**6. Conclusions**

We began this article by proposing a relational approach to landscape stewardship, outlining what it is, why it matters, and what it means. We then applied this approach to analyse two cases of landscape stewardship, examining multi-actor collaboration for landscape stewardship using Edwards' gardening tools [55,56]. We found the tools useful to gain a more finely-textured understanding of human-human interactions. Applying the tools has shown how important the context and history of a place and its people are in shaping the inter-personal interactions. Historic disparities and power dynamics between people make boundary-crossing work particularly di fficult, and working in small pockets can help to focus boundary-crossing activities. In this, we o ffer an advancement of the work of the gardening tools: applying them in a new context, beyond the educational and social work contexts in which they have usually been applied, has shown that it is important to emphasise the historical aspects and the need for careful attention from stewardship facilitators towards the di fferent dimensions of relationality in the context of boundary crossing work. We sugges<sup>t</sup> that the tools could be applied in similar ways to support analysis, planning, and facilitation and gain a more nuanced understanding of collaboration in other social-ecological sustainability initiatives.

The tools have also helped to identify three key social-relational processes which lend a perspective on collaboration currently under-represented in the literature. We recommend that participants and facilitators of boundary-crossing work pay attention to these three practices as a guide to collaboration: 1. belonging while di ffering, 2. growing together by interacting regularly and building common knowledge, and 3. learning and adapting together with humility and empathy. Finally, we o ffer these three practices as a potential research framework, inviting researchers and other practitioners to investigate the applicability of these practices in their contexts. Our hope is that such applications will deepen our understanding of human-human relationships in social-ecological and landscape stewardship research.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, J.C. and E.R.; Formal analysis, J.C., E.R., A.C., S.F.C., N.L., L.M. and B.v.d.W.; Investigation, J.C., A.C., S.F.C., N.L., L.M., and B.v.d.W.; Methodology, J.C. and E.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research has been funded by the Department of Environment, Forestry, and Fisheries (DEFF), Chief Directorate: Natural Resource Management Programmes (NRM), Directorate: Operational Support and Planning, through the Tsitsa Project. The contents of this paper do not necessarily reflect the view and policies of the DEFF, Chief Directorate: NRM, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. J.C. thanks the Rhodes University Postdoctoral Fellowship; B.v.d.W. was supported in part by the National Research Foundation of South Africa (Grant number: 126382). Living Lands gratefully acknowledges the support from Commonland and the DOEN Foundation. The Article Publication Charge (APC) was funded by Rhodes University.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would like to thank the local residents and project partners in the Langkloof and in the Tsitsa River Catchment for their participation in, and contributions to, this work.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
