Evaluation of a Collaborative Model: A Case Study Analysis of Watershed Planning in theIntermountain West

Collaborative planning processes have become increasingly popular for addressing environmental planning issues, resulting in a number of conceptual models for collaboration. A model proposed by Selin and Chavez suggests that collaboration emerges from a series of antecedents and then proceeds sequentially through problem-setting, direction-setting, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation phases. This paper summarizes an empirical study to evaluate if the Selin and Chavez model encompasses the range of factors important for the establishment and operation of collaboration in watershed planning from the perspective of the planning coordinator. Analysis of three case studies of watershed based planning efforts in the Intermountain West suggests the model realistically describes some of the fundamental collaborative elements in watershed planning. Particularly important factors include the involvement of stakeholders in data collection and analysis and the establishment of measurable objectives. Informal face-to-face dialog and watershed field tours were considered critical for identifying issues and establishing trust among stakeholders. Group organizational structure also seems to play a key role in facilitating collaboration. From this analysis, suggestions for refining the model are proposed.     

Factors influencing perceptions of aquatic ecosystems

While factors influencing perceptions of drinking water have been well studied, those of aquatic ecosystems have been to lesser extent. We conducted a review to improve awareness of these factors. Environmental factors found to influence public perceptions of aquatic ecosystems were presence/absence of water plants and algae, presence/absence of floating debris, the odor, movement (for flowing waters) and clarity/turbidity of the water, and the type, condition, setting, naturalness, and overall aesthetic appeal of the ecosystem. Sociocultural factors found to influence public perceptions of aquatic ecosystems included age, education, gender, and place-based knowledge. We provide perspectives of how managers can better meet the diverse social demands placed on aquatic ecosystems. The importance and benefits of considering these perspectives may be especially beneficial where significant multi-generational and culturally relevant place-based knowledge exist.     

Response to perceived predation threat in fiddler crabs: trust thy neighbor as thyself?

Prey require information if they are to respond to predation threat in a risk-sensitive manner. One way that individuals can obtain this information is through the predator-mediated, threat-induced behavior of conspecifics. We examined such a possibility in a refuge-seeking species, the sand fiddler crab (Uca pugilator). Crabs were either exposed directly to a simulated predation threat (a moving cylinder) or the threat-induced response of a near neighbor. We found that fiddler crabs responded to the flight of their neighbors even when they, themselves, were not privy to the stimulus that induced their neighbors response. However, the wider range of behaviors exhibited by these crabs—which included no reaction, freezing, running back to the burrow entrance, and burrow retreat—suggest that non-threatened crabs either (1) perceived the gravity of the predation threat differently from their directly threatened neighbors and/or (2) engaged in behaviors that allowed them to acquire further information in the face of uncertainty. Conspecific behaviors also had an effect on the hiding duration of crabs, with individuals hiding longer if they saw both the predation threat and the flight of their neighbor. Our results suggest that cues provided by conspecifics can play an important role in guiding the antipredator response of refuge-seeking prey.     

A participatory approach to ecosystem conservation: fuzzy cognitive maps and stakeholder group analysis in Uluabat Lake,Turkey

Fuzzy cognitive mapping was used to develop a participatory ecosystem management plan for Uluabat Lake, Turkey. Interviews were conducted with stakeholders belonging to six different groups. Lake pollution was the most central and most mentioned variable for stakeholders. Stakeholder groups agree that lake pollution is negatively affecting ecosystem health and thereby local economies. Thus, reducing lake pollution was chosen as the overall goal for the management plan. Possible ways to reduce lake pollution and increase ecosystem health were seen differently by the different groups. Hunters, factory managers, NGO personnel, and local people thought industry was the main cause of lake pollution, while officials from the government and local municipalities thought roads and urban development contributed the most to lake pollution. Generally the stakeholder groups did not perceive their own actions as affecting the lake as strongly as other groups thought. For example, factory managers viewed factory pollution as negatively affecting the lake but less strongly than the other groups did. According to policy option simulations, reducing lake pollution had positive effects on all variables, especially fish, birds, animal husbandry, irrigation, agriculture, and the ecological balance of the lake. Results of this analysis were used to facilitate meetings among stakeholder groups and to develop a participatory ecosystem management plan. The analysis was useful for pointing out the similarities as well as the differences among the groups. It also helped the facilitators understand the focus of each stakeholder group and enabled them to suggest activities in which each group would want to participate.     

