Collaborative Environmental Decision Making in Oregon Watershed Groups: Perceptions of Effectiveness

Abstract

Collaborative watershed groups have formed at a significant rate throughout the United States in the last decade. Data on these groups, however, has been largely anecdotal and lacking in rigorous examination of the relationship between group formation, membership, process, and group effectiveness. Using a mail survey, Oregon watershed group participants were asked to identify who initiated the formation of the group, how efficiently the group formed, how the group determines membership, what decision making method the group uses, and how members perceive the group's effectiveness. Findings indicated that a majority believe that, because of their participation in a watershed group, they better understand issues in the watershed and the perspectives of others, but less than half believe that relationships with government decision makers or physical conditions in the watershed have improved. Members of citizen initiated groups rated their groups higher than government initiated groups on addressing difficult or controversial issues. Members of groups that use consensus responded most positively on whether the group gives fair consideration to dissenting opinions. Overall, groups with restricted membership systems rated themselves lowest on involving key decision making groups, timeliness in addressing issues, and overall effectiveness. These results raise concerns about this type of group membership system.

Factors Influencing Farmers’ Participation in Water Management: A Community Development Perspective

“…Enhanced community participation has the ability to improve overall water management, including conflict resolutions [30]. The majority of farmers realized that their participation in a watershed group made them aware and understands the issues related to watershed, at the same time they rated their groups advantaged than government guided groups in tackling the issues of conflict [31].…”

Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process1

“…Furthermore, it is likely to impair citizen ownership and implementation of the plan. An overriding theme of the watershed management literature is the need for diverse stakeholder representation (Schuett and Selin, 2002; Dakins et al. , 2005).…”

“…Diversity of group membership is a related structural element that also contributes to outcome variability (Griffin, 1999; Moore and Koontz, 2003; Dakins et al. , 2005; Bidwell and Ryan, 2006; Leach, 2006).…”

“…Bidwell and Ryan (2006) conclude that inclusive participation in the collaborative process is important to achieve both representative decision making and substantive changes in water resources management. An Oregon survey of watershed group members (Dakins et al. , 2005) found that individuals from groups with restricted membership systems rated their group lowest on key stakeholder involvement, timeliness in addressing issues, and organizational effectiveness.…”

Wells are not always water follies: sustainable groundwater policies for the American West

“…Many articles propose various forms of participatory decision-making, including using the Internet and teledemocracy to make water resources decisions (Vari & Kisgyorgy, 1998;Johnson et al, 2001;Kangas & Store, 2003). One recent article discusses the use of organized "watershed groups," which include groups of citizens and government stakeholders working in collaboration to improve the status of management of a water resource and related natural resources within a geographic area (Dakins et al, 2005). Identifying the person or entity responsible for creating these hierarchical trees is beyond the scope of this paper.…”