Mission Evolution: The United States Forest Service's Response to Crisis

Abstract

After a long history as a bureaucratic success story, the United States Forest Service (USFS) found itself embroiled in crisis beginning in the late 1980s. This study examines the factors that led up to the crisis, arguing that the agency had become captured by its own core technologies. Historically, the USFS was successful in adapting to changes in its environment by employing its traditional management procedures. However, attempting to incorporate the northern spotted owl issue with its traditional core technologies threw the subsystem into crisis, during which the agency lost control over its management activities. Today, the USFS is attempting to adapt to the changes brought about by the political conflict of the era. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2004..

The Advocacy Coalition Framework in natural resource policy studies — Recent experiences and further prospects

“…Several applications deal with forest policy issues in which "forestry" ("forest sector") and "environmental" coalitions shape the policy process (Elliott, 2000;Glück, 2000;Hogl, 2000;Tewari, 2001;Weber and Christophersen, 2002;Wellstead et al, 2004). Infrequently, the first type of coalition is further labeled as a "commercial forestry" (Kamieniecki, 2000), "pro-commodity" (Salka, 2004), "development" (Lertzman et al, 1996a,b;controversial cf. Hoberg, 1996;Cashore and Howlett, 2007), "timber production and ownership" (Voitleithner, 2003) or even "production" (Hysing and Olsson, 2008) coalition.…”

“…Hoberg, 1996;Cashore and Howlett, 2007), "timber production and ownership" (Voitleithner, 2003) or even "production" (Hysing and Olsson, 2008) coalition. The environmental coalition is termed as a "proamenity" (Salka, 2004), "nature protection and sport" (Voitleithner, 2003) or even "sustainable forestry" coalition (Elliot andSchläpfer, 2001, cf. Hysing andOlsson, 2008).…”

“…Several studies document instances of coalitions strategically using external events in combination with political resources, such as venue shopping, information manipulation or brokering to bring about major policy changes (e.g. Davis and Davis, 1988;Lertzman et al, 1996aLertzman et al, , 1996bKamieniecki, 2000;Burnett and Davis, 2002;Salka, 2004;Kurtz, 2004;Sotirov, 2009).…”

The Implications of Policy Stability for Renewable Energy Innovation in the United States, 1974–2009

“…In the past two decades, a rich theoretical scholarship has demonstrated that a model of punctuated equilibrium characterizes the "large-scale departures" pattern of government resource allocation, fiscal activities and, general public policymaking (True, Jones, & Baumgartner, 2007). Empirically, these patterns have been observed at multiple levels of government (e.g., federal, state, local) (e.g., Breunig & Koski, 2006;Jacoby & Schneider, 2001;Robinson, 2004), in multiple nations (e.g., Breunig, Koski, & Mortensen, 2009;John & Margetts, 2003), and in various policy categories (e.g., Busenberg, 2004;Ceccoli, 2003;Manna, 2006;Repetto, 2006;Salka, 2004;Wood, 2006). In the United States, federal budgets have constantly displayed large changes alongside many small adjustments, featuring an "avalanche budget model" (True, 2000) or an "agenda-based, attention-driven budgeting model" (True et al, 2007).…”

Public Lands Policy and Economic Trends in Gateway Communities

“…These and companion state level acts altered the way much of the public lands base was managed. Timber and grazing policies on BLM and USFS lands were forced to make room for endangered species protection and further recreational opportunities (BLM, 2008; Clarke & McCool, 1996; Lowry, 2008; Salka, 2004; USFS, 2008; Yaffee, 1994). NPS officials had to devise management plans that reconciled tourism with greater wilderness preservation and ecosystem integrity.…”