Skip to main content
Log in

Public involvement methods in natural resource policy making: Advantages, disadvantages and trade-offs

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Almond, G.A. and S. Verba (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnstein, S.R. (1969). ‘A Ladder of Citizen Participation.’ Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35 (4): 216–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behan, R.W. (1990). ‘The RPA/NFMA: Solution to a Nonexistent Problem.’ Journal of Forestry 88 (5): 20–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berelson, B.R., P. F. Lazarsfeld and W.N. McPhee (1954).Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago, Ill: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J.M., K. E. Portney and K. Thomson (1993).The Rebirth of Urban Democracy. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J., K. E. Portney and K. Thomson (1989). ‘Empowering and Involving Citizens’ in J. L. Perry, ed., Handbook of Public Administration. Jossey–Bass, pp. 208–221.

  • Bradbury, D. (1996a). ‘A Battle for Maine's Forest: Backers of a Referendum to Ban Clear–Cutting Say It Would Preserve Maine's Woods. Foes Say It Would Be A Costly Debacle. Both Agree that Stakes are Huge.’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, D. (1996b). ‘Clear–Cut Ban Alternative Starts Taking Shape: A Firm Agreement Among Environmental Groups and Landowners is Needed Before the November Referendum.’ Portland Herald Press: Portland, ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, D. (1996c). ‘Poll Shows Clear–Cut Opposition Loses Edge: The Biggest Erosion in Support Is Among Those Who Have Seen the Forest Industry's Ads Against the November Referendum.’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, D. (1996d). ‘Maine Battle on Clear–Cuts Makes Waves: Other Forest–Producing States Are Facing Similar Issues and Expect the Vote in Maine to Have an Impact Elsewhere.’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, D. (1996e). ‘Forest Compact Camp Holds Breath for Votes.’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, E.M. (1968). ‘Citizen Participation Strategies’. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 34 (5): 287–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culhane, P. J. (1981). Public Lands Politics: Interest Group Influence on the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cupps, D. S. (1977). ‘Emerging Problems of Citizen Participation.’ Public Administration Review, 37 (5): 478–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act. Statute at Large (1966). 89, sec 754.

  • Durbin, T. and R.A. Reimer (1976). Initiative, Referendum and Recall: Resume of State Provisions. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economic Opportunity Act. Statute at Large (1964). 88, sec 253.

  • Editorial (1996). ‘Mary Adams’ Campaign on Clear–Cutting Vote Quixotic.’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME (12A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ethridge, M. E. (1987). ‘Procedures for Citizen Involvement in Environmental Policy: An Assessment of Policy Effects,’ in J. DeSario and S. Langton, eds., Citizen Participation in Public Decision Making. NewYork: Greenwood Press, pp. 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, K. L. and J. Sullivan (1994). ‘Public Participation and Appeals of Forest Service Plans An Empirical Examination.’ Society and Natural Resources 7: 125–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gippert, M. J. and V. L. DeWitte (1990). Forest Plan Implementation: Gateway to Compliance with NFMA, NEPa, and Other Federal Environmental Laws,Vol. 10 in Critique of Land Management Planning, USDA Forest Service.

  • Glass, J. J. (1979). ‘Citizen Participation in Planning: The Relationship Between Objectives and Techniques.’ Journal of the American Planning Association 45 (2): 180–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, R.G., J. S. Banta, J.R. Clark and W. J. Duddleson (1978). Protecting the Golden Shore: Lessons from the California Coastal Commision. Washington, D.C.: The Conservation Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, J. (1996). ‘Gov. King's Forestry Gamble Pays Off–But Raises Stakes: 3–Way Referendum Carries Chance of Runoff Vote.’ Bangor Daily News: Bangor, ME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, J. and A. J. Higgins (1996). ‘Forestry Bill Near Passage, Senate Expected to Give Final Approval Today.’ Bangor Daily News: Bangor ME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kekacs, A. (1996). ‘Woods Law would Harvest Crisis: State Says Clear–Cut Plan Threatens 15,600 Jobs.’ Bangor Daily News: Bangor, ME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kweit, R.W. and M.G. Kweit (1980). ‘Bureaucratic Decision–Making: Impediments to Citizen Participation.’Policy 12 (4): 646–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, S. ed. (1976). Citizen Participation in America. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, G., R. Lynn, D. Kapaldo and J. Fedkiw (1990). Analysis of an Emerging Timber Supply Disruption,Vol. 9 in Critique of Land Management Planning, USDA Forest Service.

  • Lasswell, H.D. (1971). A Pre–View of Policy Sciences. NewYork: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, F.M. and G. J. Busenberg (1995). ‘Citizen Advisory Committees and Environmental Policy: What We Know, What's Left to Discover.’ Risk Analysis 15.

  • Milbrath, L.W. and M. L. Goel (1977). Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics, Second Edition. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyniham, D. P. (1969). Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding: Community Action the War on Poverty, Free Press.

  • The National Environmental Policy Act. Statute at Large (1969). 91, sec 190.

  • Perry, N. (1996a). ‘Clear–Cut Pact Weathering Legislative after Assault Even the Harshest Critics of the Compromise Expect the Bill toWin Passage Today.’ Portland Press Herald, Portland ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, N. (1996b). ‘Group Changes Tactics on Clear–Cutting Issues Ban: Clearcutting is New Focusing on Drawing Voters Away from Gov. King's Alternative Plan’ Portland Press Herald: Portland, ME (1A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Priscoli, J.D. (1978). ‘Implementing Public Involvement Programs in Federal Agencies,’ in S. Langton, ed., Citizen Participation in America. MA: Lexington Books, pp. 97–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedel, J.A. (1972). ‘Citizen Participation: Myths and Realities.’ Public Administration Review 22 (3): 211–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimer, S. (1996). ‘In Clear–CuttingVote, MaineWill Define Itself.’ The NewYork Times (A1, A14).

  • Rosenbaum, W. A. (1978). ‘Public Involvement as Reform and Ritual: The Development of Federal Participation Programs,’ in S. Langton, ed., Citizen Participation in America. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosener, J. B. (1978a). ‘Matching Method to Purpose: The Challenges of Planning Citizen Participa tion Activities,’ in S. Langton, ed., Citizen Participation in America. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosener, J. B. (1978b). ‘Citizen Participation: Can We Measure Its Effectiveness?’ Public Administration Review 38 (5): 457–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, W.R.D. and S.D. Phillips (1979). ‘Models for the Evaluation of Public Participation Pro grammes.’ Natural Resources Journal 19: 337–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shands, W. E., V.A. Sample and D.C. LeMaster (1990). National Forest Planning: Searching for a CommonVision,Vol. 2 in Critique of Land Management Planning, USDA Forest Service.

  • Steelman, T. A. (1996). Democratic Theory, Public Participation and National Forest Management: A Case Study of the Monongahela Natinal Forest Ph.D. diss. Duke University.

  • United States Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1992). Forest Service Planning: Accommodating Uses, Producing Outputs and Sustaining Ecosystems, OTA–F–505. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, S. and N.H. Nie (1972). Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. NewYork: Harper & Row Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wengert, N. (1971). ‘Public Participation in Water Planning: A Critique of Theory, Doctrine and Practice.’ Water Resources Bulletin 7 (1).

  • Wondolleck, J.M. (1988). Public Land Conflict and Resolution: Managing National Forest Disputes. NewYork: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Steelman, T.A., Ascher, W. Public involvement methods in natural resource policy making: Advantages, disadvantages and trade-offs. Policy Sciences 30, 71–90 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004246421974

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004246421974

Keywords

Navigation