IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ccsesa/231408.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulation, Knowledge Transfer, and Forestry Policy Implementation: Different Strokes for Different Folks?

Author

Listed:
  • Gootee, Roje S.
  • Weber, Edward P.
  • Blatner, Keith
  • Carroll, Matt
  • Baumgartner, David

Abstract

Knowledge transfers from the public to the private sector about the substance and necessity of regulatory rules are critical for effective regulatory compliance. With groups of professionals that share specialized training the overall problems are minimized. Yet what happens when regulators contend with non-professionals? Using a case of forestry policy in Washington State we find that professional-to-professional exchanges are relatively effective, but that non-professional forest owners were less responsive, which reduced the effectiveness of the knowledge transfer and program compliance. We also find that one way to overcome this implementation barrier is to have regulators use an adult-based learning method.

Suggested Citation

  • Gootee, Roje S. & Weber, Edward P. & Blatner, Keith & Carroll, Matt & Baumgartner, David, 2012. "Regulation, Knowledge Transfer, and Forestry Policy Implementation: Different Strokes for Different Folks?," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 1(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ccsesa:231408
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.231408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/231408/files/SAR-V1N1-p55.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.231408?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hong, Jacky Fok Loi & Snell, Robin Stanley & Easterby-Smith, Mark, 2009. "Knowledge flow and boundary crossing at the periphery of a MNC," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 539-554, December.
    2. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    3. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    4. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Arun Rai & Xinlin Tang, 2014. "Research Commentary ---Information Technology-Enabled Business Models: A Conceptual Framework and a Coevolution Perspective for Future Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Grazia D. Santangelo & Anupama Phene, 2022. "Knowledge sourcing by the multinational enterprise: An individual creativity-based model," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(3), pages 434-448, April.
    7. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    8. Mary Moore & Paul O’ Leary & Derek Sinnott & Jane Russell O’ Connor, 2019. "Extending communities of practice: a partnership model for sustainable schools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1745-1762, August.
    9. Esther Tippmann & Pamela Sharkey Scott & Andrew Parker, 2017. "Boundary Capabilities in MNCs: Knowledge Transformation for Creative Solution Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 455-482, June.
    10. Paul M. Leonardi & Diane E. Bailey & Casey S. Pierce, 2019. "The Coevolution of Objects and Boundaries over Time: Materiality, Affordances, and Boundary Salience," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 665-686, June.
    11. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    12. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    13. Paul Vallance, 2011. "Relational and Dialectical Spaces of Knowing: Knowledge, Practice, and Work in Economic Geography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(5), pages 1098-1117, May.
    14. Hafsa Chbaly & Daniel Forgues & Samia Ben Rajeb, 2021. "Towards a Framework for Promoting Communication during Project Definition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, September.
    15. Laura J. Black & Donald R. Greer, 2024. "Minding the abstraction gap: approaches supporting implementation," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 40(4), October.
    16. Andersson, Ulf & Dasí, Àngels & Mudambi, Ram & Pedersen, Torben, 2016. "Technology, innovation and knowledge: The importance of ideas and international connectivity," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 153-162.
    17. Melo, Sara & Bishop, Simon, 2020. "Translating healthcare research evidence into practice: The role of linked boundary objects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    18. Meisiek, Stefan & Barry, Daved, 2018. "Finding the sweet spot between art and business in analogically mediated inquiry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 476-483.
    19. Haradhan Kumar MOHAJAN, 2017. "Roles Of Communities Of Practice For The Development Of The Society," Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, Alliance of Central-Eastern European Universities, vol. 6(3), pages 27-46, September.
    20. Andreas P. J. Schotter & Ram Mudambi & Yves L. Doz & Ajai Gaur, 2017. "Boundary Spanning in Global Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 403-421, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ccsesa:231408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ccsenet.org/sar .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.