Responding to a policy mandate to collaborate: structuring collaboration in the collaborative forest landscape restoration program

The Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) aims to expand the pace and scale of forest restoration on national forests in the United States. The program requires candidate projects to develop landscape-scale forest restoration proposals through a collaborative process and continue to collaborate throughout planning, implementation, and monitoring. Our comparative case analysis of the initial selected projects examines how existing collaborative groups draw on past experience of collaboration and the requirements of a new mandate to shape collaborative structures as they undertake CFLRP work. While mandating collaboration appears contrary to what is often defined as an informal and emergent process, mandates can encourage stakeholder engagement and renew commitment to overcome past conflict. Our findings also suggest that a collaborative mandate can lead to increased attention and scrutiny, prompting adjustments to collaborative process and structure. As such, mandating collaboration creates dynamic tensions between past experience and new requirements for collaborative practice.     

Urban and Ecological Planning in Chicago: Science,Policy and Dissent

Home to some of the tallest buildings in the world, the urban landscape of Chicago announces itself long before visitors can reach it. This first impression is presently being contradicted by the implementation of an 80 937 ha ecological restoration in the city's greater metropolitan area. Using these projects as a case-study, the objective of this analysis is to understand the integration of environmental conservation efforts into urban life, exploring the viability of a model for combining urban renewal and environmental restoration. Controversies surrounding the Cook County Forest Preserve project familiarize us with some of the difficulties encountered in the science, policy and politics of urban ecological restoration projects. Though the city's urban and environmental history provides clues to precedents and structural opportunities for restorationists, it has not eliminated the doubts of those favouring conservation. However, the case shows that, while controversy may be a burden, it need not end initiatives for urban and environmental planning. Moreover, these controversies can be opportunities for an institutional learning and policy adaption process.     

Restoring Forest Landscapes: Important Lessons Learnt

Forest restoration at large scales, or landscapes, is an approach that is increasingly relevant to the practice of environmental conservation. However, implementation remains a challenge; poor monitoring and lesson learning lead to similar mistakes being repeated. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the global conservation organization, recently took stock of its 10 years of implementation of forest landscape restoration. A significant body of knowledge has emerged from the work of the WWF and its partners in the different countries, which can be of use to the wider conservation community, but for this to happen, lessons need to be systematically collected and disseminated in a coherent manner to the broader conservation and development communities and, importantly, to policy makers. We use this review of the WWF’s experiences and compare and contrast it with other relevant and recent literature to highlight 11 important lessons for future large-scale forest restoration interventions. These lessons are presented using a stepwise approach to the restoration of forested landscapes. We identify the need for long-term commitment and funding, and a concerted and collaborative effort for successful forest landscape restoration. Our review highlights that monitoring impact within landscape-scale forest restoration remains inadequate. We conclude that forest restoration within landscapes is a challenging yet important proposition that has a real but undervalued place in environmental conservation in the twenty-first century.     

Catalyzing Collaboration: Wisconsin’s Agency-Initiated Basin Partnerships

Experience with collaborative approaches to natural resource and environmental management has grown substantially over the past 20 years, and multi-interest, shared-resources initiatives have become prevalent in the United States and internationally. Although often viewed as “grass-roots” and locally initiated, governmental participants are crucial to the success of collaborative efforts, and important questions remain regarding their appropriate roles, including roles in partnership initiation. In the midst of growing governmental support for collaborative approaches in the mid-1990s, the primary natural resource and environmental management agency in Wisconsin (USA) attempted to generate a statewide system of self-sustaining, collaborative partnerships, organized around the state’s river basin boundaries. The agency expected the partnerships to enhance participation by stakeholders, leverage additional resources, and help move the agency toward more integrated and ecosystem-based resource management initiatives. Most of the basin partnerships did form and function, but ten years after this initiative, the agency has moved away from these partnerships and half have disbanded. Those that remain active have changed, but continue to work closely with agency staff. Those no longer functioning lacked clear focus, were dependent upon agency leadership, or could not overcome issues of scale. This article outlines the context for state support of collaborative initiatives and explores Wisconsin’s experience with basin partnerships by discussing their formation and reviewing governmental roles in partnerships’ emergence and change. Wisconsin’s experience suggests benefits from agency support and agency responsiveness to partnership opportunities, but cautions about expectations for initiating general-purpose partnerships.     

Compliance with Wetland Mitigation Standards in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA

The United States has lost about half its wetland acreage since European settlement, and the effectiveness of current wetland mitigation policies is often questioned. In most states, federal wetland laws are overseen by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but Michigan administers these laws through the state's Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Our research provides insight into the effectiveness of the state's implementation of these laws. We examined wetland mitigation permit files issued in Michigan's Upper Peninsula between 2003 and 2006 to assess compliance with key MDEQ policies. Forty-six percent of files were out of compliance with monitoring report requirements, and forty-nine percent lacked required conservation easement documents. We also conducted site assessments of select compensatory wetland projects to determine compliance with MDEQ invasive plant species performance standards. Fifty-five percent were out of compliance. We found no relationship between invasive species noncompliance and past site monitoring, age of mitigation site, or proximity to roads. However, we found wetland restoration projects far more likely to be compliant with performance standards than wetland creation projects. We suggest policy changes and agency actions that could increase compliance with wetland restoration and mitigation goals.     

Creating and sustaining community capacity for ecosystem-based management: Is local government the key?

Recently, collaborative approaches to natural resource management have been widely promoted as ways to broaden participation and community involvement in furthering the goals of ecosystem management. The language of collaboration has even been incorporated into controversial legislation, such as the US Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. This research examines collaboration and sharing management responsibility for federal public land with local communities through a case study of the Ashland Municipal Watershed in southern Oregon. A policy sciences approach is used to analyze community participation and institutional relationships between the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and local city government in the planning processes of five land management actions occurring over a 7-year period. The knowledge gained from examining differing approaches to planning and decision making in the Ashland watershed is used to suggest future planning processes to develop and sustain the community capacity necessary to support implementation of community-based ecosystem management.     

A Framework for Assessing Collaborative Capacity in Community-Based Public Forest Management

Community-based collaborative groups involved in public natural resource management are assuming greater roles in planning, project implementation, and monitoring. This entails the capacity of collaborative groups to develop and sustain new organizational structures, processes, and strategies, yet there is a lack of understanding what constitutes collaborative capacity. In this paper, we present a framework for assessing collaborative capacities associated with community-based public forest management in the US. The framework is inductively derived from case study research and observations of 30 federal forest-related collaborative efforts. Categories were cross-referenced with literature on collaboration across a variety of contexts. The framework focuses on six arenas of collaborative action: (1) organizing, (2) learning, (3) deciding, (4) acting, (5) evaluating, and (6) legitimizing. Within each arena are capacities expressed through three levels of social agency: individuals, the collaborative group itself, and participating or external organizations. The framework provides a language and set of organizing principles for understanding and assessing collaborative capacity in the context of community-based public forest management. The framework allows groups to assess what capacities they already have and what more is needed. It also provides a way for organizations supporting collaboratives to target investments in building and sustaining their collaborative capacities. The framework can be used by researchers as a set of independent variables against which to measure collaborative outcomes across a large population of collaborative efforts.     

Making It Work: Keys to Successful Collaboration in Natural Resource Management

This paper explores the positive aspects of collaboration in natural resources. Its purpose was to investigate participants' overall attitudes about keys to successful collaboration. The sample for the study consisted of 671 participants involved in 30 collaborative initiatives (CI) with the Forest Service. Using a mailed questionnaire, this study profiled the collaborative initiatives investigating purpose, problems addressed, groups involved, and years in existence. Respondents were queried on their overall perspectives on keys to successful collaboration. A total of more than 300 comments was collected from respondents and six categories emerged: development, information exchange, organizational support, personal communication, relationships/team building, and accomplishments. Continued research will need to explore the short- and long-term impacts of collaboration in natural resources.     

Assessing Societal Impacts When Planning Restoration of Large Alluvial Rivers: A Case Study of the Sacramento River Project, California

Studies have shown that ecological restoration projects are more likely to gain public support if they simultaneously increase important human services that natural resources provide to people. River restoration projects have the potential to influence many of the societal functions (e.g., flood control, water quality) that rivers provide, yet most projects fail to consider this in a comprehensive manner. Most river restoration projects also fail to take into account opportunities for revitalization of large-scale river processes, focusing instead on opportunities presented at individual parcels. In an effort to avoid these pitfalls while planning restoration of the Sacramento River, we conducted a set of coordinated studies to evaluate societal impacts of alternative restoration actions over a large geographic area. Our studies were designed to identify restoration actions that offer benefits to both society and the ecosystem and to meet the information needs of agency planning teams focusing on the area. We worked with local partners and public stakeholders to design and implement studies that assessed the effects of alternative restoration actions on flooding and erosion patterns, socioeconomics, cultural resources, and public access and recreation. We found that by explicitly and scientifically melding societal and ecosystem perspectives, it was possible to identify restoration actions that simultaneously improve both ecosystem health and the services (e.g., flood protection and recreation) that the Sacramento River and its floodplain provide to people. Further, we found that by directly engaging with local stakeholders to formulate, implement, and interpret the studies, we were able to develop a high level of trust that ultimately translated into widespread support for the project.     

