natural resources conflict resolutionnaturalresourcespolicy.org/.../nrcr-fall-2017-syllabus.pdf ·...

August2017 Page1

NATURALRESOURCESCONFLICTRESOLUTION

LAW613/ENST513/NRSM513TheUniversityofMontana

CastlesCenter,Room19,AlexanderBlewettIIISchoolofLawFall2017Monday1:00to2:20and2:30to3:50

OfficeHoursMonday12-1

ByAppointment_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ShawnJohnsonManagingDirector,CenterforNaturalResources&EnvironmentalPolicy

Co-Chair,NaturalResourcesConflictResolutionProgram406-381-2904

shawn.johnson@umontana.edu_________________________________________________________________________________________________________CourseDescriptionConflictsovernaturalresourcesandtheenvironmentareubiquitous.Thepurposeofthiscourseistoexaminethecauses,dynamics,andconsequencesofnaturalresourceconflicts,aswellastherangeofpossibleapproachestopreventandresolvesuchconflicts.Thecoursewillconsiderthemeritsofconventionalapproachestomanagenaturalresourcesconflictsandemphasizethetheoryandmethodsofcollaboration.Itwillconcludebyconsideringinnovationsinthetheoryandpracticeofnaturalresourcesconflictresolution.Drawingonthehistoryofnaturalresourcepolicyandconflictresolution,thecoursearguesthatconventionalapproachestopreventandresolvenaturalresourceandenvironmentalconflicts–legislative,administrative,andjudicial–oftenleavecitizens,advocates,anddecision-makersdissatisfiedwiththeoutcome.Thisdissatisfactioninturnleadstoarecurrenceofdisputes,whichstrainsrelationships,andincreasestransactioncosts.Duringthepast45years,scholars,policy-makers,andadvocatesrepresentingvariousperspectiveshaveincreasinglyrealizedthatoneofthemosteffectivewaystopreventandresolvenaturalresourceconflictsistocreateopportunitiesfortherightpeopletocometogetherwiththebestavailableinformationtoaddressissuesofcommonconcern.Thecorepropositionofthis“collaborative”approachtopreventingandresolvingconflictsisthatitprovidesmoremeaningfulopportunitiesforcitizenparticipation,fostersmoreinformeddecisions,producesmoredurableandwidelysupportedoutcomes,improvesworkingrelationships,andminimizesthecostsofdisputing.Althoughitemergedlargelyinthecontextofnaturalresourcesandenvironmentalpolicy,thisapproachtocitizenparticipationandpublicdisputeresolutionisapplicabletoawide-rangeofpublicissues.

August2017 Page2

Thiscourseisdesignedforgraduatestudentsinlaw,forestry,conservation,environmentalstudies,communication,geography,planning,politicalscience,publicadministration,internationalconservationanddevelopment,andotherdisciplines.Throughreadings,casestudies,exercises,simulations,andguestspeakers,studentsareintroducedtothe“art”and“science”ofcollaborationandconflictresolution,particularlyasitappliestoland-use,naturalresource,andenvironmentalissues.Thecoursecriticallyexaminesestablishedtheoryandmethods,aswellascutting-edgeideas,methods,andpractices.Bytheendofthecourse,studentswillbeableto:

Ø Understandthecauses,dynamics,andconsequencesofnaturalresourceand

environmentalconflicts;Ø Understandtherangeofpossibleapproachestopreventandmanagesuchconflicts;Ø Gatherappropriateinformationandassesstheneedforpublicengagement,

dialogue,andconflictresolution;Ø Designpublicprocessesthatareinclusive,informed,anddeliberative;Ø Adapttheseprinciplestopublicparticipation,community-basedcollaboration,

administrativerulemaking,environmentalimpactassessment,land-useandresourceplanning,andlegislativepolicymaking;

Ø Participateeffectivelyinmulti-partypublicprocesses;Ø Understandtheroleandvalueofprocessmanagers(facilitatorsandmediators);Ø Adapttheprinciplesandstrategiestoscience-intensivepublicissues;intractable

publicdisputes;regional,trans-boundaryissues;anddisputesystemsdesign.Ø Understandtheimplicationsofcurrenttrendsincitizenparticipation,deliberative

democracy,andthegovernanceofnaturalresources.

