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.     

Water water everywhere,but not enough for salmon? Organizing integrated water and fisheries management in Puget Sound

Natural resource management has traditionally been organized within discrete land, water, and fishery resource sectors. However, emerging environmental problems often cross these boundaries, and managers have struggled to find effective planning approaches for multi-resource concerns. No case better exemplifies these challenges than efforts to ensure sufficient flows of water for salmon in the Pacific Northwest. In this study, we investigate the organizational experiences of collaborative water and salmon recovery planning groups in the Puget Sound region of Washington. Using conceptual frameworks from organizational sociology, we examine how different regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutional forces shape the structure and behavior of both water and salmon recovery planning groups. Data obtained through content analysis of planning documents and interviews with natural resource planners illustrate that legal structures, shared intra-group norms, and the distinct organizational cultures of water and salmon recovery groups constrain these organizations' ability to address linked water-for-salmon concerns. These findings illustrate that assessing institutional and organizational arrangements may be equally as important as understanding hydrology and biology when attempting to forward an integrated approach to water and fisheries management.     

Adaptive Management and Watersheds: A Social Science Perspective1

Abstract:  Adaptive management is often proposed as the most effective way to manage complex watersheds. However, our experience suggests that social and institutional factors constrain the search for, and integration of, the genuine learning that defines adaptive management. Drawing on our work as social scientists, and on a guided panel discussion at a recent AWRA conference, we suggest that watershed‐scale adaptive management must be recognized as a radical departure from established ways of managing natural resources if it is to achieve its promise. Successful implementation will require new ways of thinking about management, new organizational structures and new implementation processes and tools. Adaptive management encourages scrutiny of prevailing social and organizational norms and this is unlikely to occur without a change in the culture of natural resource management and research. Planners and managers require educational, administrative, and political support as they seek to understand and implement adaptive management. Learning and reflection must be valued and rewarded, and fora established where learning through adaptive management can be shared and explored. The creation of new institutions, including educational curricula, organizational policies and practices, and professional norms and beliefs, will require support from within bureaucracies and from politicians. For adaptive management to be effective researchers and managers alike must work together at the watershed‐scale to bridge the gaps between theory and practice, and between social and technical understandings of watersheds and the people who occupy and use them.     

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.     

Typologizing Stakeholder Information Use to Better Understand the Impacts of Collaborative Climate Science

There is increasing interest among scholars in producing information that is useful and usable to land and natural resource managers in a changing climate. This interest has prompted transitions from scientist- to stakeholder-driven or collaborative approaches to climate science. A common indicator of successful collaboration is whether stakeholders use the information resulting from the projects in which they are engaged. However, detailed examples of how stakeholders use climate information are relatively scarce in the literature, leading to a challenge in understanding what researchers can and should expect and plan for in terms of stakeholder use of research findings. Drawing on theoretical, typological, and evaluation insights from the field of information use, we examine stakeholder use of climate information emerging from 13 collaborative climate science projects conducted in the western United States between 2012 and 2016. Three primary types of use emerge from our findings—conceptual, instrumental, and justification—reflecting common typologization of information use. Conceptual use was the most predominant. We suggest that researcher awareness of this typology can enable more systematic understanding of what project outputs stakeholders use and impacts of those outputs, giving way to new areas of inquiry and aiding in the conceptualization and design of climate information products for land and natural resource managers.     

Improving Conservation of Florida Manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris): Conceptualization and Contributions Toward a Regional Warm-Water Network Management Strategy for Sustainable Winter Habitat

