The formation of large-scale collaborative resource management institutions: Clarifying the roles of stakeholders, science, and institutions

被引:154
作者
Heikkila, T [1 ]
Gerlak, AK
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Sch Int & Publ Affairs, New York, NY 10027 USA
[2] Univ Arizona, Int Studies Assoc, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA
关键词
collaborative environmental governance; institutional change; scientific information; policy entrepreneurs; Northwest Power and Conservation Council; Chesapeake Bay Program; CALFED Bay-Delta Program; Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan;
D O I
10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00134.x
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
This article explores the emergence of collaborative institutional arrangements for managing natural resources in large-scale and complex resource settings, among numerous political jurisdictions and stakeholders. It examines four regional institutions in the United States: the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's Fish and Wildlife Program, the Chesapeake Bay Program, the CALFED Bay-Delta Program, and the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. While a wealth of literature has looked at the emergence of smaller-scale resource management institutions, and some literature has begun to look at the characteristics and successes of these regional institutions, theory is lacking to explain the formation of these regional institutions. We first introduce three relevant streams of literature-on common pool resources management, on policy entrepreneurs and social capital, and on science and information in policy change-to frame our analysis. The comparisons of the cases point to the importance of integrating key insights from the literature for understanding the formation of collaborative resource governance. We emphasize how science, leadership, and prior organizational experience interact in facilitating institutional change, particularly in the process of raising awareness about resource management problems. In tracing the formation of these institutions, we also identify how external institutional triggers can help spur collaborative governance.
引用
收藏
页码:583 / 612
页数:30
相关论文
共 91 条
[41]   THE CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL COLLECTIVE ACTION [J].
LIBECAP, GD .
JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL POLITICS, 1994, 6 (04) :563-592
[42]  
LIGHT SS, 1995, BARRIERS BRIDGES REN, P103
[43]   Cooperation, reciprocity, and the collective-action heuristic [J].
Lubell, M ;
Scholz, JT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2001, 45 (01) :160-178
[44]   Collaborative watershed management: A view from the grassroots [J].
Lubell, M .
POLICY STUDIES JOURNAL, 2004, 32 (03) :341-361
[45]  
Lubell M, 2002, AM J POLIT SCI, V46, P148, DOI 10.2307/3088419
[46]  
MARTIN G, 1992, SAN FRANCISCO C 0210, pC9
[47]  
MARTIN G, 1992, SAN FRANCISCO C 0715, pA1
[48]  
McCay BonnieJ., 2002, DRAMA COMMONS, P361, DOI DOI 10.17226/10287
[49]  
MCCLURG S, 2004, BRIEFING BAY DELTA C
[50]  
MOREAU R, 1986, NEWSWEEK 0407, P72