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

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

Benefits Transfer and Low Flow Alleviation: What Lessons for Environmental Valuation in the UK?

Use of environmental valuation and benefits transfer in a recent legal ruling in the UK between Thames Water Utilities and the Environment Agency over water abstraction costs appeared to set an unfortunate precedent. In the first attempt to fulfil its statutory duties, the Agency was thwarted in its use and interpretation of non-market valuation techniques, in particular, the vexed issue of how to aggregate the results of valuation studies in original sites or those to where values might be transferred. The ruling has broader implications for water pricing and resource development by the industry. Far from being a blow for either cost-benefit analysis or environmental valuation, the decision highlights some of the research imperatives for the derivation of non-market values by economists and their translation for use in government decisions.     

Environmental management systems: Opportunities for improved environmental and business strategy?

Less than four years after publication of ISO 14001, thousands of organizations worldwide have adopted the standard. In this article, researchers working with the National Database on Environmental Management Systems (NDEMS) review some preliminary data on organizations' experiences with EMS adoption and implementation. Their findings indicate that, although organizations may face hurdles in implementing EMSs, the majority believes the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Environmental representatives: whom,what, and how are they representing?

Literature on environment and representation in politics, management, and deliberation has paid little attention on the people involved: environmental representatives. The aim of this paper is to illuminate how environmental representatives in various organizational and professional contexts understand their role as representatives, and how they are shaped by their contexts. The paper argues that it is crucial to learn about the everyday reality of individual representatives to better understand the limitations and possibilities they face. The study is based on 19 interviews with environmental representatives from five organizational and professional contexts: the state, civil society, business, science, and media in Sweden. The paper concludes that some differences in experiences, for example, in freedom and constraint, can be understood in relation to the representatives’ organizational and professional affiliation. Other experiences are common: (i) all categories stated the importance of being impartial and well read; (ii) complex layers of affiliation imply that representation requires sensitivity and adjustment between different situations; and (iii) the performative aspects of representation include the representatives’ claims-making, others’ attributions, and long-term learning of their role. The article contributes an understanding of organizational conditions and the often paradoxical, layered, multifaceted, and cautious representation these individual actors perform.     

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

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

What Is a Good Public Participation Process? Five Perspectives from the Public

It is now widely accepted that members of the public should be involved in environmental decision-making. This has inspired many to search for principles that characterize good public participation processes. In this paper we report on a study that identifies discourses about what defines a good process. Our case study was a forest planning process in northern New England and New York. We employed Q methodology to learn how participants characterize a good process differently, by selecting, defining, and privileging different principles. Five discourses, or perspectives, about good process emerged from our study. One perspective emphasizes that a good process acquires and maintains popular legitimacy. A second sees a good process as one that facilitates an ideological discussion. A third focuses on the fairness of the process. A fourth perspective conceptualizes participatory processes as a power struggle—in this instance a power play between local landowning interests and outsiders. A fifth perspective highlights the need for leadership and compromise. Dramatic differences among these views suggest an important challenge for those responsible for designing and carrying out public participation processes. Conflicts may emerge about process designs because people disagree about what is good in specific contexts.     

Regulatory failures,split-incentives,conflicting interests and a vicious circle of blame: the New Environmental Governance to the rescue?

This paper addresses a current trend of New Environmental Governance (NEG). It examines whether NEG is able to overcome a series of complex regulatory barriers and market shortfalls that stand in the way of carbon emissions reductions in the building sector. Building on an evaluation of 20 NEG arrangements from Australia and the Netherlands, it discusses the limits of the effective implementation and use of NEG in this sector. The paper concludes by suggesting three strategies to improve the performance of NEG arrangements in the building sector.     

In and Of the World? Christian Theological Anthropology and Environmental Ethics

Mainstream currents within Christianity havelong insisted that humans, among all creatures, areneither fully identified with their physical bodiesnor fully at home on earth. This essay outlines theparticular characteristics of Christian notions ofhuman nature and the implications of this separationfor environmental ethics. It then examines recentefforts to correct some damaging aspects oftraditional Christian understandings of humanity'splace in nature, especially the notions of physicalembodiment and human embeddedment in earth. Theprimary goal of the essay is not to offer acomprehensive evaluation of Christian thinking aboutnature but rather to identify theological anthropologyas a crucial dimension of, and problem for, Christianenvironmental ethics.     

Amsterdam: planning and policy for the ideal city?

