Role of Adaptive Management for Watershed Councils

Recent findings in the Umpqua River Basin in southwestern Oregon illustrate a tension in the rise of both community-based and watershed-based approaches to aquatic resource management. While community-based institutions such as watershed councils offer relief from the government control landowners dislike, community-based approaches impinge on landowners' strong belief in independence and private property rights. Watershed councils do offer the local control landowners advocate; however, institutional success hinges on watershed councils' ability to reduce bureaucracy, foster productive discussion and understanding among stakeholders, and provide financial, technical, and coordination support. Yet, to accomplish these tasks current watershed councils rely on the fiscal and technical capital of the very governmental entities that landowners distrust. Adaptive management provides a basis for addressing the apparent tension by incorporating landowners' belief in environmental resilience and acceptance of experimentation that rejects “one size fits all solutions.” Therefore community-based adaptive watershed management provides watershed councils a framework that balances landowners' independence and fear of government intrusion, acknowledges the benefits of community cooperation through watershed councils, and enables ecological assessment of landowner-preferred practices. Community-based adaptive management integrates social and ecological suitability to achieve conservation outcomes by providing landowners the flexibility to use a diverse set of conservation practices to achieve desired ecological outcomes, instead of imposing regulations or specific practices.     

Cross-Boundary Coordination on Forested Landscapes: Investigating Alternatives for Implementation

Cross-boundary coordination is a tool for ecosystem management whereby landowners voluntarily coordinate management practices toward economic and/or ecological landscape-scale outcomes (e.g., fiber, invasive species control, habitat). Past research indicates that it may be particularly applicable on landscapes that include small forest landholdings. To explore alternatives by which coordination might occur, we conducted seven focus groups with landowners (n = 51) who actively manage their forests in southwest Wisconsin and northeast Iowa. Focus group participants were presented with three hypothetical alternatives to coordinate with their neighbors; landowners could self-organize, work with a natural resource professional (i.e., forester), or work with an organization to complete a cross-boundary practice. In this article, we focus on the latter two alternatives and the role of two social theories—principal-agent and cooperation—in explaining landowners’ evaluations of these alternatives. Key findings are that (1) cross-boundary coordination has the potential to alleviate problems between landowners and resource professionals inherent to their typical working relationship, and (2) social relationships are a major factor contributing to landowners’ willingness to participate. We posit that cross-boundary coordination offers a non-economic incentive for landowners to work together as it may reduce the uncertainty associated with hiring a resource professional. At the same time, professionals can provide a bridging function among landowners who are unacquainted. To achieve these outcomes and expand the adoption of cross-boundary coordination, we suggest four guidelines. First, foster dialogue among landowners toward shared cognition and oversight. Second, match landowners’ practices and objectives such that there are clear benefits to all. Third, develop relationships through low risk activities where possible. Fourth, do not expect on-going commitments.

Some community socio-economic benefits of watershed councils: A case study from Oregon

One of the most significant junctures in natural resource planning and management in recent years has been the emergence of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM). The central focus of CBNRM is the environment, of course. However, it explicitly considers the local economy and community as well. It is a highly participatory approach to local, place-based projects, programs and policies aimed simultaneously at environmental and community health. This paper is an attempt to shed light on what happens in the local economy and community as a result of pursuing a CBNRM strategy. Oregon has been in the vanguard in putting CBNRM into operation. A key example is the state's experience with local watershed councils and the state agency that supports them, the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB). Drawing from a larger study of Oregon's watershed councils, we ask and answer the questions: ‘What direct contribution do watershed councils make to the local economies of Oregon?’; ‘Do watershed councils contribute to ‘civic engagement’ in Oregon?’ and ‘Do they enhance individuals' and communities’ capacity to engage in public issues beyond watershed council activities?’     

Wildfire Risk Management on a Landscape with Public and Private Ownership: Who Pays for Protection?

