Evaluating the Outcomes of Collaborative Modeling for Decision Support

Does collaborative modeling improve water resource management outcomes? How does collaborative modeling improve these outcomes? Does it always work? Under what conditions is collaborative modeling most appropriate? With support from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Institute for Water Resources (IWR), researchers developed an evaluation framework to help address these questions. The framework links the effects of collaborative modeling on decision‐making processes with improvements in the extent to which resource management decisions, practices, and policies balance societal needs. Both practitioners' and participants' experiences suggest that under the right circumstances, collaborative modeling can generate these beneficial outcomes. Researchers developed performance measures and a survey to systematically capture these experiences and evaluate the outcomes of collaborative modeling processes. The survey can provide immediate feedback during a project to determine whether collaborative modeling is having the desired effect and whether course correction is warranted. Over the longer term, the systematic evaluation of collaborative modeling processes will help demonstrate in what ways and under what circumstances collaborative modeling is effective, inform and improve best practices, and raise awareness among water resource planners regarding the use of collaborative modeling for resource management decisions.     

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.     

Social Networks and Community-Based Natural Resource Management

We conducted case studies of three successful examples of collaborative, community-based natural resource conservation and development. Our purpose was to: (1) identify the functions served by interactions within the social networks of involved stakeholders; (2) describe key structural properties of these social networks; and (3) determine how these structural properties varied when the networks were serving different functions. The case studies relied on semi-structured, in-depth interviews of 8 to 11 key stakeholders at each site who had played a significant role in the collaborative projects. Interview questions focused on the roles played by key stakeholders and the functions of interactions between them. Interactions allowed the exchange of ideas, provided access to funding, and enabled some stakeholders to influence others. The exchange of ideas involved the largest number of stakeholders, the highest percentage of local stakeholders, and the highest density of interactions. Our findings demonstrated the value of tailoring strategies for involving stakeholders to meet different needs during a collaborative, community-based natural resource management project. Widespread involvement of local stakeholders may be most appropriate when ideas for a project are being developed. During efforts to exert influence to secure project approvals or funding, however, involving specific individuals with political connections or influence on possible sources of funds may be critical. Our findings are consistent with past work that has postulated that social networks may require specific characteristics to meet different needs in community-based environmental management.     

Mediated Modeling in Water Resource Dialogues Connecting Multiple Scales

We observe a paradigm shift toward collaborative, multi‐level (from local to global) water management and suggestions for scale‐related design principles in the literature. Decision‐support tools are needed that can help achieve scale design principles. Mediated modeling (MM) refers to model building with people, rather than for people. This tool belongs to a family of participatory, systems oriented tools. This article explores their suitability for addressing challenges and principles that arise at multiple‐scales. MM can promote the understanding of cross‐level and cross‐scale links, creating salient, credible, and legitimate knowledge and encouraging boundary functions. Prerequisites for successful MM processes include an openness and willingness to collaborative learning. As new “meso‐level” institutions emerge to address complex challenges in water management collaboratively, tools like MM may play an important role in structuring dialogues, developing adaptive management capacity and advance an ecosystem services approach.     

Adaptive Capacity and Community-Based Natural Resource Management

Why do some community-based natural resource management strategies perform better than others? Commons theorists have approached this question by developing institutional design principles to address collective choice situations, while other analysts have critiqued the underlying assumptions of community-based resource management. However, efforts to enhance community-based natural resource management performance also require an analysis of exogenous and endogenous variables that influence how social actors not only act collectively but do so in ways that respond to changing circumstances, foster learning, and build capacity for management adaptation. Drawing on examples from northern Canada and Southeast Asia, this article examines the relationship among adaptive capacity, community-based resource management performance, and the socio-institutional determinants of collective action, such as technical, financial, and legal constraints, and complex issues of politics, scale, knowledge, community and culture. An emphasis on adaptive capacity responds to a conceptual weakness in community-based natural resource management and highlights an emerging research and policy discourse that builds upon static design principles and the contested concepts in current management practice.     

Tensions between Fiscal Accountability Policy and Collaborative Management Implementation in State Wildlife Agencies

Exploration of collaborative management implementation at two state wildlife agencies (SWAs) found that government fiscal accountability requirements create tensions that negatively impact collaborative plan implementation. Interview-derived insights highlight state policy misalignments between the support of collaborative governance and the application of governmental accountability controls. Tensions from this misalignment can negatively impact implementation and disrupt relationships among the SWA management staff, their partners, and their procurement staff. Rather than working as a part of a unified state interest to implement collaborative governance, procurement processes function as an internal regulatory authority that addresses different state policies. Informant comments identify dissimilar tension levels within the two SWAs, potentially due to the organizational location of procurement staffs. Confirmation of the influence of an SWA procurement staff organizational location on collaborative implementation requires further investigation. Tensions identified here likely exist in other natural resource management agencies and represent an understudied aspect of governmental collaborative management capacity often overlooked in collaborative planning and management scholarship.     

