The role of discretion in recreation decision-making by resource professionals in the USDA Forest Service

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 107, Issue , 2012, Pages 114-123

  Trusty, Teressa ^a   Cerveny, Lee K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b PACIFIC NORTHWEST RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Administrative discretion; Public policy implementation; Riparian recreation; USDA Forest Service; Values

Indexed keywords

FORESTRY; NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT;

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION; ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION; DECISIONS MAKINGS; POLICY IMPLEMENTATIONS; PUBLIC POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; RESOURCE PROFESSIONALS; RIPARIAN AREAS; RIPARIAN RECREATION; USDA FOREST SERVICE; VALUE;

DECISION MAKING;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; NATURAL RESOURCE; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; RIPARIAN ZONE; VALUATION;

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; NORMAL HUMAN; PERSONAL VALUE; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; RECREATION; RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; UNITED STATES;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84861009968     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: 10958630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.04.021     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Ackerman S. Observations on the transformation of the Forest Service: the effects of the National Environmental Policy Act on U.S. Forest Service decision making. Environmental Law 1990, 20:703-734.
2. Anderson J.E. Public Policymaking: An Introduction 2010, Houghton Mifflin, Boston. seventh ed.
3. Arendt H. Responsibility and Judgment 2003, Schocken Books, New York.
4. Brehm J.M., Gates S. Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public 1999, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
5. Brown G., Harris C.C. The United States Forest Service: changing of the guard. Natural Resources Journal 1992, 32:459-466.
6. Brown G., Harris C.C. The implications of work force diversification in the U.S. Forest Service. Administration & Society 1993, 25:85-113.
7. Brown G., Harris C., Squirrell T. Gender diversification in the U.S. Forest Service: does it still matter?. Review of Public Personnel Administration 2010, 30:268-300.
8. Carrington K. Street-level discretion: is there a need for control?. Public Administration Quarterly 2005, 29:141-162.
9. Cerveny L., Blahna D., Stern M., Mortimer M., Predmore S., Freeman J. The use of recreation planning tools in U.S. Forest Service NEPA assessments. Environmental Management 2011, 48:644-657.
10. Cerveny L.K., Blahna D.J., Stern M.J., Mortimer M.J., Freeman J.W. Forest Service interdisciplinary teams: size, composition, and leader characteristics. Journal of Forestry 2011, 109:201-207.
11. Charmaz K. The grounded theory method: an explication and interpretation. Contemporary Field Research: A Collection of Readings 1988, 109-126. Waveland, Prospect Heights, IL. R.M. Emerson (Ed.).
12. Clark R.N., Stankey G.H. Integrated Research in Natural Resources: The Key Role of Problem Framing. Gen. Tech. Report PNW-GTR-678 2006, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 63 p.
13. Cole D.N., Marion J.L. Recreation impacts in some riparian forests of the Eastern United States. Environmental Management 1988, 12:99-107.
14. Cox R.W. Accountability and Responsibility in Organizations: The Ethics of Discretion, Ethics and Integrity in Governance Conference 2005, Leuven, Belgium.
15. Davis K.C. Police Discretion 1975, West Publishing, St. Paul.
16. Emerson R.M., Fretz R.I., Shaw L.L. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes 1995, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
17. Evans T., Harris J. Street-level bureaucracy, social work and the (exaggerated) death of discretion. British Journal of Social Work 2004, 34:871-895.
18. Freeman J.W., Stern M.J., Mortimer M.J., Blahna D.J., Cerveny L.K. Interdisciplinary collaboration within project-level NEPA teams in the US Forest Service. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2011, 54:597-615.
19. Garcia M.W. Forest Service experience with interdisciplinary teams developing integrated resource management plans. Environmental Management 1989, 13:583-592.
20. Glaser B.G., Strauss A.L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research 1967, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago.
21. Gregory S.V. Riparian management in the 21st century. Creating a Forestry for the 21st Century: The Science of Ecosystem Management 1997, 69-85. Island Press, Washington, DC. K.A. Kohm, J.F. Franklin (Eds.).
22. Handler J.F. The Conditions of Discretion: Autonomy, Community, Bureaucracy 1986, Russell Sage, New York.
23. Holzer M., Kaifeng Y. Administrative discretion in a turbulent time: an introduction. Public Administration Quarterly 2005, 29:129-140.
24. Jewell C.J., Glaser B.E. Toward a general analytic framework: organizational settings, policy goals, and street-level behavior. Administration & Society 2006, 38:335-364.
25. Johnson R.R., Carothers S.W. Riparian Habitats and Recreation: Interrelationships and Impacts in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Region. Eisenhower Consotium Bulletin 12 1982, Eisenhower Consortium for Western Environmental Forestry Research, Fort Collins, CO, p. 31.
26. Kaufman H. The Forest Ranger: A Study in Administrative Behavior 1960, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD.
