From Planning to Implementation: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches for Collaborative Watershed Management

被引:207
作者
Koontz, Tomas M. [1 ,2 ]
Newig, Jens [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Sch Environm & Nat Resources, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Univ Washington, Tacoma Interdisciplinary Arts & Sci Program, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[3] Univ Luneburg, Fac Sustainabil, Luneburg, Germany
[4] Univ Luneburg, Ctr Study Democracy, Luneburg, Germany
关键词
collaboration; implementation; watershed; stakeholder; ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; PUBLIC-POLICY; FRAMEWORK; PARTICIPATION; PARTNERSHIPS; CHALLENGES; PROTECTION; LESSONS; MODEL;
D O I
10.1111/psj.12067
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Collaborative approaches are increasingly used to address challenging environmental problems in the United States and around the world. The inclusion of multiple stakeholders and sources of information is expected to solve such problems. Prior research has highlighted the importance of collaborative process characteristics in reaching agreements and building social capital, but less is known about what factors affect the implementation of such agreements. A parallel stream of research in policy implementation theory has developed variables and frameworks to explain the implementation of authoritative policy prescriptions. Drawing on the top-down/bottom-up perspectives on implementation, this study examines implementation of collaborative recommendations along a continuum of top-down/bottom-up approaches. A comparison of six cases in two states (Lower Saxony, Germany and Ohio, United States) indicates important differences in perceptions of implementation and environmental improvements, although whether an effort was more top down or more bottom up was not a key determinant of results. In both states, stakeholder collaborative planning efforts included substantial involvement from stakeholders and multiple government agencies and levels. Participants in the Ohio cases perceived higher levels of implementation and environmental improvements. Key factors promoting implementation of plan recommendations were resources (funding and a full-time coordinator), willing land owners, and networks. In the Lower Saxony cases, collaborative plans were seen as less impactful, but nevertheless the process of plan development did foster networks for implementing some actions to improve water quality.
引用
收藏
页码:416 / 442
页数:27
相关论文
共 71 条
[31]   We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collaborative stakeholder participation on land use policy [J].
Koontz, TM .
POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL, 2005, 33 (03) :459-481
[32]   The farmer, the planner, and the local citizen in the dell: how collaborative groups plan for farmland preservation [J].
Koontz, TM .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 2003, 66 (01) :19-34
[33]   What do we know and need to know about the environmental outcomes of collaborative management? [J].
Koontz, Tomas M. ;
Thomas, Craig W. .
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, 2006, 66 :111-121
[34]   Social learning in collaborative watershed planning: the importance of process control and efficacy [J].
Koontz, Tomas M. .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2014, 57 (10) :1572-1593
[35]  
Koontz TomasM., 2004, Collaborative Environmental Management, What Roles for Government?
[36]  
Layzer J.A., 2008, Natural experiments: ecosystem-based management and the environment
[37]  
Leach W.D., 2005, Swimming Upstream Collaborative Approaches to Watershed Management, P233
[38]   Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington [J].
Leach, WD ;
Pelkey, NW ;
Sabatier, PA .
JOURNAL OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT, 2002, 21 (04) :645-670
[39]   Making watershed partnerships work: A review of the empirical literature [J].
Leach, WD ;
Pelkey, NW .
JOURNAL OF WATER RESOURCES PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT-ASCE, 2001, 127 (06) :378-385
[40]   Surveying diverse stakeholder groups [J].
Leach, WD .
SOCIETY & NATURAL RESOURCES, 2002, 15 (07) :641-649