Whilethereisnoprerequisiteforthiscourse,participantsshouldhaveaworkingknowledgeofnaturalresourcepolicy,includingthepoliticsofformulatingandimplementingsuchpolicy.Agraduatecourseinnaturalresourcepolicyandadministrationisstronglyrecommended.Throughoutthesemester,theprofessorwilltakeadvantageofopportunitiestosharetheongoingworkoftheCenterforNaturalResources&EnvironmentalPolicy.RealizingthatthiscoursefocusesonnaturalresourceconflictresolutionintheUnitedStates--particularlytheAmericanWest--wewillalsoattempttointegratebestpracticesfromaroundtheworldandtoexplorehowtheAmericanexperiencemightbeusefulinotherregionsoftheworld.Readingforthecourseisavailableontheuniversity’sMoodlesite.Theprofessormayoccasionallyprovidesupplementaryreading.Thisisthefoundationalcourseoftheuniversity’sinterdisciplinaryNaturalResourcesConflictResolutionProgram.Formoreinformationontheprogram,pleasegotohttp://naturalresourcespolicy.org/education/conflict-resolution-program.php.

August2017 Page3

COURSEOVERVIEWPart1:TheConventionalApproachSession#1 TheNatureofNaturalResourcesConflict

Session#2 PublicParticipation:TheoryandPracticeSession#3 ThePlaceofLitigationandtheCourtsPart2:NewRolesforCitizens,Experts,andDecision-makersSession#4 TheEmergenceofNegotiationandMediation

Session#5 Community-basedCollaboration

Session#6 ReflectingonCollaboration:CritiquesandIndicatorsofSuccess

Part3:TheoryandMethodsofCollaborationSession#7 AnalyzingtheConflictorSituation

Session#8 DesigninganEffectiveCollaborativeProcess

Session#9 BuildingAgreementonScientificandTechnicalInformation

Session#10 DeliberatingandDeciding

Session#11 EngagingUnaffiliatedCitizens

Session#12 ImplementingAgreementsandAdaptiveManagementPart4:InnovationsinTheoryandPracticeSession#13 TowardMoreEffectiveGovernance

Session#14 StudentPresentations

August2017 Page4

COURSEREQUIREMENTSANDEXPECTATIONS1Inadditiontolearningaboutthehistory,theory,andmethodsofresolvingnaturalresourceconflicts,thiscourseemphasizestwoessentialskills–criticalthinkingandcommunication.Thefollowingcourserequirementsandexpectationsaredesignedtohelpallofusdevelopandrefinethesetwoessentialskillsets.AttendandParticipateinClass=28pointsTheessenceofcollaborationis“informedengagement.”Topracticethiscoreskill-set,youwillreceiveamaximumof2pointsforeveryclassyouattendandarefullyengaged,foratotalof28pointsover14weeks.Giventhatclasssessionsrelyondialogueandconversation,eachstudentshouldreadtherequiredreadingpriortoclass,bereadytodiscussthereadings,andfullyengageindiscussionandsimulations.Thegoalistoengagetheentireclass,notjustafewcommittedstudents.Ifclassparticipationanddiscussionispoor,unannouncedpop-quizzesmaybegiven.Ifyoucannotattendclassandlettheprofessorknowinadvance,youmayearn1pointbycompletingallofthereadingassignmentsforthatclassandpreparingacriticalessayonthereadingsinthecontextoftheunfoldingnarrativeoftheclass.Unexcusedabsenceswillearnyouzeropoints.LeadaSeminar=15pointsStudentswillworkingroupsoftwotoorganizeandleadone90-minuteseminarbasedonselectedsessions.Eachteamwillprovideabrieforalreviewandsummaryofthereadingspayingspecialattentiontothehistoryofideasandinstitutions(10-15minutes),andthenleadadiscussionbyframing4-6analyticalquestionsrelatedtothereadings.Whileyoushouldfeelfreetoframethediscussioninwhateverwaymakesthemostsensetoyou,makesuretoaddressthefollowingquestionsinyouroralreviewandsummary:(1)Whataretheprimaryissuesandmajorquestionsaddressedinthereading?(2)Whatargument(ifany),theoreticalorapplied,isbeingpresentedandhowisitbeingdefendedbytheauthor?(3)Whattheory,methods,concepts,andevidenceareintroduced?(4)Howisthereadingrelatedtootherreadingsthissemester?(5)Whocares?Sowhat?Whatinsightsandcontributionsdoesthereadingoffer?Theprofessorwillworkwithstudentstohelpthempreparetoleadaseminaraftertheyhavereadthematerialsanddevelopedapreliminaryframeworkforpresentationanddiscussion.Thepresentationanddiscussionwillbegradedusingthefollowingcriteria:

