Collaborative Partnership Design: The Implications of Organizational Affiliation for Watershed Partnerships

Collaborative watershed partnerships are a common strategy for addressing complex natural resource management decisions. Despite a large literature surrounding their procedural strengths and weaknesses, little theory regarding collaborative partnership design is available to guide policymaking and implementation efforts. This study investigated the relationship between partnership structure and activities using interview data from 29 of Oregon's watershed partnerships. Confirming previous research, partnership composition is related to outcomes. Further exploration reveals that organizational affiliation is related to both composition and activities. Independent partnerships were more likely to conduct scientific assessments or plans, while agency-affiliated partnerships focused primarily on restoration projects. Additional findings suggest that independent partnerships develop priorities internally, while agency-affiliated partnerships tend to adopt the strategies of their parent organization. Diverse participation, incentives, and capacity are identified as critical design considerations for collaborative partnerships.

[1]  J. Gaus,et al.  Public administration and the United States Department of Agriculture , 1940 .

[2]  K. Korfmacher.  What's the Point of Partnering? , 2000 .

[3]  Organizational Commitment to Integrated and Collaborative Management: Matching Strategies to Constraints , 2001, Environmental management.

[4]  P. Sabatier,et al.  Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington , 2002 .

[5]  John T. Woolley,et al.  The Politics of Watershed Policymaking , 1999 .

[6]  P. Kokkonen,et al.  [Resources in the future]. , 2001, Duodecim; laaketieteellinen aikakauskirja.

[7]  D. Roush.  Making collaboration work : lessons from innovation in natural resource management , 2002 .

[8]  Peter Adler,et al.  Participating the Public: Group Process, Politics, and Planning , 1997 .

[9]  B. Jones.  Bounded Rationality and Political Science: Lessons from Public Administration and Public Policy , 2003 .

[10]  Douglas S. Kenney,et al.  Arguing About Consensus: Examining the Case Against Western Watershed Initiatives and Other Collaborative Groups Active in Natural Resources Management , 2000 .

[11]  T. D. Satterthwaite.  THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds , 1976 .

[12]  E. Ostrom.  A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997 , 1998, American Political Science Review.

[13]  R. Margerum.  Collaborative Planning , 2002 .

[14]  M. Lubell.  Collaborative environmental institutions: All talk and no action? , 2004 .

[15]  Robert Kramer,et al.  Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems , 1990 .

[16]  G. Bentrup,et al.  Evaluation of a Collaborative Model: A Case Study Analysis of Watershed Planning in theIntermountain West , 2001, Environmental management.

[17]  W. F. Baber.  Bringing Society Back In: Grassroots Ecosystem Management, Accountability, and Sustainable Communities , 2004, Perspectives on Politics.

[18]  S. Singleton.  Collaborative Environmental Planning in the American West: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly , 2002 .

[19]  Organizations , 1992, Restoration & Management Notes.

[20]  John K. Gamman,et al.  Bioregional Conflict Resolution: Rebuilding Community in Watershed Planning and Organizing , 1999, Environmental management.

[21]  Herbert Snyder,et al.  Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data , 1996 .

[22]  Edward P. Weber.  Bringing Society Back In: Grassroots Ecosystem Management, Accountability, and Sustainable Communities , 2003 .

[23]  E. Weber.  Pluralism by the Rules: Conflict and Cooperation in Environmental Regulation , 1998 .

[24]  Conor Ryan.  Getting to the table: Incentives for participation in regulatory negotiations , 2000 .

[25]  T. Koontz,et al.  Research Note A Typology of Collaborative Watershed Groups: Citizen-Based, Agency-Based, and Mixed Partnerships , 2003 .

[26]  A REVIEW OF STATEWIDE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACHES FINAL REPORT APRIL 2002 U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF WATER , 2002 .

[27]  Douglas S. Kenney,et al.  The New Watershed Source Book: A Directory and Review of Watershed Initiatives in the Western United States , 2000 .

[28]  M. McClaran,et al.  Theory in Practice: Applying Participatory Democracy Theory to Public Land Planning , 1997, Environmental management.

[29]  W. Leach,et al.  Making Watershed Partnerships Work: A Review of the Empirical Literature , 2001 .

[30]  Rosemary O'Leary,et al.  Promise and Performance Of Environmental Conflict Resolution , 2003 .

[31]  Division on Earth.  New Strategies for America's Watersheds , 1999 .

[32]  L. Salamon,et al.  The tools of government : a guide to the new governance , 2002 .

[33]  D. Carpenter.  Adaptive Signal Processing, Hierarchy, and Budgetary Control in Federal Regulation , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[34]  Harry F. Wolcott,et al.  Writing Up Qualitative Research , 1990 .