Conflict in US forest management for decades centered around balancing demands from forested ecosystems, with a rise in place-based collaborative governance at the end of the twentieth century. By the early 2000s, it was becoming apparent that not only had the mix of players involved in forest management changed, but so had the playing field, as climate-driven disturbances such as wildfire and insect and disease outbreaks were becoming more extensive and severe. In this conceptual review paper, we argue that disturbance has become the most prominent driver of governance change on US national forests, but we also recognize that the governance responses to disturbance are shaped by variables such as discourses, institutional history and path dependence, and institutional innovation operating at different system levels.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe United States Forest Service, a federal agency entrusted with managing 78 M hectares of national forestlands under a broad multiple-use mandate, has seen recent shifts in policy direction emphasizing ecological restoration, consideration of climate change impacts, and a focus on managing for resilient landscapes. The process of revising the comprehensive plans guiding national forest management presents opportunities to reorient objectives, activities, and commitments toward these goals. Here we analyze case studies of three national forests that have completed the forest plan revision process since 2014: the Francis Marion National Forest in coastal South Carolina, the Kaibab National Forest in northern Arizona, and the Rio Grande National Forest in southern Colorado.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInvestments in watershed services (IWS) programs, in which downstream water users pay upstream watershed service suppliers for actions that protect drinking water, are increasing in number and scope. IWS programs represent over $170 million of investment in over 4.3 million ha of watersheds, providing water to over 230 million people.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAlthough there is acknowledgment that the complexity of social-ecological systems governance demands representation from diverse perspectives, there is little agreement in the literature on how to cross both fiat (human-demarcated) and bona fide (physical) boundaries to address such complexities. As a cohort of interdisciplinary scholars, we navigate the boundary between science and practice to address the question of fit regarding the role of organizations in transcending boundaries. We found there is a need to rectify discrepancies between theories about boundaries and theories about organizations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF