Local-level emergence of network governance within the U.S. Forest Service: A case study of mountain pine beetle outbreak from Colorado, USA

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102204Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Gaps in governance resources (legitimacy, capacity) may drive network emergence.

  • Multi-level factors influence network emergence, type, and persistence.

  • Formal governance networks of insect outbreak tend to not persist in bureaucracies.

  • State, county, industry, and NGO actors can promote network governance for federal lands.

  • Network governance of beetle outbreak often generates institutional innovation.

Abstract

In the U.S. and around the world, governmental and non-governmental actors are piloting network governance approaches to fill gaps in governance resources (management capacity, local legitimacy) that cannot be met by a single entity alone. Such resources are needed to respond adaptively to changing conditions, such as those posed by severe disturbance. The purpose of this study is to provide insight into the drivers, pathways, and outcomes of network governance emergence within a federal bureaucracy, that of the U.S. Forest Service. We aim to shed light on the local variability of emergent network types (partnerships, collaboratives, combination types). We conducted case study research on responses to a severe mountain pine beetle (MPB, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) infestation (~1996–2012) on the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests in northern Colorado, USA. We applied a multi-level analysis, comprised of bottom-up, top-down, and “from around” (pre-existing network) factors, to three examples of MPB outbreak-driven network emergence. The examples vary in their combination of geographic location (Western Slope vs. Front Range) and scale (local vs. regional). Our analysis revealed: (1) network type and governance outcomes varied due to interlinked, multi-level factors (predominant gaps in governance resources, bottom-up factors, and pre-existing networks); (2) USFS managers and counterparts exercised agency in navigating top-down bureaucratic constraints on network governance emergence; (3) state, local, industry, and NGO entities, along with federal counterparts, co-initiated network governance of federal lands; (4) emergent networks generally did not persist in the large bureaucracy after the aftermath subsided. This study's findings are applicable to governance networks associated with land management bureaucracies in the U.S. and around the world.

Introduction

Recent scholarship suggests that large bureaucracies often have limited ability to respond adaptively to changing ecological and social conditions, with Armitage et al., 2007, p. 1) framing them as “an anachronism in a world increasingly characterized by rapid transformations.” Around the world, however, land management bureaucracies have increased reliance upon and coordination with non-state entities via multi-scalar governance networks. Researchers and practitioners have highlighted the opportunities posed by the network governance model to engage the local legitimacy, capacity, and innovation incipient in governance actors (Howlett et al., 2009; Klijn and Koppenjan, 2016a, Klijn and Koppenjan, 2016b). The resultant tightening of feedbacks between local conditions, management decisions, and actions may promote adaptive governance (Chaffin et al., 2016). Network models may stand in tension with more traditional bureaucratic or expert-led governance approaches and can represent a threat to established power relations (Brunner and Steelman, 2005; Keast, 2016; Klijn and Skelcher, 2007; Winkel, 2014). This tension points to an important, yet insufficiently examined theme of the network governance literature: the processes and pathways of potential governance change from a traditional model to a network model (Abrams, 2019; Davis and Reed, 2013; Morris et al., 2018; Ojha et al., 2014; Wyborn et al., 2015). An expanded understanding of the drivers, pathways, and outcomes of network governance emergence may help forest managers and stakeholders to increase response effectiveness to ecological and social changes.

Not well understood is the local-level variability in the adoption of the network governance model, such as is occurring on many administrative units managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) (Abrams, 2019; Cheng et al., 2015; Maier and Abrams, 2018; Petersen and Wellstead, 2014; Wilson, 2006). Within this federal land management agency, an uneven transition away from the dominant federal model (Babcock, 1996) toward network governance (Keast, 2016) has been underway since the 1990s. In the USFS and around the world, networks generally operate as a supplement to (e.g., as hybrid structures), rather than a replacement of, the bureaucratic framework (Keast, 2016; Klijn and Skelcher, 2007; Scarlett and McKinney, 2016). Within this single land management agency, distinct types and processes of governance transition may be occurring when examined from the local level (Moseley and Charnley, 2014). A better understanding is needed of how these broad drivers intersect with local conditions of particular USFS administrative units to promote network governance emergence. The purpose of this analysis is to provide insight into why particular network types (partnerships, collaborative groups, combination type) and outcomes develop on distinct administrative units and scales of a land management agency during a major ecological disturbance. We draw upon intensive case-study research on USFS responses to a severe mountain pine beetle (MPB, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) infestation on the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests in northern Colorado, USA.

