Nipped in the Bud: Why Regional Scale Adaptive Management Is Not Blooming

Adaptive management is an approach to managing natural resources that emphasizes learning from the implementation of policies and strategies. Adaptive management appears to offer a solution to the management gridlock caused by increasing complexity and uncertainty. The concept of adaptive management has been embraced by natural resource managers worldwide, but there are relatively few published examples of adaptive management in use. In this article, we explore two watershed management projects in southeastern Australia to better understand the potential of adaptive management in regional scale programs through qualitative, case study–based investigation. The program logic of one case implies the use of passive adaptive management, whereas the second case claims to be based on active adaptive management. Data were created using participant observation, semistructured interviews with individuals and groups, and document review. Using thematic content and metaphor analysis to explore the case data, we found that each case was successful as an implementation project. However, the use of both passive and active adaptive management was constrained by deeply entrenched social norms and institutional frameworks. We identified seven “imperatives” that guided the behavior of project stakeholders, and that have consequences for the use of adaptive management. Reference to recent evaluations of the Adaptive Management Areas of the Pacific Northwest of the United States suggests that some of these imperatives and their consequences have broad applicability. The implications of our findings are discussed, and suggestions for improving the outcomes of regional scale adaptive management are provided.     

Adaptive management for sound ecosystem management

Sound ecosystem management meshes socioeconomic attitudes and values with sustainable natural resource practices. Adaptive management is a model for guiding natural resource managers in this process. Ecosystems and the societies that use them are continually evolving. Therefore, managers must be flexible and adaptable in the face of uncertainty and lack of knowledge. To couple good science to management, it is important to develop goals, models, and hypotheses that allow us to systematically learn as we manage. Goals and models guide the development and implementation of management practices. The need to evaluate models and test hypotheses mandates monitoring, which feeds into a continuous cycle of goal and model reformulation. This paper reviews the process of adaptive management and describes how it is being applied to oak/pine savanna restoration at Necedah National Wildlife Refuge as an illustration. Our aim is to help managers design their own adaptive management models for successful ecosystem management.     

Adaptive management of natural resources--framework and issues

Adaptive management, an approach for simultaneously managing and learning about natural resources, has been around for several decades. Interest in adaptive decision making has grown steadily over that time, and by now many in natural resources conservation claim that adaptive management is the approach they use in meeting their resource management responsibilities. Yet there remains considerable ambiguity about what adaptive management actually is, and how it is to be implemented by practitioners. The objective of this paper is to present a framework and conditions for adaptive decision making, and discuss some important challenges in its application. Adaptive management is described as a two-phase process of deliberative and iterative phases, which are implemented sequentially over the timeframe of an application. Key elements, processes, and issues in adaptive decision making are highlighted in terms of this framework. Special emphasis is given to the question of geographic scale, the difficulties presented by non-stationarity, and organizational challenges in implementing adaptive management.     

Model for Prioritizing Best Management Practice Implementation: Sediment Load Reduction

Understanding the best way to allocate limited resources is a constant challenge for water quality improvement efforts. The synoptic approach is a tool for geographic prioritization of these efforts. It uses a benefit-cost framework to calculate indices for functional criteria in subunits (watersheds, counties) of a region and then rank the subunits. The synoptic approach was specifically designed to incorporate best professional judgment in cases where information and resources are limited. To date, the synoptic approach has been applied primarily to local or regional wetland restoration prioritization projects. The goal of this work was to develop a synoptic model for prioritizing watersheds within which suites of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) can be implemented to reduce sediment load at the watershed outlets. The model ranks candidate watersheds within an ecoregion or river basin so that BMP implementation within the highest ranked watersheds will result in the most sediment load reduction per conservation dollar invested. The model can be applied anywhere and at many scales provided that the selected suite of BMPs is appropriate for the evaluation area’s biophysical and climatic conditions. The model was specifically developed as a tool for prioritizing BMP implementation efforts in ecoregions containing watersheds associated with the USDA-NRCS conservation effects assessment project (CEAP). This paper presents the testing of the model in the little river experimental watershed (LREW) which is located near Tifton, Georgia, USA and is the CEAP watershed representing the southeastern coastal plain. The application of the model to the LREW demonstrated that the model represents the physical drivers of erosion and sediment loading well. The application also showed that the model is quite responsive to social and economic drivers and is, therefore, best applied at a scale large enough to ensure differences in social and economic drivers across the candidate watersheds. The prioritization model will be used for planning purposes. Its results are visualized as maps which enable resource managers to identify watersheds within which BMP implementation would result in the most water quality improvement per conservation dollar invested.     

