Who litigates and who collaborates? Evidence from environmental groups influencing National Forest management
Tóm tắt
Natural resource decision making is changing. Previously, federal agencies made decisions about public lands and resources with one-way input from user groups and the public, but now agencies are collaborating more with stakeholders and the public to develop alternatives and choose a course of action. Changes in decision-making venues and procedures can have an impact on the representation of different interest groups, as some groups are better suited to take advantage of new opportunities than others. It is important to understand how the rise of collaborative decision making is affecting interest group representation, as it can alter not only interest group survival and influence, but also policy and management outcomes. This research examines environmental interest group participation in collaborative National Forest decision making to understand the differences between participants and non-participants in collaboration and to determine the extent to which there is equal representation of these groups under a model of collaborative governance. A survey was conducted on 101 environmental groups to test hypotheses about the dominantly theorized drivers of interest group behavior – resources and interest. Then, four organizations were chosen for case study analysis to examine the correlations in greater detail. The results indicate that resources are important for shaping the environmental groups’ ability to collaborate; organizations with larger budgets and a higher level of professionalization were associated with a collaborating strategy. Interest is important for shaping the environmental groups’ willingness to collaborate; organizations with multiple values were associated with a collaborating strategy, whereas organizations with a single, environmental value were associated with a confronting strategy. The results provide empirical evidence that smaller, less professionalized environmental groups and more ideological environmental groups are not well represented in collaboration. Given that collaboration is increasingly used to address environmental conflicts, the exclusion of these groups could affect their survival and influence on policy making, and could change the composition and influence of the environmental movement. Building organizational capacity, networking and encouraging alternative forms of participation in collaboration could help limit organizations’ marginalization under collaborative governance. Further, encouraging appropriate and legitimate collaboration, and upholding the legal foundation of environmental decision making will ensure that environmental organizations can participate in policy making through whatever strategy they choose.
Tài liệu tham khảo
American Lands Alliance. (2005) http://www.americanlands.org, accessed 1 March 2013.
Andrews, K.T. and Edwards, B. (2005) The organizational structure of local environmentalism. Mobilization 10 (2): 213–234.
Anon. (2006) A call to scholars and teachers of public administration, public policy, planning, political science, and related fields. Public Administration Review 66 (s1): 168–170.
Ansell, C. and Gash, A. (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18 (4): 543–571.
Baker, M. and Kusel, J. (2003) Community Forestry in the United States: Learning from the Past, Crafting the Future. Washington DC: Island Press.
Baumgartner, F.R. and Leech, B.L. (1998) Basic Interests. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Beierle, T.C. and Cayford, J. (2002) Democracy in Practice: Public Participation in Environmental Decisions. Washington DC: Resources for the Future.
Berry, J.M. (1977) Lobbying for the People: The Political Behavior of Public Interest Groups. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Berry, J.M. and Arons, D.F. (2003) A Voice for Nonprofits. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Bingham, G. (1986) Resolving Environmental Disputes: A Decade of Experience. Washington DC: The Conservation Foundation.
Brendler, T. and Carey, H. (1998) Community forestry, defined. Journal of Forestry 96 (3): 21–23.
Brick, P., Snow, D. and Van de Wetering, S. (eds.) (2001) Across the Great Divide: Explorations in Collaborative Conservation and the American West. Washington DC: Island Press.
Brulle, R.J. (1996) Environmental discourse and social movement organizations: A historical and rhetorical perspective on the development of us environmental organizations. Sociological Inquiry 66 (1): 58–83.
Brunner, R.D., Colburn, C.H., Cromley, C.M., Klein, R.A. and Olson, E.A. (2002) Finding Common Ground: Governance and Natural Resources in the American West. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Brunner, R. and Steelman, T.A. (2005) Beyond scientific management. In: R. Brunner, T.A. Steelman, L. Coe-Juell, C.M. Cromley, C.M. Edwards and D.W. Tucker (eds.) Adaptive Governance: Integrating Science, Policy, and Decision Making. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 1–51.
Carmin, J. and Balser, D.B. (2002) Selecting repertoires of action in environmental movement organizations. Organization Environment 15 (4): 365–388.
Cheng, A.S. (2006) Build it and they will come? Mandating collaboration in public lands management and planning. Natural Resources Journal 46 (3): 841–858.
Cheng, A.S. and Fernandez-Gimenez, M. (2006) Ford Foundation Community-based Forestry Demonstration Program: Final Research Report. http://actrees.org/files/Research/cbf_report.pdf, accessed 1 March 2013.
Coggins, G.C. (1999) Regulating federal natural resources: A summary case against devolved collaboration. Ecology Law Quarterly 25 (3): 602–610.
Conley, A. and Moote, M.A. (2003) Evaluating collaborative natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 16 (5): 371–386.
Crowfoot, J.E. and Wondolleck, J.M. (1990) Environmental Disputes: Community Involvement in Conflict Resolution. Washington DC: Island Press.