Is Amsterdam the “ideal city?” Many of the social, economic, and environmental problems facing Amsterdam are considerably less than those in cities in the USA, and in most cases, Western Europe. Amsterdam, at this moment in history, might be the world's greatest city because of its ability to ensure basic necessities, freedom, and creativity. Tolerance of drugs, sexual freedom, along with the integration of different races helps reduce many of the “social problems” faced by most cities. We have compared, on a per capita basis, differences between Amsterdam/Holland and the USA. The Netherlands is a tiny country, and comparisons are made on a city and per capita numbers at the national level. Our data show that Amsterdam has lower crime, murder, rape, drug usage (cocaine, marijuana), teenage pregnancy, diabetes, obesity, suicide, abortion rates, infant mortality, dependence on fossil fuels, and homelessness, and racial segregation is considerably less. People live longer because of Amsterdam's walkability and bike usage and access to parks. Indeed, the Netherlands leads both Western European and the USA in the proportion of trips made walking and bicycling, with significantly reduced car dependency. Ghettos are nearly non-existent compared with the segregation in the 1940s/1950s. Quality housing is supplied to everyone that gives pride of place compared with the stark, cold, and institutional “projects” provided by the US federal government. Amsterdam leads Western Europe by 35% in social housing, compared with runner-up UK, which has significantly less. The modernism of the 1960s where the poor were warehoused is nearly all gone. People living in Amsterdam seem more tolerant, secure, happier, and healthier compared with citizens in the USA. Great cities provide opportunities for all citizens to enhance their lives and ensure an unrivalled level of freedom. We demonstrate that social and environmental justice are tied together. Amsterdam is by no means perfect, but in comparison with many other democratic industrial cities, it is a far better place for citizens of all races, religions, and incomes.     

Is moral hazard good for the environment? Revenue insurance and chemical input use

Using farm level data we evaluate the input use and environmental effects of revenue insurance. A priori, the moral hazard effect on input use is indeterminate. This paper empirically assesses the input use impact of the increasingly popular, and federally subsidized, risk management instrument of revenue insurance and the extent to which its effects on input use may differ from those of the older yield based instruments. We conclude that among winter wheat farmers, those who purchase revenue insurance tend to spend less on fertilizers but do not appreciably alter pesticide expenditures. Thus, any improved environmental outcomes due to crop insurance are likely due to reduced fertilizer not pesticide use. When the environmental indicators included indicated a potential environmental fragility (i.e. high erosion, pesticide leaching or pesticide runoff potential), the input use equation suggested that fertilizer expenditures decreased. Revenue insurance undoubtedly further reduces fertilizer applications on these fields as well, but the marginal environmental benefit of revenue insurance is lessened because the reduction, where it matters most, accrues on land on which fertilizer use has already been curtailed to some degree.     

Is there a place for social capital in the psychology of health and place?

The field of environmental psychology is primely placed to further understanding of the way in which social capital influences or is influenced by the context and characteristics of neighbourhood environments, but has been one of the quieter voices in the cacophony of social capital discourse over the last decade. While there is increasing research interest in area and neighbourhood variations in social capital, the mechanisms and causal pathways through which physical environments, social capital and health may be related are not yet clear. More refined unpacking of the relationship between social capital and neighbourhood design, features and settings is required to identify practical intervention points for preserving, fostering and harnessing social capital within communities. Through a review of literature, this paper explores whether there is a place for social capital in the psychology of place and considers the contribution that environmental psychology and related disciplines could make to future social capital research and applications.     

Private Participation Going Public? Interpreting the Nexus Between Design,Frames, Roles,and Context of the Fracking ‘InfoDialog’ in Germany

At an early stage of the rising fracking controversy in Germany, ExxonMobil initiated a rather large and costly company dialogue to defuse public concerns over fracking. To shed light on the public implications of private participation, this study analyses how this so-called InfoDialog attempted to reach this goal, and what the consequences were. For this purpose, an interpretive analytical perspective that employs concepts of conflict and participation analysis is adopted. Following this perspective, several design features of the InfoDialog and their implications for the framing of the fracking issue are reconstructed. This provides the ground for analysing the roles that the InfoDialog could play in coping with the fracking controversy. Finally, the dialogue's embeddedness in the context of the emerging fracking debate in Germany is examined. The analysis suggests that the InfoDialog could not defuse the public controversy over fracking by scientization. However, as a forerunner in the emerging politics of expertise, it has supported a particular framing of the public controversy. These insights provoke further critical questions about the implications of privately organized participation arrangements regarding public controversies.