Trust factors in community-water resource management agency relationships

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 87, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 100-107

  Leahy, Jessica E ^a   Anderson, Dorothy H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Community relations; Public confidence; Public expectations; Resource dependent communities

Indexed keywords

MANAGERS; PLANNING; PUBLIC RELATIONS; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATERSHEDS;

COMMUNITY RELATIONS; MANAGEMENT DECISIONS; PUBLIC CONFIDENCE; PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS; QUALITATIVE CASE STUDIES; RESEARCH PROBLEMS; WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT; WATERRESOURCE MANAGEMENT;

DECISION MAKING;

COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER PLANNING; WATER RESOURCE;

ILLINOIS; KASKASKIA RIVER; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 47249085517     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ambrose M., and Schminke M. Organization structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice, perceived organizational support, and supervisory trust. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 2 (2002) 295-305
2. Barber B. The Logic and Limits of Trust (1983), Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick
3. Bengston D., and Fan D. An innovative method for evaluating strategic goals in a public agency: conservation leadership in the U.S. Forest Service. Eval. Rev. 23 1 (1999) 77-100
4. Buchecker M., Hunziker M., and Kienast F. Participatory landscape development: overcoming social barriers to public involvement. Landscape Urban Plan. 64 (2003) 29-46
5. Carroll M., and Hendrix W. Federally protected rivers: the need for effective local involvement. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 58 3 (1992) 346-352
6. Creswell J. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions (1998), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
7. Cvetkovich G., and Winter P. Trust and social representations of the management of threatened and endangered species. Environ. Behav. 35 2 (2003) 286-307
8. Davenport M., Leahy J., Anderson D., and Jakes P. Building trust in natural resources management within local communities: a case study of the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie. Environ. Manag. 39 (2007) 353-368
9. Dey I. Grounding Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry (1999), Academic Press, San Diego
10. Dirks K. Trust in leadership and team performance: evidence from NCAA basketball. J. Appl. Psychol. 85 6 (2000) 1004-1012
11. Frenz I., Voth D., Burns S., and Sperry C. Forest Service-community relationship building: recommendations. Soc. Nat. Resour. 13 (2000) 549-566
12. Hammond B. Forest Service Values Poll Questions: Results and Analysis (1994), Kaset International, Tampa
13. Hardin R. Trust and Trustworthiness (2002), Russell Sage Foundation, New York
14. Hart, P., Teeter, R., 1999. America unplugged: citizens and their government. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from the Partnership for Trust in Government Web site: http://www.excelgov.org/admin/FormManager/filesuploading/America_Unplugged_full_report.pdf.
15. Henderson K. Dimensions of Choice: A Qualitative Approach to Recreation, Parks, and Leisure Research (1990), Venture Publications, State College
16. Höppner C., Frick J., and Buchecker M. Assessing psycho-social effects of participatory landscape planning. Landscape Urban Plan. 83 2-3 (2007) 196-207
17. Illinois Department of Natural Resources, 2001. The Kaskaskia River basin: an inventory of the region's resources. Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Springfield.
18. Kramer R. Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 50 (1999) 569-598
19. Lawrence R., Daniels S., and Stankey G. Procedural justice and public involvement in natural resource decision making. Soc. Nat. Resour. 10 (1997) 577-589
20. Lind E.A., Tyler T., and Huo Y. Procedural context and culture: variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 73 4 (1997) 767-780
21. Moote M., and McClaran M. Implications of participatory democracy for public land planning. J. Range Manage. 50 (1997) 473-481
22. Moote M., McClaran M., and Chickering D. Theory in practice: applying participatory democracy theory to public land planning. Environ. Manage. 21 6 (1997) 877-889
23. Ostrom E. Toward a behavioral theory linking trust, reciprocity, and reputation. In: Ostrom E., and Walker J. (Eds). Trust & Reciprocity (2003), Russell Sage Foundation Publications, New York 19-79
24. Rahn, W., Rudolph, T., 2002. A multilevel model of trust in local government. Paper Presented at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
25. Reid A. Computer management strategies for text data. In: Crabtree B., and Miller W. (Eds). Doing Qualitative Research (1992), Sage, London
26. Shindler, B., Brunson, M., Stankey, G., 2002. Social acceptability of forest conditions and management practices: a problem analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep.: PNW-GTR-537. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland.
27. Shindler B., and Cramer L. Shifting public values in forest management: making sense of wicked problems. West. J. Appl. Forest. 14 1 (1999) 11-17
28. Shindler B., List P., and Steel B. Managing federal forests: public attitudes in Oregon and nationwide. J. Forest. 91 7 (1993) 36-42
29. Shindler B., and Neburka J. Public participation in forest planning: eight attributes of success. J. Forest. 95 1 (1997) 17-19
30. Smith P., and McDonough M. Beyond public participation: fairness in natural resource decision making. Soc. Nat. Resour. 14 3 (2001) 239-249
31. Stein T., and Anderson D. Combining benefits-based management with ecosystem management for landscape planning: Leech Lake watershed, Minnesota. Landscape Urban Plan. 60 3 (2002) 151-161
32. Tuler S., and Webler T. Voices from the forest: what participants expect of a public participation process. Soc. Nat. Resour. 12 (1999) 437-453
33. van den Bos K., Wilke H., and Lind E.A. When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 75 6 (1998) 1449-1458
34. Webler T., and Tuler S. Fairness and competence in citizen participation: theoretical reflections from a case study. Adm. Soc. 32 5 (2000) 566-595
35. White S. Public participation and organizational change in Wisconsin land use management. Land Use Pol. 18 (2001) 341-350
36. Winter P., Palucki L., and Burkhardt R. Anticipated responses to a fee program: the key is trust. J. Leisure Res. 31 3 (1999) 207-226
37. Wondelleck J.M., and Yaffee S.L. Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management (2000), Island Press, Washington
38. Yamagishi T., and Yamagishi M. Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motiv. Emot. 18 2 (1994) 129-166