Abstract
The Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP), established in 2009, encourages collaborative landscape scale ecosystem restoration efforts on United States Forest Service (USFS) lands. Although the USFS employees have experience engaging in collaborative planning, CFLRP requires collaboration in implementation, a domain where little prior experience can be drawn on for guidance. The purpose of this research is to identify the ways in which CFLRP’s collaborative participants and agency personnel conceptualize how stakeholders can contribute to implementation on landscape scale restoration projects, and to build theory on dynamics of collaborative implementation in environmental management. This research uses a grounded theory methodology to explore collaborative implementation from the perspectives and experiences of participants in landscapes selected as part of the CFLRP in 2010. Interviewees characterized collaborative implementation as encompassing three different types of activities: prioritization, enhancing treatments, and multiparty monitoring. The paper describes examples of activities in each of these categories and then identifies ways in which collaborative implementation in the context of CFLRP (1) is both hindered and enabled by overlapping legal mandates about agency collaboration, (2) creates opportunities for expanded accountability through informal and relational means, and, (3) creates feedback loops at multiple temporal and spatial scales through which monitoring information, prioritization, and implementation actions shape restoration work both within and across projects throughout the landscape creating more robust opportunities for adaptive management.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For an overview of CFLRP and general characteristics of the first 10 projects, see Schultz et al. (2012).
CFLR Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.fs.fed.us/restoration/CFLRP/questions/answers/qa004_impmon.shtml, accessed 10-4-2014.
For a more extensive explanation of the FACA in relation to CFLRP, see Butler, 2013.
References
Ansell C, Gash A (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J Public Adm Res Theory 18(4):543–571
Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N (2007) Adaptive co-management: collaboration, learning and multi-level governance. UBC Press, Vancouver
Berkes F (2002) Cross-scale institutional linkages: perspectives from the bottom up. In: Ostrom E, Dietz T, Dolsak N, Stern PC, Stovich S, Weber EU (eds) The drama of the commons. National Academy Press, Washington DC
Brummel RF, Nelson KC, Souter SG, Jakes PJ, Williams DR (2010) Social learning in a policy-mandated collaboration: community wildfire protection planning in the eastern United States. J Environ Plan Manage 53(6):681–699
Brunner RD, Steelman TA, Coe-Juell L, Crowley CM, Edwards CM, Tucker DW (2005) Adaptive governance: integrating science, policy and decision making. Columbia University Press, New York
Bryson JM, Crosby BC, Stone MM (2006) The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: propositions from the literature. Public Adm Rev 66(Special Issue):44–55
Butler WH (2013) Collaboration at arm’s length: navigating agency engagement in landscape-scale ecological restoration collaboratives. J Forest 111(6):395–403
Cash DW, Adger WN, Berkes F, Garden P, Lebel L, Olsson P, Pritchard L, Young O (2006) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecol Soc 11(2):8
Charmaz K (2006) Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
Connelly DR, Zhang J, Faerman S (2008) The paradoxical nature of collaboration. In: Bingham LB, O’Leary R (eds) Big ideas in collaborative public management. M. E. Sharpe, Armonk
Ebrahim A (2003) Accountability in practice: mechanisms for NGOs. World Dev 31(5):813–829
Ebrahim A (2005) Accountability myopia: losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit Volunt Sector Q 34(1):56–87
Fernandez-Gimenez ME, Ballard H, Sturtevant V (2008) Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: a study of five community-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecol Soc 13(2). http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art4/
Flyvbjerg B (2001) Making social science matter: why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecoloigcal systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473
Fung A, Wright EO (eds) (2003) Deepening democracy: institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance. Verso, London
Goldsmith S, Eggers WD (2004) Governing by network: the new shape of the public sector. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
Goldstein BE, Butler WH, Hull RB (2010) The fire learning network: a promising conservation strategy for forestry. J Forest 108(3):121–125
Gray B (1989) Collaborating: finding common ground for multiparty problems. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco
Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, New York
Innes JE, Booher DE (1999) Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. J Am Plan Assoc 65(4):412–423
