Collaboration in Hazard Mitigation Planning: Case Studies in Washington State, USA.

Hazard mitigation plans can support communities' resilience in the context of natural hazards and climate change. The quality of these plans can be evaluated using established indicators; however, research is also needed regarding the perceptions of participants in planning processes, to understand aspects of the planning processes that may not be evident in the plan documents. This study builds on previously reported plan quality scores and survey data, to investigate whether selected collaboration dynamics (principled engagement and capacity for joint action) occurred during counties' hazard planning processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 hazard planning professionals who were involved in preparing county-level hazard mitigation plans in Washington State, USA. Findings (for cases with both high- and low-scoring plans) include evidence of collaboration dynamics, although important participants (e.g., members of the local community) were reportedly missing from some planning processes, raising concerns about the extent to which the plans reflect local needs. These results are consistent with previous literature, which has demonstrated that members of the public often view hazard mitigation as inaccessible and disconnected from their daily lives. The paper concludes with recommendations for how practitioners might go about bolstering participation from important participants, potentially leading to higher-quality plans and helping to protect communities from hazards.

Visions of Restoration in Fire-Adapted Forest Landscapes: Lessons from the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program.

Collaborative approaches to natural resource management are becoming increasingly common on public lands. Negotiating a shared vision for desired conditions is a fundamental task of collaboration and serves as a foundation for developing management objectives and monitoring strategies. We explore the complex socio-ecological processes involved in developing a shared vision for collaborative restoration of fire-adapted forest landscapes. To understand participant perspectives and experiences, we analyzed interviews with 86 respondents from six collaboratives in the western U.S., part of the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program established to encourage collaborative, science-based restoration on U.S. Forest Service lands. Although forest landscapes and group characteristics vary considerably, collaboratives faced common challenges to developing a shared vision for desired conditions. Three broad categories of challenges emerged: meeting multiple objectives, collaborative capacity and trust, and integrating ecological science and social values in decision-making. Collaborative groups also used common strategies to address these challenges, including some that addressed multiple challenges. These included use of issue-based recommendations, field visits, and landscape-level analysis; obtaining support from local agency leadership, engaging facilitators, and working in smaller groups (sub-groups); and science engagement. Increased understanding of the challenges to, and strategies for, developing a shared vision of desired conditions is critical if other collaboratives are to learn from these efforts.

Managing nonpoint source pollution in western Washington: landowner learning methods and motivations.

States, territories, and tribes identify nonpoint source pollution as responsible for more than half of the Nation's existing and threatened water quality impairments, making it the principal remaining cause of water quality problems across the United States. Combinations of education, technical and financial assistance, and regulatory measures are used to inform landowners about nonpoint source pollution issues, and to stimulate the use of best management practices. A mail survey of non-commercial riparian landowners investigated how they learn about best management practices, the efficacy of different educational techniques, and what motivates them to implement land management activities. Landowners experience a variety of educational techniques, and rank those that include direct personal contact as more effective than brochures, advertisements, radio, internet, or television. The most important motivations for implementing best management practices were linked with elements of a personal stewardship ethic, accountability, personal commitment, and feasibility. Nonpoint source education and social marketing campaigns should include direct interpersonal contacts, and appeal to landowner motivations of caring, responsibility, and personal commitment.

Stream restoration and enhancement projects: is anyone monitoring?

Declines in salmon stocks and general watershed health in Washington State, USA, have led to an increase in stream restoration and enhancement projects initiated throughout the state. The increasing number of projects has also raised questions regarding the monitoring of these efforts. Project managers receiving hydraulic project approvals (HPAs) were surveyed to determine whether monitoring was taking place on their projects. About half the project managers surveyed reported the collection of baseline data and the use of biological, physical, chemical, or other water quality measures for their projects. Of those who reported collection of monitoring data, only 18% indicated that monitoring was required. Respondents were also asked to rank the importance of various project goals on a Likert scale. Project managers with projects focusing on "engineering" goals (e.g., roadbed stabilization) were less likely than other project managers to collect baseline monitoring data. Project managers with projects focusing on "restoration/ecological" or "fisheries" goals were more likely than other project managers to collect monitoring measures. Although monitoring appears to be taking place in slightly more than half of the projects surveyed, the nature of the data collected varies widely across projects, and in most cases the monitoring effort is voluntary. This suggests that project sponsors, funders, and managers must consider the issues involved in requiring appropriate monitoring, establishing standardized monitoring guidelines, the time frames in which to monitor, providing other incentives for conducting monitoring, and ensuring adequate funding for monitoring efforts.