Managing Public Forests: Understanding the Role of Collaborative Planning

Abstract

/ As federal land management agencies such as the USDA Forest Service increasingly choose to implement collaborative methods of public participation, research is needed to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the technique, to identify barriers to effective implementation of collaborative processes, and to provide recommendations for increasing its effectiveness. This paper reports on the findings of two studies focused on the experiences of Forest Service employees and their external partners as they work to implement collaborative planning processes in national forest management. The studies show both similarities and differences between agency employees and their partners in terms of how they evaluate their collaborative experiences. The studies reveal that both Forest Service employees and external partners are supportive of collaborative planning and expect it to continue in the future, both see the trust and relationships built during the process as being its greatest benefit, and both see the Forest Service's organizational culture as the biggest barrier to effective collaborative efforts. The groups differed in terms of evaluating each other's motivation for participating in the process and in whether the process was a good use of time and resources, with external partners seeing it as too drawn out and expensive. The paper concludes with a discussion of the policy implications and changes necessary to increase the effectiveness of collaborative efforts within the Forest Service and other federal land management agencies.KEY WORDS: Public land management; Collaborative planning; National forests; Public participation

Understanding the factors that make public participation effective in health policy and planning: a realist synthesis

“…Some studies suggest that a quality working relationship, trust and a degree of shared identity are the essential elements of this mechanism (Carr et al 1998;Hartz-Karp et al 2010;Poetz 2012). By investing resources in long-term relationship building -before, during and after -the quality of interaction can be improved and misunderstandings can be reduced (Poetz 2012).…”

“…By investing resources in long-term relationship building -before, during and after -the quality of interaction can be improved and misunderstandings can be reduced (Poetz 2012). A synergistic collaborative process also relies on the level of trust among participants, which enables individual interests to be transcended when searching for a group solution (Carr et al 1998). Despite differences in their backgrounds, the emergence of a shared identity or friendship, a belief in fairness, and determination in the face of adversity are vital for enhancing the participants' understanding of the 'common good' (Hartz-Karp et al 2010).…”

“…The other contextual factors that activate this mechanism are the presence of legislation that requires public participation (Carr et al 1998) and the interest of fostering democratic discourses and discussions (Bryner 2001). Further, specific conditions are necessary to achieve consensus such as clear and binding rules, leadership by the agency and the presence of a facilitator who manages conflict and keeps the process going (Bryner 2001).…”

Participatory processes for public lands: Do provinces practice what they preach?

“…Much of the research on public participation has focused on case studies that have assessed a variety of concepts related to public participation, including roles of stakeholders, incorporation of public values in decision making, conflict resolution, satisfaction levels of interest groups, perceptions of the collaborative experience, and trust (Anderson and Yaffee 1998, Carr et al 1998, Beierle and Konisky 2000, Germain et al 2001, Stringer et al 2006, Höppner 2009). Additional case study research has assessed the utility of specific participatory techniques (Chess andPurcell 1999, Parkins andDavidson 2008).…”

Perspective from the Field: Collaborative Management in Natural Resources and Environmental Administration

“…During the 1990s, the United States Forest Service and Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) both began practicing various types of collaborative management. US EPA started its community-based environmental program while the Forest Service, as well as 18 other federal agencies involved in land management, also engaged in some form of ecosystem management that included collaboration as an important component (Carr, Selin, and Schuett, 1998;Koontz and Thomas, 2006;Morrissey, Zinn, and Corn, 1994). Collaborative management has also been used by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Homeland Security, state and local public health departments, and many other US public entities (Emerson, Nabatchi, and Balogh, 2012;Thorton and Scheer, 2012), and has also been used in other countries (Reed, Henderson, and Mendis-Millard, 2013).…”