1Allstudentsmustpracticeacademichonesty.Academicmisconductissubjecttoanacademicpenaltybythecourseinstructorand/oradisciplinarysanctionbytheUniversity.

August2017 Page5

• Preparing:Wasthestudentwellprepared?Doessheorheseemknowledgeableandcomfortablewiththereadingsbeingdiscussedandreviewed?

• SummarizingandPresentingtheMaterial:Wasthepresentationeffectiveandorganized?Wasthesummaryofthereadingsclearandwellpresented?Didthestudenttie-inandintegrateclassmaterialsanddiscussions(especiallyimportantasthesemesterprogresses),e.g.,coursereadings,discussions,etc.?Didthestudentrecognizetheprimaryissuesaddressedinthereadings?

• FacilitatingClassDiscussion:Howwellwerethestudent’squestionsforclassdiscussionorganizedandconstructed?Didthestudenthelptheclassworkthroughdifficultquestions?Weretheyabletorespondtootherstudent’squestionsandcomments?

CompleteandPresentaProfessionalMemo=40pointsOneofthemostimportantskillstolearnasagraduatestudent–regardlessofyourcareerpath–ishowtothinkcriticallyandwriteconcisely.Thegoalhereisnottowriteanother30-pageresearchpaper.Moretimesthannot,whenyouentertheworkforceyouwillbeaskedtodojustasmuchresearchasyouwouldfora30-pagepaper,buttothensynthesizetheinformationintoashortmemorandum.Thepurposeofthisassignmentistoprovideyouanopportunitytoexploremorethoroughlyandthoughtfullyaparticularissuerelatedtonaturalresourceconflictandcollaboration.Itisalsoanopportunitytoapplysomeofthetheoryandmethodsreviewedduringclasssessions.Eachstudentwillprepareaprofessionalmemoonatopicrelatedtonaturalresourcespolicyandconflictresolutionthatisofparticularinteresttoherorhim.Thestructureandcontentofthememowillvarydependingonthetopicandaudience,buteachmemoshouldfollowtheguidelinespresentedin“HowtoWriteanEffectiveProfessionalMemo,”whichispostedonthecourse’sMoodlesite.Potentialtopicareasincludebutarenotlimitedtothefollowing:1. Waterpolicy,conflictresolution,andgovernance2. Publiclandslaw,policy,andconflictresolution3. Largelandscapeconservation4. Transboundaryconservation5. Environmentalpeacemaking6. Internationaltrendsandcasestudiesinnaturalresourcepolicy,conflictresolution,

andgovernanceBySession#7(October23),eachstudentshouldsubmitafulldraftofherorhisprofessionalmemofortheprofessor’sreview.Theprofessorwillthenschedule30-minutesessionswitheachstudenttoprovidefeedbackonthesedraftsandansweranyquestionsastudenthas.FinalmemosareduebymidnightonSunday,December10,2017.

August2017 Page6

Thedraftmemoandthefinalmemoareeachworth20points.Professionalmemoswillbegradedonthebasisof(1)writingandcommunication--includingclarity,levelofarticulation,andgrammar;(2)researchandanalysis--levelofcriticalanalysis,research,andspecificity;(3)coursematerials--amountofsynthesisandintegrationofcoursereadingsanddiscussions;(4)formalcitation(whateverstyleyouprefer,e.g.,parentheticalreference,footnote,endnote,legal,etc.);and(5)presentation.Eachelementisequallyimportantandwillbegradedaccordingly.FinalExam=17pointsUsingtheshortessaybyLawrenceSusskind“FifteenThingsWeKnowaboutEnvironmentalDisputeResolution,”pleasearticulatethetoptenthingsyouknowaboutnaturalresourcesconflictresolution.UsetheformatoftheSusskindessaybywritingconcise,compellingstatementsthatclearlystatethe“what”and“why.”Pleaseincludeappropriatecitations.Youressayisdueby5:00pmonThursday,December15.GradingScale93-100A90-92 A-88-89 B+83-87 B

80-82 B-78-79 C+73-77 C70-72C-

68-69D+63-67D

StudentConductCodeAllstudentsmustpracticeacademichonesty.Academicmisconductissubjecttoanacademicpenaltybythecourseinstructorand/oradisciplinarysanctionbytheUniversity.AllstudentsneedtobefamiliarwiththeStudentConductCode.ImportantDatesforDroppingaCourse,FallSemester2017:Deadline Description DateThe15thinstructionalday

StudentscandropclassesonCyberBearwitharefundandno“W”onherorhistranscript.

Sept.21=lastday

16thto45thinstructionalday

Droppingaclassrequirescompletingaformwiththeinstructor’sandadvisor’ssignatureaswellasa$10feefromregistrar’soffice.Thestudentwillreceivea‘W’ontranscript;norefundwillbeissued.

Sept.22throughNov.2

Beginningthe46thinstructionalday

Studentsareonlyallowedtodropaclassunderverylimitedandunusualcircumstances.Notdoingwellintheclass,decidingyouareconcernedabouthowtheclassgrademightaffectyourGPA,decidingyoudidnotwantto

Nov.3–Dec.12

August2017 Page7

Deadline Description Datetaketheclassafterall,andsimilarreasonsarenotamongthoselimitedandunusualcircumstances.Ifyouwanttodroptheclassforthesesortsofreasons,makesureyoudosobytheendofthe45thinstructionaldayofthesemester.Requeststodropmustbesignedbytheinstructor,advisor,andAssociateDean(inthatorder),soifyoupursuethisrequest,leavesufficienttimetoschedulemeetingswitheachoftheseindividuals(generallythiswilltakeatleast3-5workingdays).A$10feeappliesifapproved.Instructormustindicatewhethertheindividualispassingorfailingtheclassatthetimeoftherequest.

StudentswithDisabilitiesTheUniversityofMontanaassuresequalaccesstoinstructionthroughcollaborationbetweenstudentswithdisabilities,instructors,andDisabilityServicesforStudents.Ifyouhaveadisabilitythatadverselyaffectsyouracademicperformance,andyouhavenotalreadyregisteredwithDisabilityServices,pleasecontactDisabilityServicesinLommassonCenter154or406.243.2243.IwillworkwithyouandDisabilityServicestoprovideanappropriatemodification.

August2017 Page8

1.THENATUREOFNATURALRESOURCESCONFLICTThissessionprovidesanintroductionandoverviewtothecourse.Wewillreviewthenatureofnaturalresourcesandenvironmentalconflicts,explorethedynamicsofcompetitiveandcooperativeapproachestopreventingandresolvingsuchconflicts,andreviewtherequirementsandscheduleforthecourse.

Readings

1. StephenDanielsandGreggWalker,WorkingThroughEnvironmentalConflict(2001):26-33.

2. SusanL.CarpenterandW.J.D.Kennedy,ManagingPublicDisputes(1988):11-17.3. MatthewMcKinneyandWillHarmon,TheWesternConfluence(2004):18-30.4. JuliaWondolleck,TheImportanceofProcessinResolvingEnvironmentalDisputes

(1985):341-342.5. Thomas-KilmannConflictManagementAssessment6. GlossaryOfTerms:NaturalResourcesAndEnvironmentalConflictResolution

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Whatis“good”naturalresourcespolicy?Ifeveryoneagrees,thenwhyistheresomuchconflict?