27. Kempton W., Boster J.S., Hartley J.A. Environmental Values in American Culture 1995, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
28. Kennedy J.J., Quigley T.M. Evolution of USDA Forest Service organizational culture and adaptation issues in embracing an ecosystem management paradigm. Landscape and Urban Planning 1997, 40:113-122.
29. Kennedy J.J., Haynes R.W., Zhou X. Line Officers' Views on Stated USDA Forest Service Values and the Agency Reward System. Gen. Tech. Report PNW-GTR-632 2005, USDA Forest Service, Portland, OR, 72 p.
30. Kennedy J.J. Integrating gender diverse and interdisciplinary professionals into traditional U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service Culture. Society & Natural Resources 1991, 4:165-176.
31. Koontz T.M. Federal and State public forest administration in the new millennium: revisiting Herbert Kaufman's The Forest Ranger. Public Administration Review 2007, 67:152-164.
32. Lipsky M. Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services 1980, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.
33. Maupin J.R. Control, efficiency, and the street-level bureaucrat. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART 1993, 3:335-357.
34. Maynard-Moody S., Musheno M. State agent or citizen agent: two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2000, 10:329-358.
35. Moore S.T. The theory of street-level bureaucracy. Administration & Society 1987, 19:74-94.
36. Nielsen V.L. Are street-level bureaucrats compelled or enticed to cope?. Public Administration 2006, 84:861-889.
37. Norris E.M. Riparian Restoration. Wetlands Program Technical Report 01-6 2001, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA, p. 7.
38. Reid L.M. Enabling Interdisciplinary Analysis, Proceedings from Watershed 1996 1996.
39. Riccucci N.M. Implementing welfare reform in Michigan: the role of street-level bureaucrats. International Journal of Public Administration 2002, 25:901-921.
40. Rittel H.W.J., Webber M.M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 1973, 4:155-169.
41. Robbins D. Administrative discretion: its use in budgetary analysis. Public Administration Quarterly 2005, 29:187-201.
42. Sabatier P., Mazmanian D. The conditions of effective implementation: a guide to accomplishing policy objectives. Policy Analysis 1979, 5:481-504.
43. Sabatier P.A., Loomis J., McCarthy C. Hierarchical controls, professional norms, local constituencies, and budget maximization: an analysis of U.S. Forest Service planning decisions. American Journal of Political Science 1995, 39:204-242.
44. Salwasser H. Confronting the Implications of Wicked Problems: Changes Needed in Sierra Nevada National Forest Planning and Problem Solving. Gen. Tech. Report PSW-GTR-193 2004, USDA Forest Service, Corvallis, OR, 16 p.
45. Scientific Software Development GmbH ATLAS.ti: The Knowledge Workbench, WIN 5.2.21 ed. Scientific Software Development 2008, Gmbh, Berlin, Germany.
46. Shindler B., Cramer L.A. Shifting public values for forest management: making sense of wicked problems. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 1999, 14:28-34.
47. Simon H.A. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization 1971, Free Press, New York. second ed.
48. Stern M.J., Mortimer M.J. Exploring National Environmental Policy Act Processes across Federal Land Management Agencies. Gen. Tech. Report PNW-GTR-799 2009, US Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 106 p.
49. Stern M.J., Predmore S.A. Decision making, procedural compliance, and outcomes defi{ligature}nition in U.S. forest service planning processes. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2011, 31:271-278.
50. Stern M.J., Blahna D.J., Cerveny L.K., Mortimer M.J. Visions of success and achievement in recreation-related USDA Forest Service NEPA processes. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2009, 29:220-228.
51. Stern M.J., Predmore S.A., Mortimer M.J., Seesholtz D.N. From the office to the field: areas of tension and consensus in the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act within the US Forest Service. Journal of Environmental Management 2010, 91:1350-1356.
52. Susskind L.E., Dunlap L. The importance of nonobjective judgments in environmental impact assessments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 1981, 2:335-366.
53. Thomas J.C., Mohai P. Racial, gender, and professional diversification in the Forest Service from 1983 to 1992. Policy Studies Journal 1995, 23:296-310.
54. USDA Forest Service Forest Service Handbook 1909.15.12.1 2010, USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC.
55. USDA Forest Service About Cultural Transformation 2011, Retrieved August 16, 2011, from. http://culturaltransformation.usda.gov.
56. USDA Forest Service National Forest System Land Management Planning: Proposed Rule 36 CFR Part 219 Federal Register 2011, Washington, DC, pp. 8480-8528.
57. Vaske J.J., Donnelly M.P., Williams D.R., Jonker S. Demographic influences on environmental value orientations and normative beliefs about national forest management. Society and Natural Resources 2001, 14:761-776.
58. Vinzant J.C., Crothers L. Street-level Leadership: Discretion and Legitimacy in Front-line Public Service 1998, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC.
59. Weber M. Essays in Sociology 1946, Oxford University Press, New York.
60. Wilson J.Q. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It 1991, Basic Books, New York.
61. Zinn H.C., Manfredo M.J., Vaske J.J., Wittmann K. Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions. Society and Natural Resources 1998, 11:649-662.