Managing for Multiple Resources Under Climate Change: National Forests

This study explores potential adaptation approaches in planning and management that the United States Forest Service might adopt to help achieve its goals and objectives in the face of climate change. Availability of information, vulnerability of ecological and socio-economic systems, and uncertainties associated with climate change, as well as the interacting non-climatic changes, influence selection of the adaptation approach. Resource assessments are opportunities to develop strategic information that could be used to identify and link adaptation strategies across planning levels. Within a National Forest, planning must incorporate the opportunity to identify vulnerabilities to climate change as well as incorporate approaches that allow management adjustments as the effects of climate change become apparent. The nature of environmental variability, the inevitability of novelty and surprise, and the range of management objectives and situations across the National Forest System implies that no single approach will fit all situations. A toolbox of management options would include practices focused on forestalling climate change effects by building resistance and resilience into current ecosystems, and on managing for change by enabling plants, animals, and ecosystems to adapt to climate change. Better and more widespread implementation of already known practices that reduce the impact of existing stressors represents an important “no regrets” strategy. These management opportunities will require agency consideration of its adaptive capacity, and ways to overcome potential barriers to these adaptation options.     

Boundary spanners as trust ambassadors in collaborative natural resource management

Collaboration is a growing trend in agency-led natural resource management in the USA, carrying the promise of defusing conflict and incorporating a broader range of stakeholder ideas. However, concerns exist that confrontational or litigious groups may use collaborative forums to their organization's own advantage. We conducted case studies on three collaboratives to understand how these efforts have influenced the behavior of environmental groups who were previously at odds with the managing agency, the US Forest Service. Results suggest that trust between boundary spanners from historically adversarial groups can support a realignment of the accountabilities they feel. As rational, affinitive, and procedural trust developed, boundary spanners began to advocate, within their home organizations, for the collaborative's goals. Key activities driving these realignments included the development of fair and transparent procedures governing the collaborative group, structured interaction designed to build consensus, and planned informal interactions that revealed shared values among collaborative participants.     

Institutional,Individual, and Socio-Cultural Domains of Partnerships: A Typology of USDA Forest Service Recreation Partners

Federal land management agencies, such as the USDA Forest Service, have expanded the role of recreation partners reflecting constrained growth in appropriations and broader societal trends towards civic environmental governance. Partnerships with individual volunteers, service groups, commercial outfitters, and other government agencies provide the USDA Forest Service with the resources necessary to complete projects and meet goals under fiscal constraints. Existing partnership typologies typically focus on collaborative or strategic alliances and highlight organizational dimensions (e.g., structure and process) defined by researchers. This paper presents a partner typology constructed from USDA Forest Service partnership practitioners’ conceptualizations of 35 common partner types. Multidimensional scaling of data from unconstrained pile sorts identified 3 distinct cultural dimensions of recreation partners—specifically, partnership character, partner impact, and partner motivations—that represent institutional, individual, and socio-cultural cognitive domains. A hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis provides further insight into the various domains of agency personnel’s conceptualizations. While three dimensions with high reliability (RSQ = 0.83) and corresponding hierarchical clusters illustrate commonality between agency personnel’s partnership suppositions, this study also reveals variance in personnel’s familiarity and affinity for specific partnership types. This real-world perspective on partner types highlights that agency practitioners not only make strategic choices when selecting and cultivating partnerships to accomplish critical task, but also elect to work with partners for the primary purpose of providing public service and fostering land stewardship.     