Wildfire, like many natural hazards, affects large landscapes with many landowners and the risk individual owners face depends on both individual and collective protective actions. In this study, we develop a spatially explicit game theoretic model to examine the strategic interaction between landowners’ hazard mitigation decisions on a landscape with public and private ownership. We find that in areas where ownership is mixed, the private landowner performs too little fuel treatment as they “free ride”—capture benefits without incurring the costs—on public protection, while areas with public land only are under-protected. Our central result is that this pattern of fuel treatment comes at a cost to society because public resources focus in areas with mixed ownership, where local residents capture the benefits, and are not available for publicly managed land areas that create benefits for society at large. We also find that policies that encourage public expenditures in areas with mixed ownership, such as the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003 and public liability for private values, subsidize the residents who choose to locate in the high-risk areas at the cost of lost natural resource benefits for others.     

Making Collaborative Watershed Management Work: The Confluence of State and Regional Initiatives

Initiatives in the Neponset, Ipswich, and Sudbury-Assabet-Concord watersheds highlight how watershed-scale innovation in engaging nongovernment participants is influenced, but not dominated, by the statewide program, the Massachusetts Watershed Initiative. The presence or absence of three elements—external support, process, and issue—and the order in which they occur, shape the viability of collaborative watershed-scale management initiatives. External support includes providing personnel or funding from outside an initiative. Process is the interaction among individuals undertaking watershed-wide policy development and/or implementation. An issue is an attention-requiring concern, vital to a watershed, that can most effectively be addressed by a coordinated strategy among different parties. A process generated by an issue is sustainable and amenable to enhancement through external support. The contribution of external support is most apparent when outside assistance is provided after an issue has crystallized into clear problem needs that can be addressed through specific research projects or implementation activities. Process is central in shaping issues, utilizing external support, and generating management results. The outcomes of voluntary processes in the three watershed initiatives highlight how the evolution of the Massachusetts Watershed Initiative leads to, and depends upon, the development of watershed-scale initiatives.     

Evolving Water Management Institutions in the Red River Basin

Institutions are the rules and norms that guide societal behavior. As societies evolve—with more diverse economies, increased populations and incomes, and more water scarcity—new and more complex water management institutions need to be developed. This evolution of water management institutions may also be observed across different constituencies, with different societal needs, in the same time period. The Red River of the North basin is particularly well suited for research on water management issues. A key feature of water management in the Red River Basin is the presence of three completely different sets of water law. Minnesota’s water law is based upon riparian rights. North Dakota’s water law is based upon prior appropriation. Manitoba has a system of water allocation that features provincial control. Because the basin is fairly homogeneous in terms of land use and geographic features, its institutional diversity makes this an excellent case study for the analysis of local water institutions. This article reviews the local water management institutions in the Red River Basin and assesses the ongoing institutional evolution of local water management.     

Explaining land management decisions to understand local landscape functions and change. Some insights from Tuscany

Structural changes in agriculture and urbanisation affect land management regimes and local landscape functions. Studying the new functions of land is as relevant as the owners' land management decisions, the replacement of farming with different activities and land uses may impact not only the local landscape's functions but also, in the long run, its structure and the environment. Drawing on a detailed case study in Tuscany based on qualitative interviews with landowners and on the understanding of the socio-economic context, this article analyses landowners' attitudes towards land property and farming in relation to individual motives as well as to local and supra-local contexts. Five relational typologies of landowners are identified: pure farmers, amenity farmers, land developers, land-with-house owners and house-with-land owners. Diverse trends – such as particular farmers’ attitudes towards land development, or the emerging role of non-professional farmers in land management – are found to raise challenges related to rural land planning and management.     

Sustainability and attitudes to locality: the discourse of town and parish councillors

The possible role of parish and town councils (local councils) in the local implementation of sustainable development has been overlooked both in research and in policy-making. This article is based on research into local councillors' attitudes to sustainability and to their own role within a single county. A “discourse of local council legitimation” is identified, in which local councillors see their communities as living organisms, whose interests they represent with the benefit of local knowledge and holistic thinking – characteristics which they see as absent at other levels of government. Local councillors essentially see their role as local and relatively short-term – a perspective that will have to be addressed if local councils are to make a significant contribution to sustainability.     