Public participation in plastics recycling schemes

Without public contributions, recycling from domestic waste would not be possible. In order to support recycling projects it is important to try to understand who recycles, how they recycle, and why they recycle. This paper presents the results of a structured survey of 500 members of the public served by schemes to collect plastics waste for recycling. Data were gathered on the characteristics, behaviours and motivations of recyclers. The authors also sought to discover how the public perceive plastics compared to other materials, and as a recyclable material. Responses were collected in such a way that the awareness of the recyclability of materials could be compared with the recycling behaviour of respondents. An element of comparison was introduced between those served by a system of bottle banks (bring scheme) and those covered by a household collection (collect scheme). The survey results are reported and their implications for the management of post-consumer plastics waste collection schemes are discussed.     

Understanding Dispute Resolution Processes for American and Australian Public Wildlands: Towards a Conceptual Framework for Managers

/ The last 20 years have seen the successful application of environmental dispute resolution processes, where people voluntarily negotiate toward mutually acceptable solutions, to many environmental disputes. The effects of contextual influences, such as the number of parties and presence of deadlines, on outcomes are known and frequently described. Less well documented and understood are the interaction processes themselves. This paper draws on two case studies to develop a conceptual framework describing these processes. Disputes associated with management planning for the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex in the United States and Fitzgerald River National Park in Australia provided the cases. The conceptual framework derived had eight sequential stages: (1) joint definition of problems, (2) uncertainty about what to do, (3) agreement on group procedures, (4) realization of interdependence, (5) enthusiasm about collective possibilities, (6) commitment to working together, (7) consolidation of the group, and (8) implementation of a resolution. The framework provides new insights for managers of public wildlands, especially the need for varying but ongoing managerial involvement in dispute resolution processes. High levels of involvement and influence are essential at the beginning in problem definition and group procedure design and at the end in implementing resolutions. Conversely, agency members must be willing to exert less influence, while still being involved and committed to collective purposes, during the middle stages. Also apparent from the conceptual framework is the importance of developing shared understandings and of allowing sufficient time for understanding to develop, if successful resolution is to be achieved. KEY WORDS: Environmental dispute resolution; Conceptual framework; Public wildlands; Shared understandings; Australia     

Assessing Public Participation Techniques for Comfort, Convenience, Satisfaction, and Deliberation

Public participatory techniques have been the focus of a large and growing body of environmental literature. There is some consensus among those who study these techniques that there is a need to develop and implement new techniques that meet certain criteria. These include that the techniques be comfortable, convenient, and satisfying to participants. Authors have also frequently called for the use of deliberative techniques, which allow participants to express and listen to a variety of perspectives regarding the issue at hand. However, the literature on public participation lacks a set of widely applicable evaluation methods to determine whether participants in techniques find them comfortable, convenient, satisfying, or deliberative. This paper reports on the implementation of two different techniques that participants scored fairly high on all of these factors, as well as the scale-based survey questions developed to measure these factors.     

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.     

Public and occupational risks of the Nevada (USA) Test Site

The Nevada Test Site (NTS), north of Las Vegas, was the scene of hundreds of nuclear weapons tests over four decades, both above- and belowground. There is considerable interest, both in neighboring communities and elsewhere, in the risks it poses. Overall, the greatest risks are nonradioactive in origin, with occupational risks to employees and accident risks in transporting low-level nuclear wastes to the NTS from other Department of Energy (DOE) sites ranking highest. For radiation risks, that to workers handling radioactive materials is much higher than that to the surrounding population, either present or future. Overall, annual risks are small, with all fatalities approximately 0.008% of total Nevada deaths. At the NTS, the government spends about 5000 times more on radiation as opposed to nonradiation deaths. This suggests that at least some resources may be misallocated towards cleanup of public risks and that the occupational risk of cleanup may be much higher than the public risk. Thus risk may be multiplied by well-meaning programs.     

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.