Forest Biodiversity Monitoring for REDD+: A Case Study of Actors’ Views in Peru

The climate change mitigation mechanism Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries (REDD+) is currently being negotiated under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Integrating biodiversity monitoring into REDD+ facilitates compliance with the safeguards stipulated by the UNFCCC to exclude environmental risks. Interviews with actors engaged in REDD+ implementation and biodiversity conservation at the national and sub-national level in Peru (n = 30) and a literature review (n = 58) were conducted to pinpoint constraints and opportunities for monitoring effects of REDD+ management interventions on biodiversity, and to identify relevant biodiversity data and indicators. It was found that particularly sub-national actors, who were frequently involved in REDD+ pilot projects, acknowledge the availability of biodiversity data. Actors at both the national and sub-national levels, however, criticized data gaps and data being scattered across biodiversity research organizations. Most of the literature reviewed (78 %) included indicators on the state of certain biodiversity aspects, especially mammals. Indicators for pressure on biodiversity, impacts on environmental functions, or policy responses to environmental threats were addressed less frequently (31, 21, and 10 %, respectively). Integrating biodiversity concerns in carbon monitoring schemes was considered to have potential, although few specific examples were identified. The involvement of biodiversity research organizations in sub-national REDD+ activities enhances monitoring capacities. It is discussed how improvements in collaboration among actors from the project to the national level could facilitate the evaluation of existing information at the national level. Monitoring changes in ecosystem services may increase the ecological and socioeconomic viability of REDD+.     

Why Won’t They Come? Stakeholder Perspectives on Collaborative National Forest Planning by Participation Level

Collaboration has taken root in national forest planning, providing expanded opportunities for stakeholder participation in decision-making, but are these processes considered meaningful by key stakeholders? Do the processes result in increased participation by key stakeholders? We present results of a study of stakeholder perspectives of a collaborative planning process on the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests in Western Colorado, U.S.A. The stakeholders were stratified by participation levels in order to explore a possible relationship between participation and perceptions of the collaborative process. We used a Q-methodology approach to compare and contrast perspectives across participant levels in the North Fork Valley Landscape Working Group process. The results demonstrate four distinct perspectives on the collaborative process: 1) The collaborative process is valued by the Forest Service and will directly influence planning decisions; 2) The Forest Service, the collaborative process, and other stakeholders are not to be trusted; 3) The collaborative process is most effective when emphasizing place-specific dialogue that primarily involves stakeholders educating the Forest Service about issues; and 4) Forest planning involves issues requiring the application of scientific knowledge and expertise rather than collaboration. These perspectives were not strongly associated with participation levels, with time constraint being the primary mediating factor affecting participation. There are several possible actions policymakers and planners can take to enhance participation and overcome high rates of nonparticipation.     

Defining success over time for large landscape conservation organizations

Transboundary issues, like climate change, threaten the health of natural ecosystems. To address these problems, management is taking place at larger geographic scales and across political boundaries. Although landscapes are considered the suitable scale for conservation, limited research exists on how members of large landscape conservation organizations (LLCOs) define success. The Crown Managers Partnership (CMP) and the Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Cooperative (SAMAB) are two LLCOs that support collaboration for the conservation of the Northern Rockies and the Southern Appalachian regions. We analyze the diverse interpretations of success among SAMAB and CMP participants during different stages of the organizations’ life cycle. Of particular importance is how members emphasize intangible successes such as relationships and the cascading effects LLCOs can have on other projects and organizations. This research provides insight into the distinct niche LLCOs fill in transboundary ecosystem management.     

Managing Public Forests: Understanding the Role of Collaborative Planning

/ As federal land management agencies such as the USDA Forest Service increasingly choose to implement collaborative methods of public participation, research is needed to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the technique, to identify barriers to effective implementation of collaborative processes, and to provide recommendations for increasing its effectiveness. This paper reports on the findings of two studies focused on the experiences of Forest Service employees and their external partners as they work to implement collaborative planning processes in national forest management. The studies show both similarities and differences between agency employees and their partners in terms of how they evaluate their collaborative experiences. The studies reveal that both Forest Service employees and external partners are supportive of collaborative planning and expect it to continue in the future, both see the trust and relationships built during the process as being its greatest benefit, and both see the Forest Service's organizational culture as the biggest barrier to effective collaborative efforts. The groups differed in terms of evaluating each other's motivation for participating in the process and in whether the process was a good use of time and resources, with external partners seeing it as too drawn out and expensive. The paper concludes with a discussion of the policy implications and changes necessary to increase the effectiveness of collaborative efforts within the Forest Service and other federal land management agencies.KEY WORDS: Public land management; Collaborative planning; National forests; Public participation     