What’s a Stream Without Water? Disproportionality in Headwater Regions Impacting Water Quality

Headwater streams are critical components of the stream network, yet landowner perceptions, attitudes, and property management behaviors surrounding these intermittent and ephemeral streams are not well understood. Our research uses the concept of watershed disproportionality, where coupled social-biophysical conditions bear a disproportionate responsibility for harmful water quality outcomes, to analyze the potential influence of riparian landowner perceptions and attitudes on water quality in headwater regions. We combine social science survey data, aerial imagery, and an analysis of spatial point processes to assess the relationship between riparian landowner perceptions and attitudes in relation to stream flow regularity. Stream flow regularity directly and positively shapes landowners’ water quality concerns, and also positively influences landowners’ attitudes of stream importance—a key determinant of water quality concern as identified in a path analysis. Similarly, riparian landowners who do not notice or perceive a stream on their property are likely located in headwater regions. Our findings indicate that landowners of headwater streams, which are critical areas for watershed-scale water quality, are less likely to manage for water quality than landowners with perennial streams in an obvious, natural channel. We discuss the relationships between streamflow and how landowners develop understandings of their stream, and relate this to the broader water quality implications of headwater stream mismanagement.     

Changing Approaches to Mountain Watersheds Management in Mainland South and Southeast Asia

Mountain watersheds, comprising a substantial proportion of national territories of countries in mainland South and Southeast Asia, are biophysical and socioeconomic entities, regulating the hydrological cycle, sequestrating carbon dioxide, and providing natural resources for the benefit of people living in and outside the watersheds. A review of the literature reveals that watersheds are undergoing degradation at varying rates caused by a myriad of factors ranging from national policies to farmers' socioeconomic conditions. Many agencies—governmental and private—have tried to address the problem in selected watersheds. Against the backdrop of the many causes of degradation, this study examines the evolving approaches to watershed management and development. Until the early 1990s, watershed management planning and implementation followed a highly centralized approach focused on heavily subsidized structural measures of soil conservation, planned and implemented without any consultation with the mainstream development agencies and local people. Watershed management was either the sole responsibility of specially created line agencies or a project authority established by external donors. As a consequence, the initiatives could not be continued or contribute to effective conservation of watersheds. Cognizant of this, emphasis has been laid on integrated, participatory approaches since the early 1990s. Based on an evaluation of experiences in mainland South and Southeast Asia, this study finds not much change in the way that management plans are being prepared and executed. The emergence of a multitude of independent watershed management agencies, with their own organizational structures and objectives and planning and implementation systems has resulted in watershed management endeavors that have been in complete disarray. Consistent with the principle of sustainable development, a real integrated, participatory approach requires area-specific conservation programs that are well incorporated into integrated socioeconomic development plans prepared and implemented by local line agencies in cooperation with nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and concerned people.     

Landowner motivations for watershed restoration: lessons from five watersheds

Collaborative watershed management initiatives have increased tremendously over the past decade. One of the critical questions for these initiatives is how to influence private land management practices to improve watershed health. This article researches landowner motivations and preferences for watershed restoration efforts in five watersheds in Western Oregon. Based on a survey of 446 landowners and 80 personal interviews, the research revealed that landowner perspectives vary by socio-economic, cultural, and land use characteristics. They are strongly motivated by a concern for future generations and interpersonal influence is particularly important. Finances, time, and unfamiliarity were all significant barriers to the adoption of conservation practices. The findings also revealed considerable variation among landowners as to their trusted sources of information and preferred outreach methods. Beyond the findings in Oregon, the research suggests that watershed initiatives need to understand landowner characteristics and motivating factors to better promote watershed restoration and target outreach efforts.     