Innes JE, Booher DE (2010) Planning with complexity: an introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. Routledge, New York
Koontz TM, Steelman TA, Carmin J, Korfmacher KS, Moseley C, Thomas CW (2004) Collaborative environmental management: what roles for government?. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
Kraft ME (2004) Environmental policy and politics, 3rd edn. Pearson Longman, New York
Layzer J (2008) Natural experiments: ecosystem-based management and the environment. MIT Press, Cambridge
Lee KN (1993) Compass and gyroscope: integrating science and politics for the environment. Island Press, Washington, DC
Lee KN (1999) Appraising adaptive management. Conserv Ecol 3(2). http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol3/iss2/art3/
Margerum R (1999) Getting past yes: from capital creation to action. J Am Plan Assoc 65(2):181–192
Margerum R (2011) Beyond consensus: improving collaborative planning and management. MIT Press, Cambridge
Maxwell JA (1996) Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Applied social research methods series, vol 41. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
McGrory CK, Sousa DJ (2012) American environmental policy: beyond gridlock. MIT Press, Cambridge
Olsson P, Folke C, Galaz V, Hahn T, Schultz L (2007) Enhancing the fit through adaptive co-management: creating and maintaining bridging functions for matching scales in the Kristianstads Vattenrike Biosphere Reserve, Sweden. Ecol Soc 12(1):28
Pahl-Wostl C, Sendzimir J, Jeffrey P, Aerts J, Berkamp G, Cross K (2007) Managing change toward adaptive water management through social learning. Ecol Soc 12(2):30
Pressman JL, Wildavsky A (1984) Implementation: how great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. University of California Press, Berkeley
Randolph J, Bauer M (1999) Improving environmental decision-making through collaborative methods. Policy Stud Rev 16(3/4):168–191
Romzek B, LeRoux K, Blackmar J (2012) A preliminary theory of informal accountability among network organizational actors. Public Adm Rev 72(3):442–453
Schultz CA, Jedd T, Beam RD (2012) The collaborative forest landscape restoration program: a history and overview of the first projects. J Forest 110(7):381–391
Steelman TA (2010) Implementing innovation: fostering enduring change in environmental and natural resource governance. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC
Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Newbury Park
Tipple T, Wellman JD (1991) Herbert Kaufman’s Forest ranger thirty years later: from simplicity and homogeneity to complexity and diversity. Public Adm Rev 51(5):421–428
Unerman J, O’Dwyer B (2006) Theorising accountability for NGO advocacy. Acc Audit Acc J 19(3):349–376
US House of Representatives (2003) Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003. Public Law 108-148 vol 117 Stat. 1887-1915, 108th Congress, First Session edn, United States of America
US Forest Service (1992) Ecosystem management of the National Forests and Grasslands: Memorandum 1330-1. US Forest Service, Washington, DC
US Forest Service (2011) Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program, Submitting Proposals. US Forest Service. http://www.fs.fed.us/restoration/CFLR/submittingproposals.shtml. Accessed October 25 2011
US Forest Service (2012) National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule. 36 CFR Part 219, vol RIN 0596–AD02
Vaughn J, Cortner HJ (2005) George W. Bush’s Healthy Forests: reframing the environmental debate. University Press of Colorado, Boulder
Weber EP (1998) Pluralism by the rules: conflict and cooperation in environmental regulation. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC
Weber EP (2003) Bringing society back. In: Grassroots Ecosystem Management, Accountability, and Sustainable Communities. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Wondolleck J, Yaffee SL (2000) Making collaboration work: lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press, Washington, DC
Wyborn C, Bixler RP (2013) Collaboration and nested environmental governance: scale dependency, scale framing, and cross-scale interactions in collaborative conservation. J Environ Manage 123:58–67
Acknowledgments
This research was funded by the US Forest Service (USFS) Northern Research Station and further supported by a travel grant from The Nature Conservancy. The authors wish to thank the participants in this study whose time and thoughtful reflections were invaluable to this research. Also, we are grateful to three reviewers as well as Drs. Robert Deyle and Rachel Christensen whose insightful suggestions contributed significantly to improving the quality of this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Butler, W.H., Monroe, A. & McCaffrey, S. Collaborative Implementation for Ecological Restoration on US Public Lands: Implications for Legal Context, Accountability, and Adaptive Management. Environmental Management 55, 564–577 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0430-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0430-8