IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v61y2015icp216-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participant perceptions of consensus-based, marine mammal take reduction planning

Author

Listed:
  • McDonald, Sara L.
  • Rigling-Gallagher, Deborah

Abstract

This study employs Structural Equation Models (SEMs) to systematically analyze the components of a multi-stakeholder negotiation in an applied setting. It characterizes participant perceptions of a multi-stakeholder, consensus-based negotiation process used to reduce harmful interactions between marine mammals and fishing gear in U.S. waters (marine mammal Take Reduction Teams). From April to July 2013, 234 current and former participants of eight Take Reduction Teams received a survey with 15 questions about the negotiation process, outputs (Take Reduction Plans), and outcomes. The SEMs depict relationships among the latent variables of social capital and shared learning, fairness, stakeholder satisfaction with the Take Reduction Plans, and their perceived outcomes. The SEMs also explain the influence of independent predictors of team identity and age, geographic region, and stakeholder affiliation on the latent variables. Results indicate that stakeholder views of fairness significantly influenced their satisfaction with the Take Reduction Plans, which in turn, significantly affected their opinions of the outcomes. While the majority of participants believed the plans were at least slightly successful at reducing marine mammal bycatch, this varied among teams and was significantly influenced by stakeholder affiliation, region, and Take Reduction Team age.

Suggested Citation

  • McDonald, Sara L. & Rigling-Gallagher, Deborah, 2015. "Participant perceptions of consensus-based, marine mammal take reduction planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 216-226.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:216-226
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.08.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X15002237
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.08.004?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. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.
    2. Leach, William D. & Sabatier, Paul A., 2005. "To Trust an Adversary: Integrating Rational and Psychological Models of Collaborative Policymaking," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(4), pages 491-503, November.
    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. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    2. Jens Nilsson & Annica Sandström & Daniel Nohrstedt, 2020. "Beliefs, social identity, and the view of opponents in Swedish carnivore management policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 453-472, September.
    3. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Axel Marx, 2008. "Limits to non‐state market regulation: A qualitative comparative analysis of the international sport footwear industry and the Fair Labor Association," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 253-273, June.
    5. Sangmin Kim, 2016. "The workings of collaborative governance: Evaluating collaborative community-building initiatives in Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(16), pages 3547-3565, December.
    6. Ya Li & Zhichang Zhu & Catherine M. Gerard, 2012. "Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 209-220, March.
    7. Gabriel Leonardo & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2016. "Politicians, bureaucrats, and tax morale: What shapes tax compliance attitudes?," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1608, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    8. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    9. Andrew F Smith, 2014. "Political deliberation and the challenge of bounded rationality," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 269-291, August.
    10. Han Wang & Yueli Xu, 2024. "Achieving Neighborhood-Level Collaborative Governance through Participatory Regeneration: Cases of Three Residential Heritage Neighborhoods in Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Patricia A. McKay & Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Christine A. Vogt, 2020. "Assessing improvements in socio-ecological system governance using mixed methods and the quality governance framework and its diagnostic capacity tool," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 41-66, March.
    12. Porter, Madeleine & Franks, Daniel M. & Everingham, Jo-Anne, 2013. "Cultivating collaboration: Lessons from initiatives to understand and manage cumulative impacts in Australian resource regions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 657-669.
    13. Russell W. Mills & Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, 2014. "Secondary learning and the unintended benefits of collaborative mechanisms: The Federal Aviation Administration's voluntary disclosure programs," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 437-454, December.
    14. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    15. John Selsky & Barbara Parker, 2010. "Platforms for Cross-Sector Social Partnerships: Prospective Sensemaking Devices for Social Benefit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 21-37, July.
    16. Janmaat, Johannus A., 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement in Land Development Decisions: A Waste of Effort?," MPRA Paper 6147, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Wiebren Kuindersma & Froukje G Boonstra, 2010. "The Changing Role of the State in Dutch Regional Partnerships," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 28(6), pages 1045-1062, December.
    18. Vilma Atkociuniene & Sigitas Vaitkevicius & Egle Stareike, 2021. "Development of Sustainable Partnership Organizational Mechanism (POM): Case of Local Action Groups (LAG)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    19. Andrew Pattison & William Cipolli & Jose Marichal, 2022. "The devil we know and the angel that did not fly: An examination of devil/angel shift in twitter fracking “debates” in NY 2008–2018," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 51-72, January.
    20. Lihua Yang, 2018. "Collaborative knowledge-driven governance: Types and mechanisms of collaboration between science, social science, and local knowledge," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 53-73.

    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:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:216-226. 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/marpol .

    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.