Benefit–Cost Analysis of StormwaterQuality Improvements

The major purpose of this paper is to explore the potential value of benefit–cost evaluation for stormwater quality management decisions at a local level. A preliminary benefit–cost analysis (BCA) screening method is used for maximum extent practicable (MEP) analysis, identifying promising management practices, and identifying societal and economic tradeoffs for local stormwater problems. Ballona Creek, a major urban storm drain in Los Angeles, California, USA, is used to illustrate the practicality of the benefit–cost evaluation. The Ballona Creek example demonstrates the economic limits of stormwater management in an urban region and attests to the value of coordinated basinwide management compared to uncoordinated management by individual landowners. Evaluation results suggest that in urban areas, the benefit of stormwater quality improvements might be far greater if accompanied by comprehensive redesign of drainage networks and neighboring land uses. In this case, benefit–cost analysis is found to be useful for evaluating and understanding stormwater management alternatives despite the uncertainties in characterizing stormwater quality and the effects of stormwater management on improving receiving water quality.     

An integrative methodological framework for sustainable environmental planning and management

Sustainable environmental planning and management require effective integration of ecological, socioeconomic, and institutional elements. This paper presents an integrative methodological framework for sustainable environmental planning and management. The development of this integrative framework is accomplished by combining two complementary analytical approaches—Hufschmidt's conceptual framework for watershed planning and management and the ABC resource survey method. The combined methodological framework seeks to delineate and synthesize essential ecological information utilizing an integrative resource survey method. This method generates classifications of environmental significance and constraint. Areas of environmental significance and constraint are then linked to appropriate and acceptable resource management actions, implementation tools (e.g., education, technical assistance), and institutional and organizational arrangements. The integrative methodological framework was developed for application in the Rio Fortuna watershed in Costa Rica's Arenal Conservation Area. The watershed is characterized by a variety of land and resource uses, including biologically diverse and ecologically fragile protected areas, small-parcel agriculture, cattle ranching, and tourism.     

A Paradigm of International Environmental Law: The Case for Controlling the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes

The production of large quantities of wastes globally has created a commercial activity involving the transfrontier shipments of hazardous wastes, intended to be managed at economically attractive waste-handling facilities located elsewhere. In fact, huge quantities of hazardous wastes apparently travel the world in search of “acceptable” waste management facilities. For instance, within the industrialized countries alone, millions of tonnes of potentially hazardous waste cross national frontiers each year on their way for recycling or to treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) because there is no local disposal capacity for these wastes, or because legal disposal or reuse in a foreign country may be more environmentally sound, or managing the wastes in the foreign country may be less expensive than at home. The cross-boundary traffic in hazardous wastes has lately been under close public scrutiny, however, resulting in the accession of several international agreements and laws to regulate such activities. This paper discusses and analyzes the most significant control measures and major agreements in this new commercial activity involving hazardous wastes. In particular, the discussion recognizes the difficulties with trying to implement the relevant international agreements among countries of vastly different socioeconomic backgrounds. Nonetheless, it is also noted that global environmental agreements will generally be a necessary component of ensuring adequate environmental protection for the world community—and thus a need for the careful implementation of such agreements and regulations.     

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT AND SOCIAL CAPITAL: KEYS TO WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SUCCESS IN ALABAMA1

ABSTRACT: Forces driving the initiation of watershed management activities in Alabama have ranged from top-down, agency-led initiatives to bottom-up, citizen-led initiatives. A number of watershed projects in Alabama were examined including three NPS projects funded by U.S. EPA grants and a more comprehensive locally-initiated watershed management authority. Watershed projects were categorized into four different models. Factors which produced significant differences in the development and utilization of social capital and local capacities for watershed management were investigated. The success of watershed management initiatives was examined qualitatively and appears to correlate with a number of social factors. These factors include the extent of stakeholder involvement, the availability of social capital in the watershed, and the presence of a real or perceived water resource concern or problem. Both short term project success and the longer term prognosis for continued watershed management activities seems to depend most upon the amount of social capital in the watershed. Two major changes in resource management programs and organizations could lead to increased focus on and support for local watershed management initiatives. These are reorganization of resource management agencies around watershed units, and assignment of at least one staff person in each watershed unit to watershed management.     