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.     

Intergovernmental relationships after disaster: state and local government learning during flood recovery in Colorado

ABSTRACT

When communities experience disaster, emergency response and recovery are led internally, based on local-level policy decisions and priorities. Decisions about how or whether to rebuild are made by local governments. Higher governmental authorities such as states and provinces may institute their own disaster recovery processes and policies in addition to or in competition with local governments. Greater intergovernmental engagement could increase resources and knowledge, which would yield higher levels of learning and result in superior disaster recovery policy outcomes. The role of higher authorities, then, can have important implications for policy processes and outcomes. The learning literature includes a dearth of studies that analyze the relationships between state and local governments during disaster recovery. We move the learning literature forward by analyzing intergovernmental relationships during disaster recovery. We find that learning within local governments is associated with higher levels of resource flows from state agencies as well as more collaborative intergovernmental relationships. We also find that state governments can improve processes for disaster recovery assistance and bring together disaster-affected local governments to promote learning during the recovery process. While this study focused on relationships constrained by U.S. federal dynamics, the lessons are useful to other multilevel governance systems.     

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.     

Collaborative environmental governance and transaction costs in partnerships: evidence from a social network approach to water management in France

Several studies attempt to explain how collaborative environmental governance processes operate, but the question of why collaboration relationships form has received much less attention. Motivated by this need, this paper provides insights to the broad question: why does collaborative river basin management in France depend so heavily on partnerships made up around a few actors? Accordingly, our analytical framework develops a transaction cost explanation for the extent to which participatory procedures help stakeholders to identify partners and initiate collaboration, and for the causal link between the attributes of these stakeholders and their partnerships. The p2 model is implemented to investigate partnership networks of the key actors that govern the management of the Gironde estuary, the study case. The results provide evidence that environmental institutions bring together heterogeneous actors who might not be ready for collaboration, thereby actors’ perceived power similarity; their geographical proximity and co-presence in formal fora limit transaction costs.     

More is not always better: coping with ambiguity in natural resources management

Coping with ambiguities in natural resources management has become unavoidable. Ambiguity is a distinct type of uncertainty that results from the simultaneous presence of multiple valid, and sometimes conflicting, ways of framing a problem. As such, it reflects discrepancies in meanings and interpretations. Under the presence of ambiguity it is not clear what problem is to be solved, who should be involved in the decision processes or what is an appropriate course of action. Despite the extensive literature about methodologies and tools to deal with uncertainty, not much has been said about how to handle ambiguities. In this paper, we discuss the notions of framing and ambiguity, and we identify five broad strategies to handle it: rational problem solving, persuasion, dialogical learning, negotiation and opposition. We compare these approaches in terms of their assumptions, mechanisms and outcomes and illustrate each approach with a number of concrete methods.     

Developing alternative land-use scenarios to facilitate natural resource management across jurisdictional boundaries

Scenario planning is an effective approach for examining possible futures by exploring the implications and consequences of different policy responses to landscape stressors. We present here a case study that explores plausible futures of urban growth in Southern Nevada, USA that illustrates how scenario analysis can be used to inform region-wide resource management by spatially modeling drivers of change, resource impacts, and potential policy responses. Using a suite of energy, water and biodiversity impact models, we assess the outcomes of the various futures on priority resources, resulting in a clear basis of comparison between alternative policies and their potential outcomes. This case study demonstrates the utility of scenario modeling for natural resource management by exploring crucial policy decisions that might be made in the near-term that could have lasting and sometimes conflicting influences on regional resources over the long term.     

Exploring management strategies for community-based forests using multi-agent systems: A case study in Palawan, Philippines

This paper describes the experiences and lessons learned in applying a multi-agent systems (MAS) model to study the dynamics and complex interactions among stakeholders in the management of community-based forests. The MAS model is developed using the companion modelling (ComMod) approach, which allows for a collaborative development of the model between the stakeholders and researchers. This approach involves the development and application of role-playing games (RPGs) and computer simulation as learning tools and to validate the model. Inferences are drawn from the learning and negotiation processes that the stakeholders and researchers underwent in the collaborative development of the MAS model. These processes ultimately led to the development of a collaborative resource management plan. The approach and the MAS model were applied to a case study involving a community-based forest managed by three villages in the island of Palawan, Philippines.     

