Elsevier

Ocean & Coastal Management

Volume 74, March 2013, Pages 57-66
Ocean & Coastal Management

Beyond traditional stakeholder engagement: Public participation roles in California's statewide marine protected area planning process

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.06.012Get rights and content

Abstract

Public participation was one of the hallmarks of the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, a planning process to support the redesign of California's system of marine protected areas (MPAs). The MLPA Initiative implemented innovative and unconventional public outreach and engagement strategies to assist local communities share relevant knowledge and data, and provide timely and targeted contributions to MPA planning discussions. This collaborative model helped broaden traditional forms of participation to ensure public input received and integrated into MPA planning legitimately reflected the interests and priorities of California's coastal communities. A number of considerations were critical to the success of this collaborative approach, including: understanding the needs and limitations of public audiences; working directly with communities to identify appropriate outreach and engagement strategies; prioritizing strategies that supported a multi-directional exchange of information; adapting strategies based on public feedback and internal lessons learned; and hiring professional public engagement specialists. Strategies evolved over time and increased the level and quality of public participation over this multi-stage planning process. Experiences gained from the MLPA Initiative can be used to encourage consideration of collaborative participation in other environmental planning and decision-making processes.

Introduction

Resource managers are continually challenged with making high-quality decisions while remaining responsive to the public those decisions affect (Beierle, 1998). Meeting this challenge within the environmental policy arena presents particular hurdles, as issues are often technically complex and value-laden, and multiple interests operate in a fluctuating atmosphere of dissention and distrust (Beierle, 1998; Fischer, 2000a, b; Jasanoff, 2005). Advancing solutions to environmental problems often requires changes in individual behavior, demanding policymakers to target and involve the public as they would corporations and other affected organizations (National Research Council, 2008). Addressing this challenging set of conditions requires flexible and transparent decision-making that embraces local knowledge and a diversity of values (Reed, 2008). The California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative (Initiative) provides a notable example of addressing – and adapting to – the complexities, uncertainties, and value conflicts common to environmental planning and decision-making.

Since the 1970s, requirements have been embedded in virtually all U.S. environmental legislation (Creighton, 2005), as well as many countries worldwide (Buchy and Race, 2001; OECD, 2001; Nylen, 2002), to ensure the public's involvement and full access to policy information. Traditionally, “public participation” has been defined as legally required, one-way dialogue between the public and lawmakers (e.g., voting, forming interest groups, demonstrating, lobbying) in which agencies inform the public after determining a course of action (Beierle, 1998; Innes and Booher, 2004). While this approach may provide a mechanism for decision-makers to deliver pre-determined information to the public, it misses the opportunity for the public to directly inform and influence environmental policy processes, products, and outcomes.

To improve the quality, legitimacy, and capacity of environmental decisions, public participation has begun to include more direct roles for involvement and dialogue, such as formal comments, public hearings, and citizen suits (National Research Council 2008). In recent years, the public has also helped to inform a wide range of planning and decision-making processes by participating in stakeholder, also referred to as citizen, advisory groups (Crowfoot and Wondolleck, 1990; Beatley et al., 1994; Patterson, 1999; McCool and Guthrie, 2001). While critics raise concerns about the drawbacks of a more involved public (King, 1998; Innes and Booher, 2004; Bora and Hausendorf, 2006; Abels, 2007; Reed, 2008), the benefits of two-way interactions between the public and decision-makers have been widely advocated as a way to increase the legitimacy and quality of government decisions (National Research Council, 1996; Rowe and Frewer, 2000; Abelson et al., 2003; Daley, 2007; Fox et al., 2013a). This includes decision-making within the field of resource management (Fischer, 2000a, b; Beierle, 2002; Reed et al., 2009) and more specifically, marine spatial planning (Pomeroy and Douvere, 2008).

While improvements have been made to broaden traditional participation models, people leading decision-making processes still struggle to offer inclusive engagement opportunities reflective of the diverse communities such policy decisions affect. A “collaborative participation” model challenges traditional forms of participation and proposes a new way of conceptualizing participation and engaging the public in planning and decision-making (Innes and Booher, 2004). Collaborative participation engages the public, process participants, and decision-makers in a multi-dimensional dialogue so that policies, interests, and the public co-evolve (Innes and Booher, 2004).

This paper explores the implementation of innovative and unconventional outreach and engagement strategies to promote participation beyond traditional stakeholder and public involvement in a statewide marine protected area (MPA) planning process. From 2004 to 2011, the Initiative adopted a collaborative approach to support a multi-way dialogue and interaction among the public, scientists, resource managers, agency staff, appointed stakeholder advisory groups, and policy advisors. Regional1 outreach and engagement strategies were designed to recognize the value in relationship building among a diverse public, the power of open and honest multi-dimensional dialogue, and the advantages of integrating public input and interests into process outcomes. Considering the diverse and complex communities that make up the State of California, outreach and engagement strategies required “out of the box” thinking, and were adapted to public feedback, lessons learned assessments, community needs, and available resources. “Best practices” highlighted in literature were also incorporated, including: involving the public early and investing in the advance planning of public participation (Chess and Purcell, 1999; Webler and Tuler, 2006); ensuring participants have the power to influence decisions (Fiorino, 1990; Laird, 1993; Chase et al., 2004; Tippett et al., 2007); understanding the needs and concerns of participants and communities (Salm et al., 2000); using multiple methods for participation (e.g., workshops, meetings, advisory committees, etc.) (Torgerson, 1986); providing technical assistance to the public (Richards et al., 2004); encouraging participation of native peoples (Elder, 1982; Torgerson, 1986); and conducting vigorous outreach and engaging liaisons to encourage public participation (Young et al., 1993).

