and agriculture organization of the united nations (FAO). Yearb. Int. Environ. Law34 (1), yvae031. 10.1093/yiel/yvae031

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 32

  MetcalfeA. N.KennedyT. A.MendezG. A.MuehlbauerJ. D. (2022). Applied citizen science in freshwater research. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water9 (2), e1578. 10.1002/wat2.1578

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 33

  NewigJ.JagerN. W.ChalliesE.KochskämperE. (2023). Does stakeholder participation improve environmental governance? Evidence from a meta-analysis of 305 case studies. Glob. Environ. Change82, 102705. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102705

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  NormanG. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Adv. Health Sciences Education15 (5), 625–632. 10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  ObiorahC. A.NdubuisiO. G.AliS. E.AkuU. T.NesiamaO.AgbakhamenC. O.et al (2025). The Role of Law in Environmental Conservation: Regulation, Enforcement and Compliance. 10.5281/zenodo.14956776

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 36

  OECD (2023). Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions: Governance for Sustainable Development. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. 10.1787/9a20554b-en

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 37

  OgunkanD. V. (2022). Achieving sustainable environmental governance in Nigeria: a review for policy consideration. Urban Gov.2 (1), 212–220. 10.1016/j.ugj.2022.04.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  OgwuM. C.El MalahiS.IzahS. C. (2025). “Policy and regulatory frameworks for sustainable environmental practices,” in Evaluating Environmental Processes and Technologies (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland), 513–544. 10.1007/978-3-031-85327-2_16

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 39

  PambudiA. S.KusumantoT. (2023). “Water resources governance in Indonesia towards environmental sustainability along with social and economic development,” in Environmental Governance in Indonesia (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 289–311. 10.1007/978-3-031-15904-6_16

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 40

  PetersK.WagnerP. D.PhyoE. W.ZinW. W.KyiC. C. T.FohrerN. (2023). Spatial and temporal assessment of human-water interactions at the inle Lake, Myanmar: a socio-hydrological DPSIR analysis. Environ. Monit. Assess.195 (1), 220. 10.1007/s10661-022-10730-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 41

  PoikaneS.KellyM. G.FreeG.CarvalhoL.HamiltonD. P.KatsanouK.et al (2024). A global assessment of Lake restoration in practice: new insights and future perspectives. Ecol. Indic.158, 111330. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111330

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 42

  PutnamR. D. (2015). “Bowling alone: america’s declining social capital,” in The City Reader. Editors R. T. LeGates and F. Stout. 6th Edn (New York, NY: Routledge), 188–196.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 43

  PutnamR. D.NanettiR. Y.LeonardiR. (1994). Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Available online at: http://digital.casalini.it/9781400820740 (Accessed April 4, 2026).

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 44

  SpearsB. M.HamiltonD. P.PanY.ZhaoshengC.MayL. (2022). Lake management: is prevention better than cure?Inland Waters12 (1), 173–186. 10.1080/20442041.2021.1895646

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 45

  WangD.XuP. Y.AnB. W.GuoQ. P. (2024). Urban green infrastructure: bridging biodiversity conservation and sustainable urban development through adaptive management approach. Front. Ecol. Evol.12, 1440477. 10.3389/fevo.2024.1440477

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 46

  YadavS. K.BanerjeeA.JhariyaM. K.MeenaR. S.RajA.KhanN.et al (2022). “Environmental education for sustainable development,” in Natural Resources Conservation and Advances for Sustainability (Elsevier), 415–431. 10.1016/B978-0-12-822976-7.00010-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 47

  ZhaiJ.YaoJ.HuX.TianJ.YangR.LvF.et al (2025). Integrating ecological cognition and compensation strategies for livelihood transitions: insights from the Poyang Lake fishing ban policy. Sustainability17 (6), 2539. 10.3390/su17062539

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article