IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v70y2018icp432-441.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Navigating social forestry – A street-level perspective on National Forest management in the US Pacific Northwest

Author

Listed:
  • Maier, Carolin
  • Abrams, Jesse B.

Abstract

US forest policy changed dramatically during the 1990s and fundamentally altered National Forest management in the Pacific Northwest. Via the Northwest Forest Plan, the previous emphasis on timber production was replaced with a broader set of objectives and collaborative management approaches became increasingly important. Yet the legacies of past institutions, such as those related to budget structures and planning processes, continue to weigh on contemporary dynamics of policy implementation in the current ‘social forestry’ regime. The convoluted nature of the current forest governance system’s emergence raises the question of how it affects policy implementation at the local level. We rely on 35 qualitative interviews with various actors involved in public forest management on the Siuslaw and Willamette National Forests in Oregon to understand how multiple and contradictory policies, combined with local stakeholder involvement, influence management decisions. We find that forest management takes place in a vetocratic and neoliberal institutional setting: the implementation of projects is contingent upon getting past numerous veto players who, at the same time, increasingly take on tasks formerly assigned to government entities

Suggested Citation

  • Maier, Carolin & Abrams, Jesse B., 2018. "Navigating social forestry – A street-level perspective on National Forest management in the US Pacific Northwest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 432-441.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:432-441
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717305847
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James McCarthy, 2005. "Devolution in the Woods: Community Forestry as Hybrid Neoliberalism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(6), pages 995-1014, June.
    2. Cheng, Antony S. & Danks, Cecilia & Allred, Shorna R., 2011. "The role of social and policy learning in changing forest governance: An examination of community-based forestry initiatives in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 89-96.
    3. William M. Salka, 2004. "Mission Evolution: The United States Forest Service's Response to Crisis," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 21(2), pages 221-232, March.
    4. Benjamin Cashore & Michael Howlett, 2007. "Punctuating Which Equilibrium? Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 532-551, July.
    5. Kennedy, James J. & Thomas, Jack Ward & Glueck, Peter, 2001. "Evolving forestry and rural development beliefs at midpoint and close of the 20th century," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1-2), pages 81-95, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abrams, Jesse, 2019. "The emergence of network governance in U.S. National Forest Administration: Causal factors and propositions for future research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    2. McIntyre, Kathleen B. & Schultz, Courtney A., 2020. "Facilitating collaboration in forest management: Assessing the benefits of collaborative policy innovations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Abrams, Jesse & Wollstein, Katherine & Davis, Emily Jane, 2018. "State lines, fire lines, and lines of authority: Rangeland fire management and bottom-up cooperative federalism," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 252-259.
    4. Kelly, Erin Clover & Charnley, Susan & Pixley, Jodie T., 2019. "Polycentric systems for wildfire governance in the Western United States," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Bethmann, Stephanie & Simminger, Eva & Baldy, Jana & Schraml, Ulrich, 2018. "Forestry in interaction. Shedding light on dynamics of public opinion with a praxeological methodology," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 93-101.
    6. Maier, Carolin & Wirth, Kristina, 2018. "The world(s) we live in – Inter-agency collaboration in forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 102-111.
    7. Natasha Haruka Collins & Courtney A. Schultz, 2021. "Why companies fund climate change projects on national forests: insights into the motivations of the Forest Service’s corporate partners," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 1-26, December.
    8. Nenad Šimunović & Franziska Hesser & Tobias Stern, 2018. "Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    9. Renata Putkowska-Smoter & Krzysztof Niedziałkowski, 2021. "Street level bureaucracy in response to environmental pressure. Insights from forestry and urban green space governance in Poland," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(5), pages 900-918, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abrams, Jesse, 2019. "The emergence of network governance in U.S. National Forest Administration: Causal factors and propositions for future research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Paing, Win Min & Han, Phyu Phyu & Ota, Masahiko & Fujiwara, Takahiro, 2023. "The state-private hybrid forest policy in Myanmar: The impact of neoliberalism on the forestry sector after the 1990s," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    3. Sotirov, Metodi & Memmler, Michael, 2012. "The Advocacy Coalition Framework in natural resource policy studies — Recent experiences and further prospects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 51-64.
    4. Davis, Emily Jane & Hajjar, Reem & Charnley, Susan & Moseley, Cassandra & Wendel, Kendra & Jacobson, Meredith, 2020. "Community-based forestry on federal lands in the western United States: A synthesis and call for renewed research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. Crandall, Mindy S. & Adams, Darius M. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Smith, David, 2017. "The potential rural development impacts of utilizing non-merchantable forest biomass," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 20-29.
    6. Cassandra Moseley & Susan Charnley, 2014. "Understanding micro-processes of institutionalization: stewardship contracting and national forest management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(1), pages 69-98, March.
    7. Christopher Weible & David Carter, 2015. "The composition of policy change: comparing Colorado’s 1977 and 2006 smoking bans," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 207-231, June.
    8. Paúl Cisneros, 2020. "A Comparative Study of the Introduction of Restrictions to Large‐Scale Mining in Four Latin American Countries," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 687-712, September.
    9. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Hong, 2018. "Governmentality within REDD+: Optimizing incentives and efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 611-622.
    10. van der Ven, Hamish & Sun, Yixian & Cashore, Benjamin, 2021. "Sustainable commodity governance and the global south," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    11. Jakob T. Pruess, 2023. "Unraveling the complexity of extended producer responsibility policy mix design, implementation, and transfer dynamics in the European Union," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(6), pages 1500-1520, December.
    12. Kate Driscoll Derickson, 2009. "Gendered, Material, and Partial Knowledges: A Feminist Critique of Neighborhood-Level Indicator Systems," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(4), pages 896-910, April.
    13. Spilsbury, Michael J. & Nasi, Robert, 2006. "The interface of policy research and the policy development process: challenges posed to the forestry community," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 193-205, March.
    14. Brendan Moore & Andrew Jordan, 2020. "Disaggregating the dependent variable in policy feedback research: an analysis of the EU Emissions Trading System," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 291-307, June.
    15. Daniel H. Mutibwa, 2022. "The (Un)Changing Political Economy of Arts, Cultural and Community Engagement, the Creative Economy and Place-Based Development during Austere Times," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-24, September.
    16. Sarkki, Simo & Rönkä, Anna Reetta, 2012. "Neoliberalisations in Finnish forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 152-159.
    17. Per Angelstam & Michael Manton & Taras Yamelynets & Ole Jakob Sørensen & Svetlana V. Kondrateva (Stepanova), 2020. "Landscape Approach towards Integrated Conservation and Use of Primeval Forests: The Transboundary Kovda River Catchment in Russia and Finland," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-27, May.
    18. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Alig, Ralph J., 2005. "Forestland development and private forestry with examples from Oregon (USA)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 709-720, August.
    19. Victoria Wibeck & Björn-Ola Linnér & Melisa Alves & Therese Asplund & Anna Bohman & Maxwell T. Boykoff & Pamela M. Feetham & Yi Huang & Januario Nascimento & Jessica Rich & Charles Yvon Rocha & Franco, 2019. "Stories of Transformation: A Cross-Country Focus Group Study on Sustainable Development and Societal Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Azad Singh Bali & Alex Jingwei He & M Ramesh, 2022. "Health policy and COVID-19: path dependency and trajectory [Health care reform in Germany: Patchwork change within established governance structures]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(1), pages 83-95.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:432-441. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.