For the purposes of this paper, “public participation” refers to the Initiative's collaborative participation model designed to actively engage local communities and members of the general public in multi-directional dialogue (and as explored in Innes and Booher (2004)). Conventional and unconventional outreach and engagement strategies described in this paper denote the mechanisms and tools developed to support and promote this collaborative approach. All other types of public participation, including legally mandated participation and/or involvement of stakeholder advisory groups are separately identified or referred to as “traditional” outreach. The co-authors of this paper were directly involved in the Initiative planning process; thus, the paper reflects a “participant-observer” perspective.

Section snippets

Background

Enacted in 1999, the MLPA directs the state of California to reevaluate and redesign its system of MPAs to increase its coherence and effectiveness at protecting the state's marine life, habitat, and ecosystems (Fish and Game Code § 2853 (a)).2

Meeting each region

When developing, applying, and adapting outreach and engagement strategies, it is fundamental to have a clear understanding of the internal workings of regional communities and target audiences. While strategies developed by the Initiative focused on engaging a diverse public in multi-dimensional dialogue, in each region there was a general formula to introducing the public to the MLPA and the Initiative, as well as offering the public key opportunities to participate.

Before any MPA planning

Tailoring strategies to reflect community needs and foster collaborative participation

The Initiative's collaborative evolution was rooted in outreach and engagement strategies that focused on a number of key themes, including building and maintaining relationships, understanding and responding to public needs and concerns, creating formal and informal opportunities for public engagement, reaching underrepresented groups, and developing a comprehensive media strategy. As outreach and engagement strategies were implemented, sufficient flexibility was retained to be responsive to

Considering trade-offs of a collaborative approach

The Initiative's collaborative participation approach involved a number of trade-offs, including project funding, delivery of neutral messaging, and the perceived value of engaging the public in a multi-dimensional dialogue. The Initiative did not seek additional funding to hire public engagement specialists or a media liaison in the south coast and north coast regions. Rather, the Initiative budget was reallocated to create the new Initiative contract positions and associated outreach tools

Conclusion

Experiences from the Initiative reveal that adopting a collaborative, inclusive participation model to support environmental planning and decision-making helps to: inform and involve a more diverse public audience; deepen mutual understandings and cross-interest relationships; explore and integrate new ideas and solutions that may not have been otherwise considered; and ensure that planning and decision-making is informed by the needs and interests of the affected communities. Key findings from

Acknowledgements

KS, CS, DC, AR, EP, MH, EP, DM, and BO were partially or fully supported by the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative during the MPA network planning process, with funding provided by the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. The authors received no support from the Initiative in writing this manuscript. The authors wish to thank all members of the public who participated directly and indirectly in the Initiative for their meaningful contributions to improving California's network of MPAs.

References (52)

  • M. Reed et al.

    Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management

    Journal of Environmental Management

    (2009)
  • E. Saarman et al.

    The role of science in supporting marine protected area network planning and design in California

    Ocean and Coastal Management

    (2013)
  • J. Tippett et al.

    Meeting the challenges of sustainable development – a conceptual appraisal of a new methodology for participatory ecological planning

    Progress in Planning

    (2007)
  • G. Abels

    Citizen involvement in public policy-making: does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? the case of pTA

    Interdisciplinary Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • T. Beatley et al.

    Representation in comprehensive planning: an analysis of the Austinplan process

    Journal of the American Planning Association

    (1994)
  • Beierle, T.C., 1998. Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goal....
  • T.C. Beierle

    The quality of stakeholder-based decisions

    Risk Analysis

    (2002)
  • A. Bora et al.

    Participatory science governance revisited: normative expectations versus empirical evidence

    Science and Public Policy

    (2006)
  • M. Buchy et al.

    The twists and turns of community participation in natural resource management in Australia: what is missing?

    Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

    (2001)
  • California Department of Fish and Game

    California Marine Life Protection Act: Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas

    (2008)
  • California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Draft Strategy for Stakeholder and Interested Public Participation,...
  • California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Strategy for Stakeholder and Interested Public Participation, 2007...
  • California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Strategy for Stakeholder and Interested Public Participation in the...
  • California Marine Life Protection Act Regional Profile for the North Coast Study Region: Tribal Appendix (Appendix E)....
  • California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Strategy for Public Participation in the MLPA North Coast Region,...
  • L.C. Chase et al.

    Public participation in wildlife management: what do stakeholders want?

    Society and Natural Resources

    (2004)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text