Practitioner Perceptions of Adaptive Management Implementation in the United States

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Adaptive management is a growing trend within environment and natural resource management efforts in the United States. While many proponents of adaptive management emphasize the need for collaborative, iterative governance processes to facilitate adaptive management, legal scholars note that current legal requirements and processes in the United States often make it difficult to provide the necessary institutional support and flexibility for successful adaptive management implementation. Our research explores this potential disconnect between adaptive management theory and practice by interviewing practitioners in the field. We conducted a survey of individuals associated with the Collaborative Adaptive Management Network (CAMNet), a nongovernmental organization that promotes adaptive management and facilitates in its implementation. The survey was sent via email to the 144 participants who attended CAMNet Rendezvous during 2007-2011 and yielded 48 responses. We found that practitioners do feel hampered by legal and institutional constraints: > 70% of respondents not only believed that constraints exist, they could specifically name one or more examples of a legal constraint on their work implementing adaptive management. At the same time, we found that practitioners are generally optimistic about the potential for institutional reform.

Summary: Addressing the Interactional Challenges of Moving Collaborative Adaptive Management From Theory to Practice

“…The historical context that shaped the relationships among key actors is particularly important (Greig et al 2013). Social factors, tied to social learning and the development and deployment of social capital through increased stakeholder involvement, are essential elements of CAM (Benson and Stone 2013, Childs et al 2013, Smedstad and Gosnell 2013, Curtin 2014). …”

“…Successful implementation of management plans is considered unlikely without stakeholder buy-in (Green et al 2013). In addition, stakeholder involvement provides critical flows of experiential knowledge and the articulation of multiple values (Scarlett 2013) Ecology and Society 19(1): 46 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss1/art46/ that can yield a wider range of alternatives (Benson and Stone 2013) and highlight important uncertainties (Loftin 2014). …”

“…Benson and Stone (2013) found that practitioners associated with CAMNet reported institutional barriers to and constraints on CAM efforts, including limitations on flexibility stemming from legal requirements.…”

“…For long-term transformation of governance arrangements, CAM processes must become embedded within governance institutions (Smedstad and Gosnell 2013). Current institutions are not designed to carry out CAM, having limited capacity for flexibility and power sharing, and many key actors have organizational cultures that have little tolerance for uncertainty and error (Benson and Stone 2013, Childs et al 2013, Greig et al 2013, LoSchiavo et al 2013. Resource managers often lack mechanisms to include meaningful stakeholder participation in decision processes (Scarlett 2013), as well as institutional support for experimentation that does not produce results quickly (Benson and Stone 2013).…”

Introduction to exploring opportunities for advancing collaborative adaptive management (CAM): integrating experience and practice

“…The papers describe one or more principles or aspects of CAM through a survey, evaluation, or comparison of multiple projects. Benson and Stone (2013) conducted a mail survey of practitioners to explore the potential disconnect between adaptive management theory and practice relative to legal requirements and processes in the U.S., which make it difficult to successfully implement CAM. Smedstad and Gosnell (2013) evaluated the National Riparian Service Team's efforts to catalyze CAM of public land riparian areas in seven cases from the western U.S. Margoluis et al (2013) described results chains, proposed as a valuable tool for helping the conservation community clearly specify the theory of change behind the adaptive management actions they were implementing.…”