FOREST HYDROLOGY ISSUES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: A CONSULTANT'S VIEWPOINT1

ABSTRACT: Forest hydrology should be a mature science with routine use of hydrological procedures to evaluate the effect of past, current and proposed harvesting practices on water resources. It is not. However, water users are pressuring forest managers to exercise their role in managing forested watersheds for water supply. Most forest managers are poorly equipped to carry out this role. Forestry schools need to ensure that their graduates, whether employed in forest management positions or as specialists in watershed management, understand that all forestry operations may affect instream or downstream water users. Specialists in forest hydrology should be fully aware of the following: (1) climate and watershed characteristics influence streamflow in separate ways; (2) forestry practices produce changes in water yield and quality, and that only these changes need to be evaluated to estimate their effects; (3) watershed storage is a critical factor in evaluating the effects of harvesting on streamflow; and (4) the effect of harvest on one watershed cannot be extrapolated to another without consideration of the processes affected. Research is needed to assist watershed managers in applying models to watersheds for which climate and streamflow data are insufficient. Research is also needed to incorporate climate, streamflow and other data for hydrological models into geographic information systems. Joint research projects are needed to develop physical relationships between stream channel characteristics of importance to fisheries biologists and streamflow characteristics affected by forest harvest.     

INTEGRATING DIFFUSEINONPOINT POLLUTION CONTROL AND WATER BODY RESTORATION INTO WATERSHED MANAGEMENT1

ABSTRACT: The objective of water quality/watershed management is attainment of water quality goals specified by the Clean Water Act. The Total Maximal Daily Load (TMDL) planning process is a tool to set up watershed management. However, TMDL methodologies and concepts have several problems, including determination of Loading Capacity for only low flow critical periods that preclude consideration of wet weather sources in water quality management. Research is needed to develop watershed pollutant loading and receiving waters Loading Capacity models that will link wet and dry weather pollution loads to the probability of the exceedence of water quality standards. The long term impact of traditional Best Management Practices as well as ponds and wetlands, must be reassessed to consider long term accumulation of conservative toxic compounds. Socioeconomic research should focus on providing information on economic and social feasibility of implementation of additional controls in water quality limited watersheds.     

Adaptive management for a turbulent future

The challenges that face humanity today differ from the past because as the scale of human influence has increased, our biggest challenges have become global in nature, and formerly local problems that could be addressed by shifting populations or switching resources, now aggregate (i.e., "scale up") limiting potential management options. Adaptive management is an approach to natural resource management that emphasizes learning through management based on the philosophy that knowledge is incomplete and much of what we think we know is actually wrong. Adaptive management has explicit structure, including careful elucidation of goals, identification of alternative management objectives and hypotheses of causation, and procedures for the collection of data followed by evaluation and reiteration. It is evident that adaptive management has matured, but it has also reached a crossroads. Practitioners and scientists have developed adaptive management and structured decision making techniques, and mathematicians have developed methods to reduce the uncertainties encountered in resource management, yet there continues to be misapplication of the method and misunderstanding of its purpose. Ironically, the confusion over the term "adaptive management" may stem from the flexibility inherent in the approach, which has resulted in multiple interpretations of "adaptive management" that fall along a continuum of complexity and a priori design. Adaptive management is not a panacea for the navigation of 'wicked problems' as it does not produce easy answers, and is only appropriate in a subset of natural resource management problems where both uncertainty and controllability are high. Nonetheless, the conceptual underpinnings of adaptive management are simple; there will always be inherent uncertainty and unpredictability in the dynamics and behavior of complex social-ecological systems, but management decisions must still be made, and whenever possible, we should incorporate learning into management.     

FOREST COVER,IMPERVIOUS‐SURFACE AREA,AND THE MITIGATION OF STORMWATER IMPACTS1

ABSTRACT: For 20 years, King County, Washington, has implemented progressively more demanding structural and nonstructural strategies in an attempt to protect aquatic resources and declining salmon populations from the cumulative effects of urbanization. This history holds lessons for planners, engineers, and resource managers throughout other urbanizing regions. Detention ponds, even with increasingly restrictive designs, have still proven inadequate to prevent channel erosion. Costly structural retrofits of urbanized watersheds can mitigate certain problems, such as flooding or erosion, but cannot restore the predevelopment flow regime or habitat conditions. Widespread conversion of forest to pasture or grass in rural areas, generally unregulated by most jurisdictions, degrades aquatic systems even when watershed imperviousness remains low. Preservation of aquatic resources in developing areas will require integrated mitigation, which must including impervious‐surface limits, forest‐retention policies, stormwater detention, riparian‐buffer maintenance, and protection of wetlands and unstable slopes. New management goals are needed for those watersheds whose existing development precludes significant ecosystem recovery; the same goals cannot be achieved in both developed and undeveloped watersheds.     

WATERSHEDS ARE NOT EQUAL: EXPLORING THE FEASIBILITY OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT1

ABSTRACT: We propose that some watersheds may be better candidates for watershed management than others. The extent of success of watershed management may depend, in part, on attributes intrinsic to watersheds: scientific feasibility, social feasibility, and motivational feasibility. Using illustrations from New Jersey watershed management efforts, we tie scientific feasibility to the nature of environmental problems and the scientific capability to solve them. Social feasibility encompasses civic infrastructure and engagement. Motivational feasibility includes issue salience linked to values or economic considerations. We suggest that assessments should be made about the viability of watershed management in specific watersheds and that priorities should be developed based on these assessments. Research on watershed management should explore not only how to improve watershed management but also where to conduct it.     

THE (POLITICAL) SCIENCE OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT IN THE ECOSYSTEM AGE1

ABSTRACT: Ecosystem management has become an important unifying theme for environmental policy in the past decade. Whereas the science of ecosystem dynamics suggests that it will remain difficult to define ecosystem borders and all of the natural and anthropogenic effects that influence them, the politics of ecosystem management require that a national ecosystem delineation standard be adopted. Moreover, a political framework for ecosystem management decision making must be designed in such a way as to complement the hierarchical, interrelated nature of ecosystems generally. This paper advocates that a watershed-based ecosystem delineation standard is the most politically suitable because it will be easily understood by the public and watersheds have a long history as a medium of environmental policy. The paper then proposes that the political framework for watershed-based ecosystem management must depend heavily on state and local autonomy, subject to federally prescribed standards and goals. The Coastal Zone Management Act provides a model for how a national ecosystem management policy can work within state and local watershed cultures and economies.     

Missing the trees for the forest? Bottom-up policy implementation and adaptive management in the US natural resource bureaucracy

For decades, natural resource agencies in the United States have attempted to restore ecosystems using adaptive management, a process that emphasizes experimental learning to reduce uncertainty. Most studies show that it rarely occurs in practice and explain implementation failures as organizational issues. This study draws on policy implementation theory to suggest that behaviors and attitudes of individuals may better explain implementation gaps. This comparative case study finds differences between experts implementing adaptive management in the Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Geological Survey. These include differences in attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors aimed at promoting individual autonomy, performance standards, and defending individual interests on the job. Policy implications are twofold: first, that individual behaviors impact adaptive management implementation and intrinsic motivation to perform such functions. Second, regardless of agency, experts view their work as a social good. This suggests that a devolved planning process may remedy implementation obstacles.     

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.     

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.     

Marshaling Adaptive Capacities within an Adaptive Management Framework to Enhance the Resiliency of Wastewater Systems

We assess adaptive capacity and adaptive management as measures of wastewater (WW) system resiliency using data from interviews with WW system managers (hereafter managers) impacted by past storms. Results suggest the most resilient WW systems are those with high adaptive capacities that employ an adaptive management approach to make ongoing adaptation investments over time. Greater amounts of generic adaptive capacities (i.e., skilled staff and good leadership) help smooth both day‐to‐day and emergency operations and provide a foundation for adaptive management. In turn, adaptive management helps managers both build more generic adaptive capacities, and develop and employ greater amounts and diversity of specific adaptive capacities (i.e., soft and/or hard adaptations) that are especially important for enhancing and sustaining resiliency. Adaptive management also enables managers to better understand their system's vulnerabilities, how those vulnerabilities change over time, and what specific actions may reduce those vulnerabilities. Finally, our work suggests WW system resilience critically depends on the capacities of the human systems for building resilience as much as or more so than relying only on physical infrastructure resilience. Our work contributes to filling an important gap in the literature by advancing our understanding of the human dimensions of infrastructure resilience and has practical implications for advancing resilience in the WW sector.     

Benefits of Collaborative Learning for Environmental Management: Applying the Integrated Systems for Knowledge Management Approach to Support Animal Pest Control

Resource management issues continually change over time in response to coevolving social, economic, and ecological systems. Under these conditions adaptive management, or “learning by doing,” offers an opportunity for more proactive and collaborative approaches to resolving environmental problems. In turn, this will require the implementation of learning-based extension approaches alongside more traditional linear technology transfer approaches within the area of environmental extension. In this paper the Integrated Systems for Knowledge Management (ISKM) approach is presented to illustrate how such learning-based approaches can be used to help communities develop, apply, and refine technical information within a larger context of shared understanding. To outline how this works in practice, we use a case study involving pest management. Particular attention is paid to the issues that emerge as a result of multiple stakeholder involvement within environmental problem situations. Finally, the potential role of the Internet in supporting and disseminating the experience gained through ongoing adaptive management processes is examined.     

