Disturbance shapes the US forest governance frontier: A review and conceptual framework for understanding governance change.

Conflict in US forest management for decades centered around balancing demands from forested ecosystems, with a rise in place-based collaborative governance at the end of the twentieth century. By the early 2000s, it was becoming apparent that not only had the mix of players involved in forest management changed, but so had the playing field, as climate-driven disturbances such as wildfire and insect and disease outbreaks were becoming more extensive and severe. In this conceptual review paper, we argue that disturbance has become the most prominent driver of governance change on US national forests, but we also recognize that the governance responses to disturbance are shaped by variables such as discourses, institutional history and path dependence, and institutional innovation operating at different system levels. We review the governance changes in response to disturbance that constitute a new frontier in US federal forest governance and offer a conceptual framework to examine how these governance responses are shaped by multi-level factors.

Rangeland Fire Protection Associations as disaster response organisations.

Rangeland Fire Protection Associations (RFPAs) are volunteer-based groups of trained private landowners who are authorised to respond to events in partnership with governmental agencies. This study analysed the functioning and structure of RFPAs in Idaho and Oregon in the western United States to characterise this under-researched model of disaster response. RFPAs represent an expanding type of disaster response organisation that interfaces with established fire suppression entities, yet 'emergent behaviour' manifested in some RFPA response actions. This appeared to lessen and mediate with time, as well as due to recognition of the issues, increased experience of fires, and training that fostered new mutual understandings. There is a need for continued examination of the effect of repeat experience in developing the characteristics of disaster response organisations. In addition, it is crucial to know how the interface between established and other types of organisations may be enhanced to make cooperative disaster response more effective.

Comparison of USDA Forest Service and Stakeholder Motivations and Experiences in Collaborative Federal Forest Governance in the Western United States.

In the United States, over 191 million acres of land is managed by the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, a federal government agency. In several western U.S. states, organized collaborative groups have become a de facto governance approach to providing sustained input on management decisions on much public land. This is most extensive in Oregon, where at least 25 "forest collaboratives" currently exist. This affords excellent opportunities for studies of many common themes in collaborative governance, including trust, shared values, and perceptions of success. We undertook a statewide survey of participants in Oregon forest collaboratives to examine differences in motivations, perceptions of success, and satisfaction among Forest Service participants ("agency participants"), who made up 31% of the sample, and other respondents ("non-agency") who represent nonfederal agencies, interest groups, citizens, and non-governmental groups. We found that agency participants differed from non-agency participants. They typically had higher annual incomes, and were primarily motivated to participate to build trust. However, a majority of all respondents were similar in not indicating any other social or economic motivations as their primary reason for collaborating. A majority also reported satisfaction with their collaborative-despite not ranking collaborative performance on a number of specific potential outcomes highly. Together, this suggests that collaboration in Oregon is currently perceived as successful despite not achieving many specific outcomes. Yet there were significant differences in socioeconomic status and motivation that could affect the ability of agency and nonagency participants to develop and achieve mutually-desired goals.