Dalton, R.J. (1994) The Green Rainbow. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dalton, R.J., Recchia, S. and Rohrschneider, R. (2003) The environmental movement and modes of political action. Comparative Political Studies 36 (7): 743–771.
Delfin, F.G. and Tang, S. (2008) Foundation impact on environmental nongovernmental organizations: The grantees’ perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 37 (4): 603–625.
Dillman, D.A. (1999) Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.
Dukes, E.F. and Firehock, K. (2001) Collaboration: A Guide for Environmental Advocates. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
Edmunds, D. and Wollenberg, E. (2002) Disadvantaged Groups in Multistakeholder Negotiations. CIFOR Programme Report. http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/strategic_negotiation_report.pdf, accessed 1 March 2013.
Gais, T.L. and Walker, Jr. J.L. (1991) Pathways to influence in American politics. In: Walker Jr. J.L. (ed.) Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 103–122.
Garson, G.D. (2012) Scales and Measures. Asheboro, NC: Statistical Associates Publishers.
Gray, G.J., Enzer, M.J. and Kusel, J. (2001) Understanding Community-Based Forest Ecosystem Management in the United States. New York: Haworth Press.
Long, F.J. and Arnold, M.B. (1995) The Power of Environmental Partnerships. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace and Company.
Mansbridge, J.J. (1986) Why we Lost the ERA. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
McCarthy, J.D. and Zald, M.N. (1977) Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology 82 (6): 1212–1241.
McCloskey, M. (1999) Local communities and the management of public forests. Ecology Law Quarterly 25 (3): 624–629.
McCloskey, M. (2000) Problems with using collaboration to shape environmental public policy. Valparaiso University Law Review 34 (2): 423.
Milbrath, L.W. (1963) The Washington Lobbyists. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Moote, A. and Lowe, K. (2008) What to Expect from Collaboration in Natural Resource Management: A Research Synthesis for Practitioners. Flagstaff, AZ: Ecological Restoration Institute, Northern Arizona University.
Moote, M.A., McClaran, M.P. and Chickering, D.K. (1997) Theory in practice: Applying participatory democracy theory to public land planning. Environmental Management 21 (6): 877–889.
Mutter, L.R., Virden, R.J. and Cayer, N.J. (1999) Interest group influence in state natural resource policymaking. Society and Natural Resources 12 (3): 243–255.
Owyhee Initiative. (2012) Facts & Resources, http://www.owyheeinitiative.org/resources.htm, accessed 1 February 2013.
Piven, F.F. and Cloward, R. (1977) Poor People’s Movements: How they Succeed, Why They Fail. New York: Vintage.
Reid, E.J. (1999) Nonprofit advocacy and political participation. In: E.T. Boris and C.E. Steuerle (eds.) Nonprofits and Government: Collaboration and Conflict. Washington DC: Urban Institute Press, pp. 291–327.
Schlozman, K.L. and Tierney, J.T. (1986) Organizing Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Smith, S.R. and Lipsky, M. (1993) Nonprofits for Hire: The Welfare State in the Age of Contracting. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Staggenborg, S. (1988) The consequences of professionalization and formalization in the pro-choice movement. American Sociological Review 53 (4): 585–606.
Sturtevant, V., Moote, M.A., Jakes, P. and Cheng, A.S. (2005) Social Science to Improve Fuels Management: A Synthesis of Research on Collaboration. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, General Technical Report NC-257.
Susskind, L. and Cruikshank, J. (1987) Breaking the Impasse. New York: Basic Books.
Truman, D.B. (1951) The Governmental Process. New York: Knopf.
Wallace, G. and Haufler, J. (2007) Factors that Influence Successful Collaborations Between the Forest Products Industry and Environmental Organizations. Washington DC: American Forest & Paper Association.
Weber, E.P. (2000) A new vanguard for the environment: Grass-roots ecosystem management as a new environmental movement. Society and Natural Resources 13 (3): 237–259.
Webler, T. and Tuler, S. (2001) Public participation in watershed management planning: Views on process from people in the field. Research in Human Ecology 8 (2): 29–39.
Welsh, M.M. (2004) Reaction of the national environmental groups to devolution. Society and Natural Resources 17 (4): 293–304.
Western, D. and Wright, R.M. (1994) Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community-Based Conservation. Washington DC: Island Press.
Wilson, J.Q. (1995) Political Organizations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Wondolleck, J.M. and Yaffee, S.L. (2000) Making Collaboration Work: Lessons From Innovation in Natural Resource Management. Washington DC: Island Press.
Zald, M.N. (2000) Ideologically structured action: An enlarged agenda for social movement research. Mobilization 5 (1): 1–16.
Zald, M.N. and Ash, R. (1966) Social movement organins: Growth, decay, and change. Social Forces 44 (3): 327–340.
Zald, M. and McCarthy, J. (eds.) (1987) Social Movements in an Organizational Society. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.