A spatially explicit framework for quantifying downstream hydrologic conditions

Continued improvements in spatial datasets and hydrological modeling algorithms within Geographic Information Systems (GISs) have enhanced opportunities for watershed analysis. With more detailed hydrology layers and watershed delineation techniques, we can now better represent and model landscape to water quality relationships. Two challenges in modeling these relationships are selecting the appropriate spatial scale of watersheds for the receiving stream segment, and handling the network or pass-through issues of connected watersheds. This paper addresses these two important issues for enhancing cumulative watershed capabilities in GIS. Our modeling framework focuses on the delineation of stream-segment-level watershed boundaries for 1:24 000 scale hydrology, in combination with a topological network model. The result is a spatially explicit, vector-based, spatially cumulative watershed modeling framework for quantifying watershed conditions to aid in restoration. We demonstrate the new insights available from this modeling framework in a cumulative mining index for the management of aquatic resources in a West Virginia watershed.     

The trouble with tanks: unsettling dominant Australian urban water management paradigms

Over the course of Australia's Millennium Drought, urban water managers gained more appreciation of householders' willingness and capacities to respond to water shortages and restrictions, including by installing rainwater tanks (RWTs) for watering gardens. How urban water managers regard tanks and tank users gives insight into their understandings of social sustainability, as found in interviews conducted in 2006 and 2010. These also revealed a growing distance between policymakers and water providers pursuing a broader approach to sustainability in their communities. The RWT is considered here as a limit case for paradigms of urban water management: it challenges conventional distinctions (such as provider/consumer) and heralds a new hydropolitics. These challenges are discussed as seven kinds of trouble with tanks: (1) incompatibility with the management model and vision of modernity enshrined in the ideal of centralised provision in control of accredited water experts; (2) anxieties about control and risk aroused by these private on-site facilities and their non-expert users; (3) equivocation over their environmental effects, normally assessed in hydrological terms that downplay the benefits of green streetscapes; (4) inexplicability of their popularity within dominant economically rationalist models of customers; (5) educational effects that exceed rationalist, individualist models of learning and require more socially realistic, culturally intelligent and practice-oriented approaches; (6) generation of enthusiasms that are spurned as threats to rationality instead of harnessed to energise the sustainability journey and (7) community-building effects that are unthinkable within the neoliberal customer paradigm but graspable to water managers through lay concepts like “dinner table conversations”.     

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.     

THE WATERSHED IN PRINCIPLE1

Three fundamental concepts linking drainage basin characteristics, stream behavior, and management of watersheds are deduced from field data and observations. An electrical analogy of a watershed clarifies definitions and broadens understanding of this complex natural resource. The three basic principles deal with (1) the interrelationships of watershed morphology, constitution, and appearance; (2) the nature of the control man can exert over runoff-influencing forces, and (3) the efficiency of watershed management efforts. Recognition of these principles can assist educators, managers, planners and researchers to more fully inform students and to more effectively guide and evaluate management decisions.     

Incorporating Social Context Variables Into Paired Watershed Designs to Test Nonpoint Source Program Effectiveness1

Prokopy, Linda Stalker, Z. Asligül Göçmen, Jing Gao, Shorna Broussard Allred, Joseph E. Bonnell, Kenneth Genskow, Alicia Molloy, and Rebecca Power, 2011. Incorporating Social Context Variables Into Paired Watershed Designs to Test Nonpoint Source Program Effectiveness. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 47(1):196‐202. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2010.00508.x Abstract: In a traditional paired watershed study, watersheds are selected to be as similar as possible so that conclusions may be drawn about the performance of Best Management Practices. We have extended the paired watershed concept to examine the effectiveness of watershed management programs by adding comparative criteria for social characteristics. For four different 8 or 11/12 digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) watersheds in the Midwest, we have piloted a systematic method for selecting paired subwatersheds. First, we developed a list of 11 key variables. Next, a factor analysis was conducted to determine the underlying structure of the 11 input variables. Finally, in each of the four watersheds, potential paired subwatersheds (all 14 digit HUCs) were selected using the factors in a cluster analysis. Informal interviews were then held with key informants in each watershed to provide qualitative assessments of criteria that could impact the comparability of the subwatersheds. This method for selecting paired watersheds should be helpful for other researchers to test the effectiveness of watershed management programs focused on behavior change.