2. Whatisconflict,andwhatareyourperceptionsorfeelingsaboutconflict?Whataresomecommonconnotationsaboutconflict?Isconflictgood,bad,orboth?

3. Whatarethecentralelementsofanyconflict?Reviewthetypicalsequenceofanaturalresourceorpublicpolicyconflicttoclarifyhowtheseelementsinteractandinfluenceoneanother.

4. Whatcausesnaturalresourcesandenvironmentalconflicts?Discusswhyitisimportanttounderstandthecauseand/ornatureofnaturalresourceconflictsinordertoeffectivelymanageandresolvethem.Whyisprocesssoimportanttoprevent,managing,andresolvingnaturalresourceconflicts?

5. AssessyourpersonalstyleorapproachtoconflictbycompletingtheThomas-KilmannConflictManagementAssessment.Discussthemeritsofalternativepersonalapproachestoconflictmanagement.UsetheexerciseWinAsMuchAsYouCantoexaminethemeritsofcooperativeandcompetitiveapproachestoconflict.

August2017 Page9

2.PUBLICPARTICIPATION:THEORYANDPRACTICEOneofthebestwaystopreventormitigateconflictovernaturalresourcesandenvironmentalissuesistoprovidemeaningfulopportunitiesforcitizensandstakeholderstobeinvolvedfromtheverybeginning.WhilethetheoryandlegalframeworkforpublicparticipationintheUnitedStatesiscompelling,itoftenleavesparticipantsanddecision-makersfrustratedanddissatisfiedwiththeoutcome.

Readings

1. DanielKemmis,CommunityandthePoliticsofPlace(1990):9-16.2. DanielKemmis,ThisSovereignLand:ANewVisionforGoverningtheWest(2001):

124-126.[SeeSession5ForThisReading]3. ThomasC.BeierleAndJerryCayford,DemocracyinPractice:PublicParticipationin

EnvironmentalDecisions(2002):2-4.4. ThomasDietzAndPaulC.Stern,Eds.PublicParticipationinEnvironmental

AssessmentandDecisionMaking(2008):36-52.5. CenterforNaturalResources&EnvironmentalPolicy,PublicParticipation:Lessons

LearnedImplementingthe2012USForestServicePlanningRule(2015):20Pages.6. SherryArnstein,ALadderofCitizenParticipation,(1969):216-18.7. DanielYankelovich,TheMagicofDialogue:TransformingConflictintoCooperation

(1999):169-176.8. InternationalAssociationforPublicParticipation,CoreValues,CodeofEthics,

Spectrum,andToolsofPublicParticipation(2010):18Pages.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. ThebasicquestionJeffersonandMadisonattemptedtoanswerincreatingtheU.S.Constitutionwas...“shouldtheburdenofsolvingpublicproblemsrestmostdirectlyoncitizensorongovernment?”ExplainthephilosophicalargumentsofJeffersonandMadison,andexploretheimplicationstonaturalresourcespolicyandconflictresolution.Whichphilosophicalframeworkdoyoumostagreewithandwhy?

2. Whyshouldcitizensbeinvolvedinnaturalresourcedecisions?Whataretheargumentssupportingcitizenparticipation?Whataretheargumentsagainst?

3. Reviewthelegalframeworkforpublicparticipation.Howwelldoesthislegalframeworksupportoneormoreofthereasonstoinvolvecitizensinnaturalresourcedecisions?

4. Whatarethemostsurprisinglessonsthatemergefromthestudyonpublicparticipationunderthe2012nationalforestplanningrule?UsingtheclassicframeworkprovidedArnstein,whereonthe“ladderofcitizenparticipation”doespublicparticipationonnationalforestplanningseemtofallandwhy?

5. “Whatismissing”inconventionalpublicparticipationprocesses?Andwhatarethepitfallsorproblemsrelatedtopublicparticipationinnaturalresourcedecision-making?Identifywhatcitizenswantinapublicprocess,andwhytheydon’t

August2017 Page10

participate.Usingexamples,explainthedifferencebetweenthe“Decide-Announce-Defend”modelofpublicparticipationincontrasttothe“AlwaysConsultBeforeDeciding”modelofpublicparticipation.

