Adaptive participation in watershed management.

Much of the guidance on watershed management stresses the need for collaboration among a variety of interested parties. For example, the first principle of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) framework document on watershed management states that people who are most affected by management decisions should be “involved throughout” and should “shape key decisions” (U.S. EPA) 1996). Similarly, a recent National Research Council (NRC 1999) report stresses the need for watershed management to integrate science and deliberative process. Although there is some question whether such collaborative efforts can produce results (e.g., Goldfarb 1994; Napier 1998), other empirical research suggests that participation can in some instances improve outcomes in general (Chess and Purcell 1999; Yaffee et al. 1996), and watershed management in particular (e.g., Astrack et al. 1984; Kenney 1997; Kich 1980; Stuart 1993). The Natural Resources Law Center's (NRLC) research on seventy-six western watershed initiatives (1998), for example, found that despite complications associated with “broad and open” memberships, participation is one of the five qualities “instrumental to success in watershed initiatives,” along with: leadership, resources, appropriate focus, and “credible and efficient processes of decision …

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

[2]  William B. Lord,et al.  Analysis of Institutional Innovation in the Natural Resources and Environmental Realm: The Emergence of Alternative Problem-Solving Strategies in the American West , 1999 .

[3]  Steve Selin,et al.  Developing a collaborative model for environmental planning and management , 1995 .

[4]  S. Michaels Configuring Who Does What in Watershed Management: The Massachusetts Watershed Initiative , 1999 .

[5]  N. Ash́ford,et al.  Public Participation in Contaminated Communities , 2001 .

[6]  Ensuring sustainability of natural resources: focus on institutional arrangements , 1996 .

[7]  H. Fineberg,et al.  Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society , 1996 .

[8]  B. Knuth,et al.  Success of citizen advisory committees in consensus‐based water resources planning in the great lakes basin , 1993 .

[9]  Richard F. Astrack,et al.  Managing a Public Involvement Program , 1984 .

[10]  Kai N. Lee Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, Kai N. Lee. 1993. Island Press, Washington, DC. 290 pages. ISBN: 1-59963-197-X. $25.00 , 1993 .

[11]  Evelyn Pinkerton Local Fisheries Co-management: A Review of International Experiences and Their Implications for Salmon Management in British Columbia , 1994 .

[12]  Douglas S. Kenney,et al.  Resource Management at the Watershed Level: An Assessment of the Changing Federal Role in the Emerging Era of Community-Based Watershed Management , 1997 .

[13]  Craig W. Thomas Linking Public Agencies With Community‐Based Watershed Organizations: Lessons From California , 1999 .

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

[15]  B. Knuth,et al.  The role of agency goals and local context in Great Lakes water resources public involvement programs , 1993 .

[16]  Ortwin Renn A Model for an Analytic−Deliberative Process in Risk Management , 1999 .

[17]  Branden B. Johnson,et al.  Advancing Understanding of Knowledge's Role in Lay Risk Perception , 1993 .

[18]  Seth Tuler,et al.  Integrating Technical Analysis With Deliberation in Regional Watershed Management Planning: Applying the National Research Council Approach , 1999 .