Regionalization of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Japan: Balancing the Proximity Principle with Economic Efficiency

The proximity principle—disposing of waste close to its origin—has been a central value in municipal solid waste (MSW) management in Japan for the last 30 years and its widespread adoption has helped resolve numerous “Not in My Backyard” issues related to MSW management. However, MSW management costs have soared, in large part because of aggressive recycling efforts and because most MSW is incinerated in a country that has scarce landfill capacity. In addition, smaller, less sophisticated incinerators have been closed because of high dioxin emissions. Rising costs combined with the closure of smaller incinerators have shifted MSW management policy toward regionalization, which is the sharing of waste management facilities across municipalities. Despite the increased use of regionalized MSW facilities, the proximity principle remains the central value in Japanese MSW management. Municipal solid waste management has become increasingly regionalized in the United States, too, but different driving forces are at work in these two countries. The transition to regionalized MSW management in Japan results from strong governmental control at all levels, with the central government providing funds and policy direction and prefectures and municipalities being the primary implementing authorities. By contrast, market forces are a much stronger force with US MSW management, where local governments—with state government oversight—have primary responsibility for MSW management. We describe recent changes in Japan’s MSW programs. We examine the connections between MSW facility regionalization, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the proximity principle, coordination among local governments, central government control, and financing mechanisms.     

Developing a spatial framework of common ecological regions for the conterminous United States

In 1996, nine federal agencies with mandates to inventory and manage the nation's land, water, and biological resources signed a memorandum of understanding entitled “Developing a Spatial Framework of Ecological Units of The United States.” This spatial framework is the basis for interagency coordination and collaboration in the development of ecosystem management strategies. One of the objectives in this memorandum is the development of a map of common ecological regions for the conterminous United States. The regions defined in the spatial framework will be areas within which biotic, abiotic, terrestrial, and aquatic capacities and potentials are similar. The agencies agreed to begin by exploring areas of agreement and disagreement in three federal natural-resource spatial frameworks—Major Land Resource Areas of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Hierarchy of Ecological Units of the USDA Forest Service, and Level III Ecoregions of the US Environmental Protection Agency. The explicit intention is that the framework will foster an ecological understanding of the landscape, rather than an understanding based on a single resource, single discipline, or single agency perspective. This paper describes the origin, capabilities, and limitations of three major federal agency frameworks and suggests why a common ecological framework is desirable. The scientific and programmatic benefits of common ecological regions are described, and a proposed process for development of the common framework is presented.     

Establishing a Regional Monitoring Strategy: The Pacific Northwest Forest Plan

adaptive monitoring design. Adaptive monitoring design is an iterative process that refines the specifications for monitoring over time as a result of experience in implementing a monitoring program, assessing results, and interacting with users. An adaptive design therefore facilitates ecosystem management. We also discuss lessons of temporal and spatial scales raised by the consideration of a design for ecosystem management. Three additional issues—integration of information from different sources, institutional infrastructure, and the roles of individuals working in an interagency setting—are also identified, but not developed in detail.     

WATERSHED COUNCILS: AN EMERGING FORM OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT1

ABSTRACT: There is increasing interest in using watershed councils to provide information to public natural resource managers, particularly in the western states. Watershed councils are composed of interested governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders that form to collaboratively manage water and other natural resources at the scale of a watershed. This research is the first step in a multi-step policy analysis designed to answer the question of whether watershed councils are an improvement over traditional methods of public involvement in natural resource management. This paper outlines why watershed councils form and discusses their structure and operation. There is considerable variability in terms of watershed councils' goals, their effectiveness, stakeholder composition, their involvement in the “real” decision-making process, types of participation that are allowed, leadership, financing, decision-making procedures, efficiency, and temporal scale. These structural components are presented as a framework that can be used by researchers to develop criteria to evaluate watershed councils.