UNDERSTANDING AND ADDRESSING CRITIQUES OF COLLABORATION Melissa Freeman and Ben Goldman Supervisor: Heather Kulp Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program
Methodology Materials Studied Interviewees • Group Governance Documents • Applicable Statutes • Academic Articles 2 • Media Articles and Blog Posts 7 15 Stakeholder Groups 18 Interviewed • Academics • Facilitators • Lawyers Has Never Participated • Conservationists No Longer Participates • Environmentalists Participates, Has Concerns • Stewardship Group Representatives • Recreation Group Representatives Participates, Generally Approves • Timber Industry Representatives • 42 Interviews • County Commissioners • 58% Response Rate • State Agency Staff • 8 of 9 USFS Regions • Forest Service Officers
Process Flow Establish Make Review Form Group Deliberate Norms Decisions Progress Simplified steps in overall process for collaborative groups
What We Heard
#1: Group Procedure There is an inconsistent employment of Form Group procedural best practices in and across Establish Norms collaborative groups Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
Group Some interviewees found meetings are often inefficient and unproductive Procedure • Unclear procedures and purpose leads to less Form Group efficient use of meeting time • Groups spend too much time discussing issues Establish Norms not relevant to main objectives Deliberate • Meeting agenda is not effectively designed and managed Make Decisions Review Progress
Group Some interviewees perceived facilitators as biased or ineffective Procedure Form Group “ Collaborative groups function best when Establish Norms the facilitator seeks out consensus like a hawk on the hunt. ” Deliberate -Interviewee Make Decisions Review Progress
#2: Group Learning Disputes over substantive issues are a Form Group significant source of tension Establish Norms Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
Group Many groups do not have a fact finding process Learning “ Things break down over disagreements Form Group about what science is telling people and which science is valid … Some Establish Norms participants believe that their values trump Deliberate everything else and science or economics don’t matter. ” Make Decisions -Interviewee Review Progress
Some stakeholders believe scientific Group viewpoints are presented to promote Learning certain interests over others Interviewees said: Field trips make it easier to discuss actual issues in the forest Form Group Would like to see more ecologists, biologists, and experts outside of Establish Norms the Forest Service brought to group discussions Deliberate Science is not always clear-cut because it is often as much about Make Decisions values as it is about facts Review Progress Science is “cherry-picked” to achieve a predetermined outcome, especially to promote timber sales
#3: Agency Communication The Forest Service does not always Form Group effectively engage with collaborative groups Establish Norms Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
The USFS sometimes does not strike Agency the right balance of involvement to Communication empower group progress Concerns when agency is Concerns when agency is over-involved: under-involved: Group cannot provide valued FACA violations can occur Form Group input Establish Norms Group becomes a “rubber Group becomes disengaged Deliberate stamp” Make Decisions Group’s work product not Review Progress Stakeholders get left out considered
The USFS sometimes does not Agency effectively communicate helpful Communication information to the group Interviewees said many groups do not know: How long the NEPA process can take Form Group Establish Norms Where their proposal stands in the NEPA process Deliberate How to ensure that proposals comply with the law Make Decisions Review Progress When and how a proposal will be implemented
#4 Consensus Groups often disagree over decision Form Group making procedures Establish Norms Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
Stakeholders disagree over whether Consensus requiring consensus is positive or negative Interviewee in favor of Interviewee not in favor of consensus: consensus: Form Group “Seeking consensus with a wide audience does not Establish Norms “Without a consensus rule, necessarily achieve the level collaboration turns into the of specificity required to have Deliberate rule of the rural majority” a level of impact on forest management” Make Decisions Review Progress
Many groups do not establish when Consensus consensus should be reached • Most groups did not have procedures guiding which decisions require voting Form Group • Groups did not distinguish between Establish Norms coming to consensus for each step and coming to consensus for the overall plan Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
Some groups will change decision Consensus rules mid-way to exclude certain stakeholders “Sometimes breakdown happens as collaboration goes on. Instead of being Form Group inclusive and building consensus, groups Establish Norms start getting more exclusive like “clubs” and they move to majority vote rather Deliberate than consensus. Then people start Make Decisions feeling angry because they are left out.” -Interviewee Review Progress
#5: Stakeholder Input The collaborative process can result in Form Group certain voices not being heard Establish Norms Deliberate Make Decisions Review Progress
Stakeholder Some collaborative groups fail to represent a broad range of interests Input Interviewees’ concerns about representation: Meetings are usually time-intensive, distant, and held on during business hours, which makes it hard for unpaid stakeholders to Form Group attend Establish Norms Certain stakeholder groups “fall out of the process altogether,” either Deliberate on purpose or by accident Make Decisions Stakeholder groups that have more to gain attend in higher Review Progress numbers, which can create imbalance or isolate stakeholders with less intense interests
Stakeholders disagree over the Stakeholder balance between local interests and Input national interests Because local Because national forests communities are most Form Group are public lands, all affected by stewardship Americans should have Establish Norms of federal lands, they an equal voice in their should have a stronger Deliberate stewardship voice Make Decisions Review Progress
There is concern that collaboration Stakeholder circumvents or weakens the NEPA Input process, or may do so in the future “ I’m concerned that collaboration is taking on such an important role in the Form Group Forest Service and has such influence Establish Norms that it is keeping the Forest Service from meeting the intent of the public Deliberate involvement requirements in NEPA ” Make Decisions -Interviewee Review Progress
Generating Options What are options that might address concerns about meeting productivity and stakeholder inclusion? Brainstorming Rules: • Generate first – evaluate later! • Be curious and ask questions • Use active listening Please see the webinar version of the presentation on the NFF website for HNMCP recommendations
Priority Recommendations
#1: Meeting Productivity Collaborative groups should follow Group Procedure procedures that make meetings more Group productive and effective Learning Agency Communication Consensus Stakeholder Input
Collaborative groups should follow procedures Meeting that make meetings more productive and Productivity efficient This may include: Clear Purpose Well-Defined Scope Group Prioritized Agenda Group Evaluation Procedure Group Learning Agency Communication Consensus Stakeholder Input
Collaborative groups should follow procedures Meeting that make meetings more productive and Productivity efficient Clear Purpose Well-Defined Scope Group Prioritized Agenda Group Evaluation Procedure Group Learning Agency Communication Being clear about the purpose of meeting and keeping that purpose at Consensus the forefront of group discussion Stakeholder Input
Collaborative groups should follow procedures Meeting that make meetings more productive and Productivity efficient Clear Purpose Well-Defined Scope Group Prioritized Agenda Group Evaluation Procedure Group Learning Ensuring that the discussion is within Agency Communication the bounds of: • the technical capacity of group members Consensus • the needs of the Forest Service • realistic time constraints Stakeholder Input • the group’s ability to find common ground
Collaborative groups should follow procedures Meeting that make meetings more productive and Productivity efficient Clear Purpose Well-Defined Scope Group Prioritized Agenda Group Evaluation Procedure Group Learning Agency Creating an agenda that will: Communication • appropriately prioritize issues Consensus • produce the most discussion • be enforced by a timekeeper Stakeholder Input
Recommend
More recommend
