The Role of Trust in Community Wildland Fire Protection Planning

Lachapelle, Paul; McCool, Stephen F.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2011.569855

Cited by 84 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, distrust between stakeholders can lead to stalemates in planning, lawsuits that hold up management actions, noncompliance with regulations, public protests, and even violence (Cvetkovich and Winter 2003, Vaske et al 2007, Stern 2008a,b, 2010, Lachapelle and McCool 2012. The inability of groups to trust each other can severely undermine the potential for learning and experimentation, leading to suboptimal outcomes for all parties involved and for natural resources .…”

Section: Institutional Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Stern¹,

Baird²

2015

E&S

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The resilience of natural resource management (NRM) institutions are largely contingent on the capacities of the people and organizations within those institutions to learn, innovate, and adapt, both individually and collectively. These capacities may be powerfully constrained or catalyzed by the nature of the relationships between the various entities involved. Trust, in particular, has been identified repeatedly as a key component of institutional relationships that supports adaptive governance and successful NRM outcomes. We apply an ecological lens to a pre-existing framework to examine how different types of trust may interact to drive institutional resilience in NRM contexts. We present the broad contours of what we term "trust ecology," describing a conceptual framework in which higher degrees of diversity of trust, as conceptualized through richness and evenness of four types of trust (dispositional, rational, affinitive, and systems based), enhance both the efficacy and resilience of NRM institutions. We describe the usefulness and some limitations of this framework based on several case studies from our own research and discuss the framework's implications for both future research and designing more resilient governance arrangements.

show abstract

Section: Institutional Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Stern¹,

Baird²

2015

E&S

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Past research has also established the importance of social capital, i.e., relations of trust and reciprocity, in improving wildfire planning and management (Bihari andRyan 2012, Lachapelle andMcCool 2012). For example, the Fire Learning Network, led by The Nature Conservancy, an environmental nongovernmental organization (NGO), and composed of fire managers from diverse agencies and landscapes, utilizes collaboration across organizations and jurisdictions to result in new guiding narratives for institutional reform and the diffusion of fire management innovations across otherwiseisolated communities of practice .…”

Section: Linking Within and Across Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-envisioning community-wildfire relations in the U.S. West as adaptive governance

Abrams¹,

Knapp²,

Paveglio³

et al. 2015

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Prompted by a series of increasingly destructive, expensive, and highly visible wildfire crises in human communities across the globe, a robust body of scholarship has emerged to theorize, conceptualize, and measure community-level resilience to wildfires. To date, however, insufficient consideration has been given to wildfire resilience as a process of adaptive governance mediated by institutions at multiple scales. Here we explore the possibilities for addressing this gap through an analysis of wildfire resilience among wildland-urban interface communities in the western region of the United States. We re-engage important but overlooked components of social-ecological system resilience by situating rural communities within their state-to national-level institutional contexts; we then analyze two communities in Nevada and New Mexico in terms of their institutional settings and responses to recent wildfire events. We frame our analysis around the concepts of scale matching, linking within and across scales, and institutional flexibility.

show abstract

“…For example, in a study of national parks in the United States and Ecuador, trust in protected areas authorities proved to be a key predictor of compliance with park regulations, with distrust predicting noncompliance (Stern 2008a). Trust held by community members for natural resource agencies has also been shown to increase public approval of management decisions and minimize resistance to planning efforts (Cvetkovich and Winter 2003;Lachapelle and McCool 2012;Vaske et al 2007). Studies from multiple disciplines have identified trust as an important driver of collaboration, conflict resolution, and enhanced group performance in various contexts (Fulmer and Gelfand 2012;Ostrom 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%