We used southwestern Florida as a case study to lay the groundwork for an intended and organized decision-making process for managing warm-water habitat needed by endangered manatees to survive winters in Florida. Scientists and managers have prioritized (a) projecting how the network of warm-water sites will change over the next 50 years as warmed industrial discharges may expire and as flows of natural springs are reduced through redirection of water for human uses, and (b) mitigating such changes to prevent undue consequences to manatees. Given the complexities introduced by manatee ecology; agency organizational structure; shifting public demands; fluctuating resource availability; and managing within interacting cultural, social, political, and environmental contexts, it was clear that a structured decision process was needed. To help promote such a process, we collected information relevant to future decisions including maps of known and suspected warm-water sites and prototyped a characterization of sites and networks. We propose steps that would lead to models that might serve as core tools in manatee/warm-water decision-making, and we summarized topics relevant for informed decision-making (e.g., manatee spatial cognition, risk of cold-stress morbidity and mortality, and human dimensions). A major impetus behind this effort is to ensure proactively that robust modeling tools are available well in advance of the anticipated need for a critical management decision.     

The hazards of risk management

Summary Increasing application of the concept of risk raises several policy and management issues for environmental managers. Functionally, risk can be structured as risk assessment, risk management and risk communication. Each of these functional areas have complex technical issues associated with them that are often unfamiliar to the public.Dr Donald W. Floyd is an Assistant Professor in the School of Natural Resources at The Ohio State University. He specialises in natural resource/environmental policy, with an emphasis on conflict resolution.     

Key Principles of Community-Based Natural Resource Management: A Synthesis and Interpretation of Identified Effective Approaches for Managing the Commons

This article examines recent research on approaches to community-based environmental and natural resource management and reviews the commonalities and differences between these interdisciplinary and multistakeholder initiatives. To identify the most effective characteristics of Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM), I collected a multiplicity of perspectives from research teams and then grouped findings into a matrix of organizational principles and key characteristics. The matrix was initially vetted (or “field tested”) by applying numerous case studies that were previously submitted to the World Bank International Workshop on CBNRM. These practitioner case studies were then compared and contrasted with the findings of the research teams. It is hoped that the developed matrix may be useful to researchers in further focusing research, understanding core characteristics of effective and sustainable CBNRM, providing practitioners with a framework for developing new CBNRM initiatives for managing the commons, and providing a potential resource for academic institutions during their evaluation of their practitioner-focused environmental management and leadership curriculum.     

The development and application of water management sustainability indicators in Brazil and Scotland

This paper reports the formulation and application of a framework of catchment-level water resource management indicators designed to integrate environmental, economic and social aspects of sustainability. The framework of nine indicators was applied to the River Dee and River Sinos catchments in Scotland and Brazil, respectively, following an indicator selection process that involved inputs from water management professionals in both countries, and a pilot exercise in Scotland. The framework was found to capture a number of key sustainability concerns, and was broadly welcomed by water resource managers and experts as a means of better understanding sustainable water resource management. Issues relating to poor water quality and public water supply were particularly prominent in the findings for the Sinos, while findings for the Dee suggested that more attention might be focused on building institutional capacity and public participation in catchment management. The use of some proxy indicators was required in both catchments due to poor data availability, and this problem may hinder the further development of indicator frameworks that attempt to better integrate environmental, economic and social dimensions of sustainability.     

GIS, modeling, and politics: on the tensions of collaborative decision support

A tension exists at the heart of efforts to support collaboration with GIS. Many scholars and practitioners seek to support two separate objectives: (1) problem solving and (2) the exploration of diverse problem understandings. GIS applications designed for problem solving often pre-define the problem space by structuring the kind of information that can be considered or the way in which the problem is conceptualized. In doing so, they necessarily privilege particular perspectives and understandings of the problem while marginalizing others. As a result, these initiatives undermine their second objective. This is problematic in the context of contentious environmental decisions which have broad-reaching impacts on people with diverse perspectives and interests. In such contexts, I argue that equitable collaboration is impossible without first emphasizing the exploration of diverse problem understandings. I support this argument theoretically by turning to the literatures on collaborative planning and spatial decision support, and empirically in my analysis of a case study of an effort to construct a GIS for supporting collaborative water resource management in rural Idaho. Reflecting upon the case, I provide a set of recommendations to those seeking to better negotiate the tensions of supporting collaboration with GIS in the context of contentious environmental and natural resource decisions.