Reflections from USDA Forest Service employees on institutional constraints to engaging and serving their local communities

Journal of Forestry

Volumn 105, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 43-48

  Davenport, Mae A ^a   Anderson, Dorothy H ^b   Leahy, Jessica E ^c   Jakes, Pamela J ^d  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^d USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Communities; Institutional constraints; Relationship building; USDA Forest Service

Indexed keywords

MANAGEMENT; PERSONNEL; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS; RELATIONSHIP BUILDING;

FORESTRY;

CAPACITY BUILDING; COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION; COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; FOREST MANAGEMENT; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; LOCAL PARTICIPATION;

FORESTRY; MANAGEMENT; PERSONNEL; RESEARCH;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33847355684     PISSN: 00221201     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Berg, B.L. 2004. Qualitative research methods. Pearson, Boston. 336 p.
2. Carroll, M.S., and W.G. Hendrix. 1992. Federally protected rivers: The need for effective local involvement. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 58(3): 346-352.
3. Frenz, I.C., D.E. Voth, S. Burns, and C.W. Sperry. 2000. Forest Service-community relationship building: Recommendations. Soc. Natur. Resour. 13:549-566.
4. Hendee, J.C. 1984. Public opinion and what foresters should do about it. J. For. 340-344.
5. Koontz, T., T.A. Steelman, J. Carmin, K.S. Korfmacher, C. Moseley, and C.W. Thomas. 2004. Collaborative environmental management: What roles for government? Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DC. 210 p.
6. Lachapelle, P., S.F. McCool, and M.E. Patterson. 2003. Barriers to effective natural resource planning in a "messy" world. Soc. Natur. Resour. 16(6):473-490.
7. Marshall, C., and G.B. Rossman. 1998. Designing qualitative research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. 224 p.
8. McCool, S., and K. Guthrie. 2001. Mapping the dimensions of successful public participation in messy natural resources management situations. Soc. Natur. Resour. 14:309-323.
9. Samdahl, D. 1999. Epistemological and methodological issues in leisure research. P. 119-133 in Leisure studies: Prospects for the twenty-first century, Jackson, E.L., and T.L. Burton (eds.). Venture Publishing, State College, PA.
10. Schuster, T., D. Decker, and M. Pfeffer. 2003. Social learning for collaborative natural resource management. Soc. Natur. Resour. 16:309-326.
11. Selin, S.W., M.A. Schuett, and D.S. Carr. 1997. Has collaborative planning taken root in national forests? J. For. 95(5):25-28.
12. Shindler, B., M. Brunson, and G.H. Stankey. 2002. Social acceptability of forest conditions and management practices: A problem analysis. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. 537. Pacific Northwest Research Station. 68 p.
13. Strauss, A., and J. Corbin. 1990. Basics of qualitative research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. 270 p.
14. USDA Forest Service. 2006. National Partnership Office. Available online at www.fs.fed.us/aboutus/partnership/index.shtml; last accessed Sept. 12, 2006.
15. Wondelleck, J.M., and S.L. Yaffee. 2000. Making collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press, Washington, DC. 279 p.