Family legacies and community networks shape private forest management in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan (USA)

Lind-Riehl, Jennifer F.; Jeltema, Shelly; Morrison, Margaret; Shirkey, Garbriela; Mayer, Audrey L.; Rouleau, Mark; Winkler, Richelle

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.005

Cited by 48 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This turn to proxies (or other agents in social networks of street-level bureaucrats and participants) to drive VIP enrollment was supported both by our NIPF owner interviews [22] and the literature [17,27,29]. Proxies or intermediaries were more likely to be trusted by Western UP forest owners, particularly if they were locally active foresters, family, or neighbors.…”

Section: Intent Of Program Managers and Proxiesmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…We then compared their views on VIPs to those of a purposeful sampling of 37 Western UP NIPF owners interviewed concurrently. The research design and major findings from our interviews with NIPF owners have been previously published in another work [22]. The goal of the current paper is to contrast these findings with our land management organization interviews to identify existing gaps between NIPF owner intentions and VIP program goals and implementation through outreach efforts.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While economic incentives were important to almost all of the forest owners with land enrolled in VIPs, financial incentives were much less important to owners who were not participating in VIPs [22]. For example, an owner with VIP-enrolled property stated:…”

Section: Inadequate Program Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This illustrates a second key trait of street level bureaucrats; they have considerable discretion regarding how resources are allocated and how programs are managed, and this discretion directly influences policy implementation effectiveness [16,17,22,25,26]. Information about VIPs and natural resource agencies is disseminated at the discretion of program managers, and the passive nature of the information campaign exacerbates VIP enrollment problems:…”

Section: Inadequate and Ineffective Outreach To Nipf Ownersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Program managers were aware that the current suite of VIPs in the state were mainly serving those owners who were primarily interested in harvesting and economic values, and owners with other management goals such as wildlife, aesthetics, or cultural heritage are underserved [22]. One program manager stated: "(O)ne thing that I've noticed... because I was a consulting forester before this...is that (most of) the landowners that call us ( .…”

Section: Underserved Forest Owner Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Failure to Communicate: Inefficiencies in Voluntary Incentive Programs for Private Forest Owners in Michigan

Rouleau

Lind-Riehl

Smith

et al. 2016

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Coordinating forest management across thousands of nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) owners is a difficult yet necessary task for state land management agencies. Voluntary Incentive Programs (VIPs) can coordinate the decentralized activities of these owners in return for services or financial incentives. However, many VIPs typically have low enrollment. Our study investigates the implementation of VIPs to increase forest management coordination among NIPFs in Michigan. We present findings from 20 semi-structured interviews with leaders of state and local land management organizations, and government officials at state natural resource agencies, and contrast their answers with those recorded from 37 interviews of NIPF owners regarding their knowledge and attitudes toward VIPs. Our interviews highlight a critical disconnect between NIPF owner motivations and VIP incentives, as well as misallocated resources for VIP promotion by state agencies, driving low enrollment. At the core, low enrollment in VIPs is generated by inadequate communication between NIPF owners and program managers, along with distrust of government agency objectives. Viewing managers as "street level bureaucrats", civil servants whose job discretion is impacted heavily by available resources, may increase our understanding of the issues plaguing VIPs and help identify improvements to VIP design and implementation.

show abstract