Fuel Reduction Management Practices in Riparian Areas of the Western USA

Two decades of uncharacteristically severe wildfires have caused government and private land managers to actively reduce hazardous fuels to lessen wildfire severity in western forests, including riparian areas. Because riparian fuel treatments are a fairly new management strategy, we set out to document their frequency and extent on federal lands in the western U.S. Seventy-four USDA Forest Service Fire Management Officers (FMOs) in 11 states were interviewed to collect information on the number and characteristics of riparian fuel reduction treatments in their management district. Just under half of the FMOs surveyed (43%) indicated that they were conducting fuel reduction treatments in riparian areas. The primary management objective listed for these projects was either fuel reduction (81%) or ecological restoration and habitat improvement (41%), though multiple management goals were common (56%). Most projects were of small extent (93% < 300 acres), occurred in the wildland-urban interface (75%), and were conducted in ways to minimize negative impacts on species and habitats. The results of this survey suggest that managers are proceeding cautiously with treatments. To facilitate project planning and implementation, managers recommended early coordination with resource specialists, such as hydrologists and fish and wildlife biologists. Well-designed monitoring of the consequences of riparian fuel treatments on fuel loads, fire risk, and ecological effects is needed to provide a scientifically-defensible basis for the continued and growing implementation of these treatments.     

Theory into Practice: Implementing Ecosystem Management Objectives in the USDA Forest Service

In the United States and around the world, scientists and practitioners have debated the definition and merits of ecosystem management as a new approach to natural resource management. While these debates continue, a growing number of organizations formally have adopted ecosystem management. However, adoption does not necessarily lead to successful implementation, and theories are not always put into practice. In this article, we examine how a leading natural resource agency, the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, has translated ecosystem management theory into concrete policy objectives and how successfully these objectives are perceived to be implemented throughout the national forest system. Through document analysis, interviews, and survey responses from 345 Forest Service managers (district rangers, forest supervisors, and regional foresters), we find that the agency has incorporated numerous ecosystem management components into its objectives. Agency managers perceive that the greatest attainment of such objectives is related to collaborative stewardship and integration of scientific information, areas in which the organization has considerable prior experience. The objectives perceived to be least attained are adaptive management and integration of social and economic information, areas requiring substantial new resources and a knowledge base not traditionally emphasized by natural resource managers. Overall, success in implementing ecosystem management objectives is linked to committed forest managers.     

Compensatory Mitigation for Streams Under the Clean Water Act: Reassessing Science and Redirecting Policy1

Doyle, Martin W. and F. Douglas Shields, 2012. Compensatory Mitigation for Streams Under the Clean Water Act: Reassessing Science and Redirecting Policy. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(3): 494-509. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00631.x Abstract: Current stream restoration science is not adequate to assume high rates of success in recovering ecosystem functional integrity. The physical scale of most stream restoration projects is insufficient because watershed land use controls ambient water quality and hydrology, and land use surrounding many restoration projects at the time of their construction, or in the future, do not provide sufficient conditions for functional integrity recovery. Reach scale channel restoration or modification has limited benefits within the broader landscape context. Physical habitat variables are often the basis for indicating success, but are now increasingly seen as poor surrogates for actual biological function; the assumption “if you build it they will come” lacks support of empirical studies. If stream restoration is to play a continued role in compensatory mitigation under the United States Clean Water Act, then significant policy changes are needed to adapt to the limitations of restoration science and the social environment under which most projects are constructed. When used for compensatory mitigation, stream restoration should be held to effectiveness standards for actual and measurable physical, chemical, or biological functional improvement. To achieve improved mitigation results, greater flexibility may be required for the location and funding of restoration projects, the size of projects, and the restoration process itself.     

Creating False Images: Stream Restoration in an Urban Setting

Stream restoration has become a multibillion dollar business with mixed results as to its efficacy. This case study utilizes pre‐ and post‐monitoring data from restoration projects on an urban stream to assess how well stream conditions, publicly stated project goals, and project implementation align. Our research confirms previous studies showing little communication among academic researchers and restoration practitioners as well as provides further evidence that restoration efforts tend to focus on small‐scale, specific sites without considering broader land use patterns. This study advances our understanding of restoration by documenting that although improving ecological conditions is a stated goal for restoration projects, the implemented measures are not always focused on those issues that are the most ecologically salient. What these projects have accomplished is to protect the built environment and promote positive public perception. We argue that these disconnects among publicized goals for restoration, the implemented features, and actual stream conditions may create a false image of what an ecologically stable stream looks like and therefore perpetuate a false sense of optimism about the feasibility of restoring urban streams.