A Story About People and Porpoises: Consensus-Based Decision Making in the Shadow of Political Action

Environmental Management

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 814-821

  McDonald, Sara L ^a   Rigling Gallagher, Deborah ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Advocacy coalition framework; Bycatch; Consensus; Fishing; Harbor porpoise; Negotiations; Stakeholders; Take Reduction Team

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; DECISION MAKING; FISHERIES; FISHING (OIL WELLS);

ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK; BY-CATCH; CONSENSUS; HARBOR PORPOISE; NEGOTIATIONS; STAKEHOLDERS; TAKE REDUCTION TEAM;

MAMMALS;

BYCATCH; DECISION MAKING; GILLNET; HARBOR; MARINE MAMMAL; STAKEHOLDER;

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONSENSUS; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FISHERY; HOSPITAL POLICY; MARINE MAMMAL; NONHUMAN; POLITICS; PORPOISE; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES; ANIMAL; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HUMAN; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

NEW ENGLAND; UNITED STATES;

MAMMALIA; PHOCOENA; PHOCOENIDAE;

ANIMALS; CONSENSUS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; FISHERIES; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; NEW ENGLAND; POLICY MAKING; POLITICS; PORPOISES;

EID: 84940955197     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-015-0545-6     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bazeley P (2007) Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. Sage Publications Ltd., Washington, DC
2. Beierle TC, Cayford J (2002) Democracy in practice: public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
3. Beierle TC, Konisky DM (2000) Values, conflict and trust in participatory environmental planning. J Policy Anal Manag 19:587–602
4. Bullard JK (2012) Decision to temporarily shift the gillnet fishery closure to protect harbor porpoise to Febuary 2013. Gloucester, MA
5. Carretta JV, Barlow J (2011) Long-term effectiveness, failure rates, and “dinner bell” proporties of acoustic pingers in a gillnet fishery. Mar Technol Soc J 45:7–19
6. Dietz T, Stern PC (eds) (2008) Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making—panel on public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
7. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511
8. Geijer CKA, Read AJ (2013) Mitigation of marine mammal bycatch in U.S. fisheries since 1994. Biol Conserv 159:54–60. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.11.009
9. Hardin R (1982) Collective action. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
10. Holmes T, Scoones I (2000) Participatory environmental processes: experiences from North and South. IDS Working Paper No. 113
11. Innes JE, Booher DE (2004) Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Plan Theory Pract 5:419–436. doi:10.1080/1464935042000293170
12. Jenkins-Smith HC, Sabatier PA (1994) Evaluating the advocacy coalition framework. J Public Policy 14:175–203
13. Kramer RM (1999) Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annu Rev Psychol 50:569–598
14. Leach WD (2006) Theories about consensus-based conservation. Conserv Biol 20:573–575. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00408.x
15. Luce RD, Raiffa H (1957) Games and decisions—introduction and critical survey. Dover Publications Inc, New York
16. Mazmanian DA, Sabatier PA (1989) Implementation and public policy. University Press of America Inc, Lanham
17. National Marine Fisheries Service (2008) Harbor Porpoise Take Reduction Team: supplement to the key outcomes memorandum from the December 2007 meeting. Department of Commerce/NOAA/NMFS/NERO, Gloucester
18. National Marine Fisheries Service (2012) NMFS initial response to request by the Northeast Seafood Coalition modify the harbor porpoise consequence closure area. Northeast Regional Office, Gloucester
19. Niles MT, Lubell M (2012) Integrative frontiers in environmental policy theory and research. Policy Stud J 40:41–64
20. Northeast Seafood Coalition (2012) Letter to NMFS requesting one-year modification to the harbor porpoise consequence closure area. New Bedford
21. Office of Inspector General (2010) Review of NOAA Fisheries enforcement programs and operations. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
22. O’Leary Z (2005) Researching real-world problems—a guide to methods of inquiry. Sage Publications Ltd, Washington, DC
23. Orphanides C, Palka D (2012) 2010–2011 HPTRP consequential bycatch and compliance rates vol Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document 12-08. Department of Commerce/NOAA/NMFS, Woods Hole
24. Palka DL, Rossman MC, VanAtten AS, Orphanides CD (2008) Effect of pingers on harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) bycatch in the U.S. Northeast gillnet fishery. J Cetacean Res Manag 10:217–226
25. Palka D, Hatch J, Orphanides C (2012) Regional review of gillnet harbor porpoise bycatch patterns and compliance to the HPTRPs 1 January 2007–31 May 2012. Paper presented at the Harbor Porpoise Take Reduction Team Meeting, Providence, 27–30 Nov 2012
26. QSR International Pty Ltd. (2010) NVivo qualitative data analysis software, version 9
27. Read AJ, Kraus SD, Lynott MC, McLellan WA, Gannon DP (2012) Letter from the scientific community to David Gouveia (NMFS/NERO) regarding the Harbor Porpoise Take Reduction Team, Letter edn. Gloucester
28. RESOLVE (1996) Final Draft Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy Harbor Porpoise Take Reduction Team Take Reduction Plan. Washington, DC
29. Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2000) Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci Technol Hum Values 25:3–29
30. Sabatier PA (1988) An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sci 21:129–168
31. Sabatier PA (1999) The need for better theories. In: Sabatier PA (ed) Theories of the policy process. Westview Press, Boulder
32. Sabatier PA, Jenkins-Smith HC (1999) The advocacy coalition framework: an assessment. In: Sabatier PA (ed) Theories of the policy process. Westview Press, Boulder
33. Sabatier P, Hunter S, McLaughlin S (1987) The devil shift: perceptions and misperceptions of opponents. West Polit Q 40:449–476
34. Schelling TC (1980) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
35. Smolowitz RJ, Wiley DN (1992) A model for conflict resolution in marine mammal/fisheries interactions: the New England Harbor Porpoise Working Group. In: Proceedings of the marine technology society conference, USA MTS ‘92: global ocean partnership, Washington, DC, pp 354–360
36. Taylor M (1987) The possibility of cooperation: studies in rationality and social change. Cambridge University Press, New York
37. Webler T, Tuler S, Krueger R (2001) What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environ Manag 27:435–450
38. Weible CM, Sabatier PA, McQueen K (2009) Themes and variations: taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Stud J 37:121–139