IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v73y2016icp195-203.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aligning policies to support forest restoration and promote organizational change

Author

Listed:
  • Schultz, Courtney A.
  • Mattor, Katherine M.
  • Moseley, Cassandra

Abstract

Forestry organizations around the world are increasingly emphasizing forest restoration as a management goal. This reflects a progression in mission away from commodity production towards ecosystem management. A key question is how to promote organizational change to support current management objectives. In 2012, the US Forest Service reorganized its budget and performance measurement structure to support the agency's current emphasis on restoration. We report the results of a survey designed to understand whether this policy change contributed to organizational change and whether the approach was accompanied by key factors known to support successful organizational transitions. We received completed surveys from 1210 agency employees (47% response rate). Although results were mixed, we found that the new approach resulted in some changes to planning approaches and staff roles. Approximately half of those in leadership positions said prioritization and integration had improved. Staff identified a need for improved communication and reported that effective leadership was central to success. These results provide some indication that similar tools can be employed to shift organizational structure and behavior to support the evolving missions of forestry agencies. Future research should investigate how to promote organizational change and learning beyond individual actors via effective leadership, communication, and evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Schultz, Courtney A. & Mattor, Katherine M. & Moseley, Cassandra, 2016. "Aligning policies to support forest restoration and promote organizational change," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 195-203.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:73:y:2016:i:c:p:195-203
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116303100
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.015?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah E. Anderson & Heather E. Hodges & Terry L. Anderson, 2013. "Technical Management in an Age of Openness: The Political, Public, and Environmental Forest Ranger," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 554-573, June.
    2. Giessen, Lukas & Krott, Max & Möllmann, Torsten, 2014. "Increasing representation of states by utilitarian as compared to environmental bureaucracies in international forest and forest–environmental policy negotiations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 97-104.
    3. Sabatier, Paul A., 1986. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 21-48, January.
    4. Martin Kroh, 2006. "Taking ‘Don’t Knows’ as Valid Responses: A Multiple Complete Random Imputation of Missing Data," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 225-244, April.
    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. Ogada, Maurice Juma, 2012. "Forest Management Decentralization in Kenya: Effects on Household Farm Forestry Decisions in Kakamega," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126319, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Šálka, Jaroslav & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Hricová, Zuzana, 2016. "Factors of political power — The example of forest owners associations in Slovakia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 88-98.
    3. Arts, Bas & Brockhaus, Maria & Giessen, Lukas & McDermott, Constance L., 2024. "The performance of global forest governance: Three contrasting perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Wang, Hsiao-Fan & Sung, Meng-Ping & Hsu, Hsin-Wei, 2016. "Complementarity and substitution of renewable energy in target year energy supply-mix plannin–in the case of Taiwan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 172-182.
    5. E R Alexander & A Faludi, 1989. "Planning and Plan Implementation: Notes on Evaluation Criteria," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 16(2), pages 127-140, June.
    6. Yi, Fangxin & Deng, Dong & Zhang, Yanjiang, 2020. "Collaboration of top-down and bottom-up approaches in the post-disaster housing reconstruction: Evaluating the cases in Yushu Qinghai-Tibet Plateau of China from resilience perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    8. Mæhle, Per Magnus & Smeland, Sigbjørn, 2021. "Implementing cancer patient pathways in Scandinavia how structuring might affect the acceptance of a politically imposed reform," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(10), pages 1340-1350.
    9. Alvaro Pina Stranger & German Varas & Gaëlle Mobuchon, 2023. "Managing Inter-University Digital Collaboration from a Bottom-Up Approach: Lessons from Organizational, Pedagogical, and Technological Dimensions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Böcher, Michael & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Forest Policy Analysis: Advancing the analytical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-6.
    11. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    12. Mathilde Collinet-Ourthe & David Carassus & Pierre Marin, 2017. "Vers un nouveau pilotage des politiques sociales," Post-Print hal-02142217, HAL.
    13. Mladen Djuric & Marina Dobrota & Jovan Filipovic, 2020. "Complexity-based quality indicators for human and social capital in science and research: the case of Serbian Homeland versus Diaspora," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 303-328, July.
    14. Zurba, Melanie & Diduck, Alan P. & Sinclair, A. John, 2016. "First Nations and industry collaboration for forest governance in northwestern Ontario, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-10.
    15. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    16. Hildebrand Sean, 2015. "Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 273-298, June.
    17. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Alvaro Pina Stranger & Germán Varas & Gaelle Mobuchon, 2023. "An Introduction to the Special Issue on Digital and Collaborative Higher Education: The Case of the Erasmus+ OpenU Project," Post-Print hal-04116966, HAL.
    19. Susan Thomas* & Amreeta Dhanoa & Uma D. Palanisamy, 2012. "Shaping the Future of Medicine: The Effect of ‘Selective’ Choices on Tomorrow’s Doctors," Institutions and Economies (formerly known as International Journal of Institutions and Economies), Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya, vol. 4(2), pages 151-164, July.
    20. Spilsbury, Michael J. & Nasi, Robert, 2006. "The interface of policy research and the policy development process: challenges posed to the forestry community," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 193-205, March.

    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:eee:forpol:v:73:y:2016:i:c:p:195-203. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.