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     

A Framework to Evaluate Ecological and Social Outcomes of Collaborative Management: Lessons from Implementation with a Northern Arizona Collaborative Group

As collaborative groups gain popularity as an alternative means for addressing conflict over management of public lands, the need for methods to evaluate their effectiveness in achieving ecological and social goals increases. However, frameworks that examine both effectiveness of the collaborative process and its outcomes are poorly developed or altogether lacking. This paper presents and evaluates the utility of the holistic ecosystem health indicator (HEHI), a framework that integrates multiple ecological and socioeconomic criteria to evaluate management effectiveness of collaborative processes. Through the development and application of the HEHI to a collaborative in northern Arizona, the Diablo Trust, we present the opportunities and challenges in using this framework to evaluate the ecological and social outcomes of collaborative adaptive management. Baseline results from the first application of the HEHI are presented as an illustration of its potential as a co-adaptive management tool. We discuss lessons learned from the process of selecting indicators and potential issues to their long-term implementation. Finally, we provide recommendations for applying this framework to monitoring and adaptive management in the context of collaborative management.     

Local Cultural Knowledge and Water Resource Management: The Wind River Indian Reservation

Ecology and culture comprise interacting components of landscapes. Understanding the integrative nature of the landscape is essential to establish methods for sustainable management. This research takes as a unifying theme the idea that ecological and cultural issues can be incorporated through management. As a first step in developing integrative management strategies, information must be collected that compares and contrasts ecological and cultural issues to identify their areas of intersection. Specifically how can local cultural knowledge enable water resource management that reflects cultural and ecological values? This research examines Native American cultural knowledge for setting water resource management priorities in the Wind River Indian Reservation in central Wyoming. A cross-cultural approach is adopted to assess the relationship between indigenous cultural knowledge and Euro-American perspectives through a comparative examination of the Wind River Water Code and Wyoming Water Law. This research indicates that cultural perspectives provide a rich arena in which to examine management issues. Understanding and identifying cultural practices may be an important first step in collaborative resource management between different cultural groups to prevent conflict and lengthy resolution in court.     

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.     

SUSTAINING LOCAL WATERSHED INITIATIVES: LESSONS FROM LANDCARE AND WATERSHED COUNCILS1

ABSTRACT: In the last decade, watershed groups (WG) established through government initiatives have become an important part of the natural resource management landscape in developed economies. In this paper, the authors reflect upon their research and experience with Landcare in Victoria, and to a lesser extent with Watershed Councils in Oregon, to identify the principles that appear fundamental to sustaining effective WG. In the first instance, these groups must be established at a local scale using social as well as biophysical boundaries. It is also critical that WG are embedded within a supportive institutional framework that identifies realistic roles for private landowners, local organizations such as WG, and regional planning bodies. Without broad stakeholder representation, the perceived benefits of participation are quickly forfeited. It is simply unrealistic to expect an effective network of WG to be sustained without substantial investment by government to provide for program management, group coordination, and cost sharing for on‐ground work. There must also be the commitment and skills within a program to establish processes that build trust and competency amongst citizens and agencies. These principles should also provide a foundation for the critical evaluation of WG programs.     

Trends and issues in land and water resources management: Setting the agenda for change

The classical model of a paradigm shift is used to explore changes that are occurring in public lands and water resources management. Recent policy developments suggest that the traditional paradigm, which is characterized by sustained yield, is in the process of being invalidated. While no new paradigm has been fully accepted, the emerging paradigm does appear to be based on two principles: ecosystem management and collaborative decision making. Implementation of these two principles is likely to require extensive revision of traditional management practices and institutions. Failure to address these issues could result in adoption of the rhetoric of change without any lasting shift in management practices or professional attitudes.     

Navigating Institutional Challenges: Design to Enable Community Participation in Social Learning for Freshwater Planning

Social learning is a process suited to developing understanding and concerted action to tackle complex resource dilemmas, such as freshwater management. Research has begun to recognise that in practice social learning encounters a variety of institutional challenges from the shared habits and routines of stakeholders (organised by rules, norms and strategies) that are embedded in organisational structures and norms of professional behaviour. These institutional habits and routines influence the degree of willingness to engage with stakeholders, and expectations of behaviours in social learning processes. Considering this, there has been a call to understand how institutions influence social learning and emergent outcomes. We addresses this by presenting a heuristic for implementing social learning cognisant of institutional context to answer three questions: (i) How institutional influences impact implementation of social learning design; (ii) how implementation of social learning design modifies institutions influencing social learning; and (iii) how these changes in design and institutions together shape social learning outcomes? To answer these questions a freshwater planning exercise was designed, implemented and evaluated as a social learning process with community groups in two New Zealand catchments. Incorporating participatory reflection enabled the project team to modify social learning design to manage institutional influences hindering progress toward outcomes. Findings emphasise that social learning is underpinned by participants’ changing assumptions about what constitutes the institution of learning itself—from instruction to a dynamic, collective and emergent process. Reflecting on these assumptions also challenged participants’ expectations about their own and others’ behaviours and roles in freshwater planning.