IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v96y2020ics0264837719310403.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Facilitating collaboration in forest management: Assessing the benefits of collaborative policy innovations

Author

Listed:
  • McIntyre, Kathleen B.
  • Schultz, Courtney A.

Abstract

Collaborative governance and landscape approaches have become a more prevalent in public land management in the United States in the face of increasing ecological and societal complexity and decreasing government resources and capacity. In this era of devolution and social-ecological change, there is a growing need for policy approaches that facilitate partnerships and participatory approaches to land management. One unique policy that emphasizes collaboration and large-landscape restoration on US federal forestlands is the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP), established in 2009 to accelerate the pace and scale of forest restoration. The policy included novel characteristics such as a decade-long commitment to landscapes and formal requirements for collaboration. This program presented an opportunity to assess how this policy affected collaboration and the factors that led to differential policy implementation. We conducted 89 interviews across all 23 CFLRP projects with internal agency staff and external collaborators on each project. We found that the CFLRP generated a variety of benefits related to collaboration, including increased trust and stronger relationships, increased collaborative partner influence, decreased litigation and conflict, and increased capacity to accomplish work; however, there were also challenges associated with the program, including thetime-intensive nature of collaboration and the lack of industry or contractors. Various local factors affected collaborative outcomes under the policy, including staff turnover and capacity, local leadership, and collaborative history. Successful collaborative outcomes were widespread under the CFLRP, and from this, we draw implications for the broader environmental governance literature about the policy characteristics that facilitate collaboration and the other institutional variables that may require attention in this context.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:96:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719310403
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104683
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719310403
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104683?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. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    2. Jesse Abrams & Emily Jane Davis & Cassandra Moseley, 2015. "Community-Based Organizations and Institutional Work in the Remote Rural West," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 32(6), pages 675-698, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Michael Howlett, 2009. "Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(1), pages 73-89, February.
    5. 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.
    6. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    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. Louda, Jiří & Dubová, Lenka & Å paÄ ek, Martin & Brnkaľáková, Stanislava & Kluvánková, Tatiana, 2023. "Factors affecting governance innovations for ecosystem services provision: Insights from two self-organized forest communities in Czechia and Slovakia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Antonia Sohns & Gordon M. Hickey & Jasper R. de Vries & Owen Temby, 2021. "Methodological Challenges in Studying Trust in Natural Resources Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Manuel Bertomeu & Javier Pineda & Fernando Pulido, 2022. "Managing Wildfire Risk in Mosaic Landscapes: A Case Study of the Upper Gata River Catchment in Sierra de Gata, Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Abdu, Nizam & Tinch, Elena & Levitt, Clinton & Volker, Peter W. & Hatton MacDonald, Darla, 2022. "Illegal firewood collection in Tasmania: Approaching the problem with the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).

    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. 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).
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. Frantzeskaki, Niki & Thissen, Wil & Grin, John, 2016. "Drifting between transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 275-286.
    6. Sergio Currarini & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandro Tavoni, 2016. "Network Economics and the Environment: Insights and Perspectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 159-189, September.
    7. Crespo, Joan & Réquier-Desjardins, Denis & Vicente, Jérôme, 2014. "Why can collective action fail in Local Agri-food Systems? A social network analysis of cheese producers in Aculco, Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 165-177.
    8. Arsovski Slobodan & Kwiatkowski Michał & Lewandowska Aleksandra & Peshevska Dimitrinka Jordanova & Sofeska Emilija & Dymitrow Mirek, 2018. "Can urban environmental problems be overcome? The case of Skopje–world’s most polluted city," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 40(40), pages 17-39, June.
    9. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.
    10. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2007:i:68:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    12. Põllumäe, Priit & Lilleleht, Ando & Korjus, Henn, 2016. "Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-16.
    13. Fleck, Ann-Katrin & Anatolitis, Vasilios, 2023. "Achieving the objectives of renewable energy policy – Insights from renewable energy auction design in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    14. Caner Bakir, 2017. "How can interactions among interdependent structures, institutions, and agents inform financial stability? What we have still to learn from global financial crisis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 217-239, June.
    15. Volland, Benjamin, 2017. "The role of risk and trust attitudes in explaining residential energy demand: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 14-30.
    16. Dayashankar Maurya, 2019. "Understanding public health insurance in India: A design perspective," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 1633-1650, October.
    17. Leonardo Becchetti & Emanuele Bobbio & Federico Prizia & Lorenzo Semplici, 2022. "Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
    19. Sabine Saurugger & Fabien Terpan, 2016. "Do crises lead to policy change? The multiple streams framework and the European Union’s economic governance instruments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(1), pages 35-53, March.
    20. Ma, Cong & Cheok, Mui Yee, 2022. "The impact of financing role and organizational culture in small and medium enterprises: Developing business strategies for economic recovery," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 26-38.
    21. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee, 2014. "Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 57-71.

    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:96:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719310403. 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.