Section snippets

The United States Forest Service and network governance

The USFS is a major administrator of U.S. public lands, responsible for managing about 9% of the nation's land base (78 million hectares), distributed across 154 national forests and 20 national grasslands (MacCleery, 2008). From the time of agency establishment in 1905 until the 1990s, the dominant federal model prevailed throughout public forest administration, in which management decision authority was both formally and informally monopolized by the USFS (Babcock, 1996; Cortner and Moote,

Analytical framework

Our study seeks to expand understanding of governance change in large bureaucracies during severe disturbance, specifically how network governance emerges and why a particular network type (collaborative, partnership, combination type) emerges in different places.1

Methods

This analysis employs a case study with embedded unit design (Yin, 2003), due to the localized social and ecological conditions of distinct sub-regions within a broader, unified administrative area (a single national forest). This variability presented the opportunity to comparatively examine how the interplay of multi-level factors –bottom-up, place-specific factors, as well as top-down and from-around factors – influenced network governance emergence in particular places (based on the

Results

Our analysis revealed that emergent network type and governance outcomes varied in the three research geographies due to variation in interlinked factors: predominant gaps in local- (to regional-) level governance resources (capacity, legitimacy); bottom-up, place-specific factors; and the from-around factor, pre-existing networks. Moreover, USFS managers – along with non-federal counterparts (state and local governments, industry, ENGOs) – navigated multi-level factors, including constraints

Discussion

In this study, we examined three examples of governance response to MPB outbreak in northern Colorado to gain insight into extreme event-driven network governance emergence within a federal bureaucracy, the USFS. The examples varied in combination of sub-regional location (Western Slope, Front Range) and scale (local, regional). Building on the concept of the “street-level” forest bureaucrat (Moseley and Charnley, 2014; Maier and Abrams, 2018), we applied an adapted framework that integrated

Conclusion

Using an integrative framework based on the frameworks of the micro-processes of institutionalization (Moseley and Charnley, 2014) and national forest network governance emergence (Abrams, 2019), we examined network governance emergence in a large bureaucracy, the USFS. We examined three examples of network emergence in response to a severe MPB outbreak (~1996–2012) in northern Colorado. Our results highlighted the local-level and scalar variability in network emergence. Distinct network types

Funding

This article was made possible with funding from National Science Foundation Grant 1414041.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the valuable comments provided by two anonymous reviewers. We also appreciate the time and perspectives shared by our interviewees, including those of the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, the Colorado State Forest Service, Boulder County Parks and Open Space, and the Western Slope and Front Range network participants and communities. We also appreciate assistance by archivists of the National Archives at Denver and the Forest History Society. GIS analysis was provided by

References (62)

  • J. Abrams et al.

    Adaptation to a landscape-scale mountain pine beetle epidemic in the era of networked governance: the enduring importance of bureaucratic institutions

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2017)
  • J. Abrams et al.

    Tracking a governance transition: identifying and measuring indicators of social forestry on the Willamette National Forest

    Soc. Nat. Resour.

    (2019)
  • R.N. Addington et al.

    Principles and practices for the restoration of ponderosa pine and dry mixed-conifer forests of the Colorado Front Range

  • D. Armitage et al.

    Adaptive Co-Management: Collaboration, Learning and Multi-Level Governance

    (2007)
  • H.M. Babcock

    Dual Regulation, Collaborative Management, or Layered Federalism

    Hastings West-Northwest J. Environ. Law Policy

    (1996)
  • L. Bramwell

    Forest Management for All: State and Private Forestry in the U.S. Forest Service

    (2013)
  • R.D. Brunner et al.

    Beyond scientific management

  • D.P. Carpenter

    The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy: Reputations, Networks, and Policy Innovation in Executive Agencies, 1862–1928

    (2001)
  • B.C. Chaffin et al.

    Transformative environmental governance

    Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

    (2016)
  • K. Charmaz

    Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis

    (2006)
  • A.S. Cheng et al.

    Examining the adaptability of collaborative governance associated with publicly managed ecosystems over time: insights from the Front Range Roundtable, Colorado, USA

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2015)
  • H. Cortner et al.

    The Politics of Ecosystem Management

    (1999)
  • S. Cottrell et al.

    Adaptive capacity in social–ecological systems: a framework for addressing bark beetle disturbances in natural resource management

    Sustain. Sci.

    (2019)
  • M.J. Dockry et al.

    Building bridges: perspectives on partnership and collaboration from the US forest service tribal relations program

    J. For.

    (2018)
  • S.P. Hays

    The American People and the National Forests: The first Century of the US Forest Service

    (2009)
  • G. Hoberg

    The emerging triumph of ecosystem management: The transformation of federal forest policy

    Environ. Polit. Western Publ. Lands

    (2001)
  • H. Kaufman

    The Forest Ranger: A Study in Administrative Behavior

    (1960)
  • R. Keast

    Network governance

  • E.H. Klijn et al.

    The shift toward network governance: drivers, characteristics and manifestations

  • Cited by (5)

    View full text