Trust And Social Representations Of The Management Of Threatened And Endangered Species

Abstract

Using quantitative analysis of questionnaire responses, observations during focus group discussions, and qualitative assessment of discussion statements, the present study examined trust and social representations of the U.S. Forest Service’s management of Southern California national forests for the protection of endangered species. Supporting expectations based on the salient values similarity (SVS) model, it was found that (a) trust was highly correlated to assessments of shared salient values, and (b) trust and both the evaluation and acceptance of specific forest management practices were strongly related. Four patterns of social representations of shared value saliency and trust of U.S. Forest Service forest management to protect species were identified. Results demonstrate the importance of trust to the acceptance of forest management practices. They also suggest the need to recognize the influence of perceived variations in saliency of values in the SVS model.

Building Trust in Natural Resource Management Within Local Communities: A Case Study of the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie

“…In particular, the uncertainty of the values of future Forest Service administrators or the U.S. administration influenced trust in the agency. These findings are supported by Cvetkovich and Winter (2003) and Winter and Cvetkovich (2003) whose research linked shared values with trust in the Forest Service's endangered species and wildland fire management.…”

“…Empirical evidence of shared values as a basis for trust in natural resource management exists Winter and Cvetkovich 2003). For example, in a study of southern California residents' trust in the USDA Forest Service, Cvetkovich and Winter (2003) found a high correlation between perceptions of shared values and trust in the agency's management of threatened and endangered species. Applying this model of trust as shared values, researchers have linked trust to attitudes toward fees and willingness to pay fees (Winter and others 1999) and approval of wildland fire management others 2004).…”

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

“…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 .…”

“…Rather, it is based on an affinity for the potential trustee. Affinitive trust may come about through feelings of social connectedness, positive shared experiences, perceptions of shared identities, or assumptions of the similarity of salient values (Braithwaite 1998, Cvetkovich and Winter 2003, Stern 2008b. Affinitive trust thus commonly develops through the cultivation of meaningful personal relationships.…”

“…In the past decade, trust between stakeholders has been identified repeatedly as a key factor driving natural resource management (NRM) outcomes (Cvetkovich and Winter 2003, Davenport et al 2007, Vaske et al 2007, Stern 2008a. Trust serves as a key enabler of adaptive governance, which describes collaborative decision-making systems in which effective adaptive ecosystem management can take place (Chaffin et al 2014).…”