Environmental Management

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 353–368 | Cite as

Building Trust in Natural Resource Management Within Local Communities: A Case Study of the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie

  • Mae A. Davenport
  • Jessica E. Leahy
  • Dorothy H. Anderson
  • Pamela J. Jakes
Article

Abstract

Communities neighboring federally protected natural areas regularly weigh the costs and benefits of the administering agency’s programs and policies. While most agencies integrate public opinion into decision making, efforts to standardize and formalize public involvement have left many local communities feeling marginalized, spurring acrimony and opposition. A significant body of research has examined barriers to effective public participation as well as strategies for relationship building in planning processes; many of which point to trust as a key factor. Trust is especially tenuous in local communities. This paper explores perceptions of trust, expectations for management, as well as constraints to building trust. In-depth interviews were conducted with 21 community members and USDA Forest Service personnel at the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in northeastern Illinois. The interviews revealed that trust is perceived as important to effective management. Distinct expectations for management outcomes and processes emerged, including the values, knowledge, and capacity demonstrated in management decisions and actions and opportunities provided for communication, collaboration, and cooperation within the agency-community relationship. The case study identified several constraints to building trust, including competing values, knowledge gaps, limited community engagement, and staff turnover.

Keywords

Trust Natural resource management Public involvement Collaboration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend gratitude to agency personnel and community leaders who provided input and support for this study, especially Logan Lee, Prairie Superintendent of Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, and her staff. We also would like to thank the study participants for their candor and continued collaboration throughout the study. Funding for this project was provided by the North Central Research Station, USDA, Forest Service. We would like to acknowledge the insights of three anonymous reviewers whose suggestions greatly improved this paper.

References

  1. Barber B (1983) The logic and limits of trust. New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg BL (2004) Qualitative research methods. Boston, PearsonGoogle Scholar
  3. Cantrill JG (1998) The environmental self and a sense of place: communication foundations for regional ecosystem management. Journal of Applied Communication Research 16:301–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carroll MS, Hendrix WG (1992) Federally protected rivers: The need for effective local involvement. Journal of the American Planning Association 58(3):346–352Google Scholar
  5. Cvetkovich G, Winter PL (2003) Trust and social representations of threatened and endangered species. Environment and Behavior 35(2):286–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davenport MA (2003). Mixing metaphors: A community-based vision for the Niobrara National Scenic River. Forest Resources. St. Paul, University of Minnesota, 122 ppGoogle Scholar
  7. Davenport MA, Anderson DH (2005) Getting from sense of place to place-based management: An interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Society and Natural Resources 18(7):625–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunlap RE (2000) The environmental movement at 30. The Polling Report 16(8):6–8Google Scholar
  9. Earle TC, Cvetkovich GT (1995) Social Trust: Toward a More Cosmopolitan Society. Westport, CT, Praeger PublishersGoogle Scholar
  10. Frenz IC, Voth DE, Burns S, Sperry CW (2000) Forest Service-community relationship building: Recommendations. Society and Natural Resources 13:549–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hull RB, Robertson DP, Kendra A (2001) Public understandings of nature: A case study of local knowledge about “natural” forest conditions. Society and Natural Resources 14:325–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hammond B (1994) Forest Service Values Poll questions: Results and analysis. Tampa, USDA Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
  13. Hendee JC (1984) Public opinion and what foresters should do about it. Journal of Forestry 82(6):340–344Google Scholar
  14. Hunt L, Haider W (2001) Fair and effective decision making in forest management planning. Society and Natural Resources 14:873–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kasperson R, Golding D, Tuler S (1992) Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous waste facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues 48(4):161–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krannich RS, Smith MD (1998) Local perceptions of public lands natural resource management in the rural West: Toward improved understanding of the “revolt in the West.” Society and Natural Resources 11:677–695Google Scholar
  17. Lachapelle P, McCool SF, Patterson ME (2003) Barriers to effective natural resource planning in a “messy” world. Society and Natural Resources 16(6):473–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lawrence RL, Daniels SE, Stankey GH (1997) Procedural justice and public involvement in natural resource decision making. Society and Natural Resources 10:577–589Google Scholar
  19. Lilijeblad A (2005) Towards a more comprehensive understanding of trust: Exploring the public’s trust in natural resources management. Unpublished masters thesis. University of Montana, Missoula, MT, 112 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Lind EA, Tyler TR (1988) The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, Plenum PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall C, Rossman GB (1998) Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA, Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  22. McCool S, Guthrie K (2001) Mapping the dimensions of successful public participation in messy natural resources management situations. Society and Natural Resources 14:309–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nie M (2003) Drivers of natural resource-based political conflict. Policy Sciences 36:307–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Parkins JR, Mitchell RE (2005) Public participation as public debate. A deliberative turn in national resource management. Society and Natural Resources 18(6):529–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pretty J, Ward H (2001) Social capital and the environment. World Development 29(2):209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rousseau DM, Sitkin SB, Burt RS, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. The Academy of Management Review 23(3):393–404Google Scholar
  27. Shannon MA (1990) Building trust: The formation of a social contract. Community and Forestry: Continuities in the Sociology of Natural Resources. Lee RG, Field DR and. Burch JWR (eds). Boulder, Co, Westview Press, pp 229–240Google Scholar
  28. Shindler B, Cramer LA (1999) Shifting public values for forest management: Making sense of wicked problems. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 14(1):28–34Google Scholar
  29. Shindler B, Toman E (2003) Fuel reduction strategies in forest communities: A longitudinal analysis of public support. Journal of Forestry 101(6):8–15Google Scholar
  30. Siegrist M, Earle T, Gutscher H (2003) Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Analysis 23(4):705–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000) Perception of hazard: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis 20(5): 713–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sitkin S, Roth N (1993) Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization Science 4(3):367–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith PD, McDonough MH (2001) Beyond public participation: Fairness in natural resource decision making. Society and Natural Resources 14:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  35. Tyler TR, Degoey P (1995) Collective restraint in social dilemmas: Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69(3):482–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. U.S. Census Bureau (2004) http://www.census.gov [accessed: May 11, 2005]
  37. Williams DR, Patterson ME, Roggenbuck JW, Watson AE (1992) Beyond the commodity metaphor. Leisure Sciences 14:29–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Winter G, Vogt CA, McCaffrey (2004) Examining social trust in fuels management strategies. Journal of Forestry 102(6):8–15Google Scholar
  39. Winter PL, Cvetkovich G (2003) A study of Southwesterners’ opinions on the management of wildland and wilderness fires: Fire Management Version. Riverside, CA, Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
  40. Winter PL, Palucki LJ, Burkhardt RL (1999) Anticipated responses to a fee program: The key is trust. Journal of Leisure Research 31(3):207–226Google Scholar
  41. Wondelleck JM, Yaffee SL (2000) Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC, Island PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mae A. Davenport
    • 1
  • Jessica E. Leahy
    • 2
  • Dorothy H. Anderson
    • 3
  • Pamela J. Jakes
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of ForestrySouthern Illinois University CarbondaleCarbondaleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Forest ManagementUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Forest ResourcesUniversity of MinnesotaNorth St. PaulUSA
  4. 4.North Central Research Station, USDA, Forest ServiceSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations