Resolving Conflict and Building Cooperation in the National Estuary Program

Appendix A: Focused Interview Protocol

The following sections describe the basic structure of the focused interview protocol used to construct the majority of variables used in this analysis. Note that the questions are not in the traditional format of more structured surveys because the interviewers were given some discretion in trying to help estuary informants provide as many details as possible. Hence, the protocol procedure should really be thought of as a dialogue instead of a question-answer format survey. The advantage of this format is that interviewers can probe respondents for more detail and thus get a better grasp of each individual situation. The disadvantage is that issues of question wording are not as precisely controlled.

Dependent Variables

Conflict resolution

Seven possible outcomes of conflict; variable sums number of “yes” answers:

• 1 Agreed on causes of problem for estuary

• 2 Agreed on importance/severity of problem

• 3 Agreed on consequences of problem for estuary

• 4 Agreed on studies/data needed

• 5 Agreed on one or more implementation actions/solutions

• 6 Program in place to solve problem

• 7 Problem fully resolved

Project Cooperation

Fifteen possible types of cooperation; variable sums number of “yes” answers:

• 1 Provide data/expertise/information to another organization

• 2 Train people from another organization

• 3 Share/reassign personnel

• 4 Joint research/data collection project

• 5 Joint grant/funding proposal

• 6 Joint conferences/meetings

• 7 Joint monitoring of estuary conditions

• 8 Joint identification of priority sites for ecological restoration

• 9 Joint identification of priority sites for economic development

• 10 Create an interagency taskforce or partnership

• 11 Sign a memorandum of understanding/agreement

• 12 Create a new non-profit organization

• 13 Create a new intergovernmental organization

• 14 Delegate permitting or regulatory activities

• 15 Develop common regulations

Independent Variables

Geographic Scope (three possible categories)

• 1 Small area of estuary affected

• 2 Several areas or very important area affected

• 3 Most of estuary affected

Conflict Issue Scope (nine possible sources of conflict)

• 1 Environmental crisis

• 2 Natural catastrophe

• 3 New study/data/knowledge

• 4 Actions external to estuary

• 5 Actions internal to estuary

• 6 Unexpected/surprise event

• 7 Predictable/longstanding problem

• 8 Political events

• 9 Personnel changes

Project Issue Scope

What type of environmental issues was this project addressing (eight possible targeted issues)?

• 1 Habitat destruction

• 2 Declines in fish and wildlife

• 3 Non-point source pollution (agricultural or urban runoff)

• 4 Point source pollution

• 5 Atmospheric deposition

• 6 Hydrologic modification

• 7 Toxic substances

• 8 Pathogens

Project Science

What efforts, if any, has the project undertaken to improve scientific understanding of the project’s impact on these problems?

• 1 Ecological/hydrodynamic models or simulations

• 2 Environmental monitoring/sampling programs

• 3 Review of existing academic or agency research reports

• 4 Commissioning of new academic or agency research projects

• 5 Hiring of environmental consultants to assess environmental conditions

Estuary Science (taken from larger estuary stakeholder survey)

On average, do you perceive the level of scientific understanding about the causes of problems in your estuary to be very inadequate, very adequate, or somewhere in between? 0 = Scientific understanding is very inadequate, 1 = scientific understanding is very adequate.

Political Change

What major events affected estuary policies this past year? Were there changes in critical elected/appointed officials at the Federal, state, or local level? Yes/No.

Stakeholder Involvement

In terms of stakeholder involvement, would you say this conflict had:

• 1 Limited conflict involving small number of stakeholders in each estuary.

• 2 Moderate conflict involving several, but not all, major stakeholders.

• 3 Full conflict involving all major stakeholders taking sides.

Trust (taken from larger estuary stakeholder survey)

Thinking about the range of contacts you have had with other stakeholders, do you completely trust these stakeholders to fulfill the promises and obligations made on each issue in the context of the partnership, completely distrust them, or somewhere in between? 0 = Completely distrust, 1 = completely trust.