6. Howdothevalues,principles,andmethodspromotedbytheInternationalAssociationforPublicParticipation(1)reflecttheidealizedobjectivesofpublicparticipation?and(2)addresssomeoralloftheproblemsassociatedwithpublicparticipation?

August2017 Page11

3.THEPLACEOFLITIGATIONANDTHECOURTSWhenconventionalapproachestopublicparticipationfailtosatisfytheinterestsofcitizensandstakeholders,peoplehavetheopportunitytochallengeboththedecision-makingprocessanditsoutcomesthroughadministrativeappealsandlitigation.Whilelitigationandthecourtsareoftentheforumoflastresort,theyplayanimportantroleinframingissues,highlightingpointsofagreementanddisagreement,andprovidingtheincentivetoresolveoutstandingconflictthroughmorecooperativemethods.Readings

1. MatthewMcKinney,WolfManagementintheNorthernRockyMountains:ACaseStudyontheRoleofLitigationinNaturalResourcesPolicy(2015):30Pages.

2. MartinNie,TheUnderappreciatedRoleofRegulatoryEnforcementinNaturalResourceConservation(2008):147-151.

3. JosephL.Sax,DefendingtheEnvironment:AStrategyforCitizenAction(1971):108-124.

4. LawrenceS.BacowandMichaelWheeler,EnvironmentalDisputeResolution(1984):12-18.

5. ChristopherM.KlyzaandDavidJ.Sousa,From“WhoHasStanding?”to“WhoIsLeftStanding?”:TheCourtsandEnvironmentalPolicymakingintheEraofGridlock(2013):SelectedPages.

6. MatthewMcKinney,ShouldNaturalObjectsHaveStanding?FromEnvironmentalEthicstoEnvironmentalLaw(2015):3Pages

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Toappreciatetheplaceoflitigationandthecourtsinnaturalresourcespolicy,readthewolfmanagementcasestudy.Startbyreviewingthefactsofthecase.a. Whatistheoriginandcauseofthisconflict(thinkintermsvalues,interests,

data,institutionalarrangements,relationships)?b. Howhaslitigationinfluencedwolfmanagementpolicyaswellastheuseof

alternativeconflictresolutionstrategies?WhatisMartinNie’sbasicargumentalongtheselines?

2. AccordingtoSax,aswellasBacowandWheeler,whataretheargumentsforandagainstlitigationandthecourtsasawayofmakingdecisionsandresolvingnaturalresourceconflicts?

3. Whatisthemostappropriateuseoflitigationandthecourts?Whenisitmostappropriate?Leastappropriate?Whydosomegroupspreferlitigationoverotherapproachestoinfluencepolicyandmanagement?Considerthefourcriteriafordetermining“whichapproachisbest.

4. Giventhecostandbenefitsoflitigationtoresolvenaturalresourceconflict,shouldthecoreissueof“standing”bereconsidered?Whoshouldparticipateingoverningormakingdecisionsabouttheuseofnaturalresources?Shouldnaturalobjectshavestanding?

August2017 Page12

4.THEEMERGENCEOFNEGOTIATIONANDMEDIATIONNegotiationandmediation(increasinglycapturedbytheall-encompassingterm“collaboration”)emergedinthelate1970sinresponsetothelimitationsoftheconventionalapproachestonaturalresourcesandenvironmentalconflict–publicparticipationandlitigation.Whileincreasinglypopular,collaborationisonlyoneapproachamongmany.Thissessionwillreviewtheincentivestonegotiateorcollaborate;clarifywhatenablesandconstrainssuchprocesses;reviewtheprinciples,processes,andcommonmethodsforcollaboration;andexaminethelegalframeworkforcollaboration.

Readings

1. MatthewMcKinney,BuildingAgreementonWaterPolicy:FromConflicttoCommunity(1997):17Pages.

2. MatthewMcKinneyandWillHarmon,TheWesternConfluence(2004):201-215.3. MatthewMcKinney,CollaborativeApproachestoNaturalResourcePolicy:Key

Elements(2011):2Pages.4. GailBingham,ResolvingEnvironmentalDisputes:ADecadeofExperience(1985):

14Pages.5. SarahBates,TheLegalFrameworkforCooperativeConservation(2006):24Pages.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Usingthecasestudyoninstreamflowpolicy,discussthefollowingquestions:a.Whatcompelsindividualsandorganizationstonegotiateorcollaborate?b.Whatconstrainsenvironmentalnegotiation?c.Whatenablesparticipantstobesuccessful?Inotherwords,whatarethekeyelementstosuccess(e.g.,theroleofmediators)?

2. Howdoesthiscasestudyrevealnewrolesforcitizens,experts,anddecision-makersinresolvingnaturalresourceconflictsandshapingnaturalresourcespolicy?Reflectonthedifferencebetweenpublicparticipationandshareddecision-making.Doesthiscaseamounttoofficialdecision-makers(e.g.,legislators,agencies,andsoon)abdicatingtheirdecision-makingauthority?

3. Whatdoesthiscasestudysuggestintermsofaprescriptiveframeworkorphasestoenvironmentalnegotiationandcollaboration?Doesthisframeworksuggestthatmultipartynegotiationisalinearprocess,orisitmoredynamic?

4. WhatlessonsdoestheBinghamarticlesuggestintermsofthehistoryandtrajectoryofnaturalresourcesconflictresolution?Thinkintermsofplace-basedandpolicy-orientedapplications,aswellasadhocvs.moresystematic,institutionalizedapplications.

5. Refertothereadingsonthelegalframeworkforenvironmentalnegotiation,mediation,andcollaboration.How,itatall,doesthisframeworkcatalyze,enable,andconstrainsuchprocessesinpractice?

August2017 Page13

5.COMMUNITY-BASEDCOLLABORATIONInthe1980’sand90’s,collaborationslowlygainedtractionasapracticalwaytosolvelocal,place-basedissues.ThroughouttheAmericanWest,thismovementisdefinedbytwokeyelements.First,citizensand/orcommunitiescatalyzed,convened,andcoordinatedtheseefforts–incontrasttowaitingforlocal,state,orfederalgovernmentofficialstoprovidesuchopportunities.Second,theseeffortstendtorevolvearoundwatersheds,ecosystems,andotherplacesdefinedbynaturalboundaries–notartificialpoliticalboundaries.

Readings

1. CharlesF.Wilkinson,LawandtheAmericanWest:TheSearchforanEthicofPlace(1988):404-410.

2. DanielKemmis,ThisSovereignLand:ANewVisionforGoverningtheWest(2001):117-149.

3. MartinNieAndMichaelFiebig,ManagingNationalForestsThroughPlace-BasedLegislation,EcologyLawQuarterly(2010):22SelectedPages.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. AccordingtoWilkinson,whatisthe“ethicofplace?”Whatarethekeycomponentsofthis“ethicofplace?”WhatisWilkinson’scoreargumentinsupportofsuchatheoryandpractice?

2. ReferringtothenarrativebyKemmis,examinethehistoryandtheoryofthecitizen-driven,place-basedcollaboration.Whatcatalyzedthis“movement?”Whatenabledindividualcasestobesuccessful,ornot,asthecasemaybe?Whichcasesaremostinterestingandcompelling,andwhy?Whatotherexamplesofcommunity-basedcollaborationareyoufamiliarwith?Aretheysuccessfulornot,andwhy?

3. Howisthecitizen-driven,place-basedcollaborationmovementsimilartoand/ordifferentfromthemoreconventionaltheoryandpracticeofenvironmentalconflictresolutionasdiscussedinsession4?

4. Assumingthathomegrown,community-basedcollaborationworks,canagenciescatalyze,convene,andsuccessfullycoordinatesuchinitiatives?Whyorwhynot?(SeeKemmis).

5. Whatistheissueorconcernaboutdelegatingdecision-makingauthoritytocommunity-basedcollaborativegroups?WhatoptionsorstrategiesdoKemmisandotherssuggestinresponsetothischallenge?

6. Whyhavesomecommunity-basedcollaborativegroupstakenituponthemselvestodraftlegislationtoimplementtheirnegotiatedagreements?Whatarethemerits–proandcon–ofthistrend(seeNieandFeibig)?

August2017 Page14

6.REFLECTINGONCOLLABORATION:CRITIQUESANDINDICATORSOFSUCCESSThepremiseofcollaborationisthat,ifyoubringtogethertherightpeopleinaconstructiveforumwiththebestavailableinformation,theycanshapesustainablesolutionsthatintegratemost(ifnotall)interests.Thismodulewillcriticallyexaminetheargumentsagainstcollaboration,alongwithalternativeindicatorsofsuccess.

Readings

CritiquesofCollaboration 1. RobertJ.Golton,Mediation:A'Sellout'forConservationAdvocatesorABargain?The

EnvironmentalProfessional(1980):62-66.2. MichaelMcCloskey,“TheSkeptic:CollaborationHasItsLimits,”HighCountryNews

(May13,1996):4pages.3. GeorgeCameronCoggins,“OfCalifornicators,QuislingsandCrazies:SomePerilsof

DevolvedCollaboration,”AcrosstheGreatDivide:ExplorationsofCollaborativeConservationandtheAmericanWest(2001):163-171.

4. KarenCoulter,etal.,CollectiveStatementonCollaborativeGroupTrends(undatedmanuscript):5pages.

5. DouglasS.Kenney,ArguingaboutConsensus:ExaminingtheCaseagainstWesternWatershedInitiativesandOtherCollaborativeGroupsActiveinNaturalResourcesManagement(2000):1-7.

IndicatorsofSuccess1. DouglasS.Kenney,AreCommunity-BasedWatershedGroupsReallyEffective?

ConfrontingtheThornyIssueofMeasuringSuccess,AcrosstheGreatDivide:ExplorationsofCollaborativeConservationandtheAmericanWest(2001):188-193.

2. JudithE.Innes,EvaluatingConsensusBuilding,TheConsensusBuildingHandbook(2004):647-659.

3. MatthewMcKinney,ParticipantSatisfactionScorecard(2004):2pages.QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Reviewtheargumentsagainstcollaboration.Whichoftheseargumentsdoyoufindmostcompellingandwhy?Whichargumentsareleastpersuasiveandwhy?

2. Whatisasuccessfulcollaborativeprocess?Discussthevariousindicatorsforsuccesspresentedintheliterature,andagreeoncriteriaforevaluatingthesuccessorprogressofacollaborativeprocess.Discusswhethertheindicatorsofsuccessyouhaveselectedshouldbeappliedtootherapproachestonaturalresourcesdecision-making(e.g.,publicparticipation,litigation,etc.).Explorethefollowingquestions–whatisgoodnaturalresourcespolicy,andwhatconditions/criteriahelpdefinesuchoutcomes?

August2017 Page15

7.ANALYZINGTHECONFLICTORSITUATIONThefirststeptopromotemeaningfulcitizenparticipationand/ortoeffectivelyresolveamulti-partydisputeistocompleteasituationassessment(sometimesreferredtoasaconflictassessmentorconflictanalysis).Thistoolallowsyouto(1)identifypeopleandorganizationsthatarepotentiallyinterestedinand/oraffectedbyagivenissueorsituation;(2)assesstheirinterestsandtheprocessoptionstheyhavetoachievetheirinterests,includingtheir“best”and“worst”alternativestoanegotiatedagreement;(3)determinewhenandwhennottoengageinacollaborativeprocess;(4)encouragestakeholderstoreframepositionstointerests;(5)clarifythe“decisionspace”forsometypeofcollaboration,includingthelegal,institutional,scientific,cultural,economic,andothersideboards;and(6)generatetheinformationneededtodesigntherightpublicprocessforanygivensituation.

Readings

1. LawrenceSusskindandJenniferThomas-Larmer,“ConductingaConflictAssessment,”TheConsensusBuildingHandbook(2004):99-136.

2. SusanCarpenterandW.J.D.Kennedy,ManagingPublicDisputes:APracticalGuidetoHandlingConflictandReachingAgreements(1991):197-223.

3. MatthewMcKinney,AnalyzingtheConflictorSituation(2015):28pages.4. MatthewMcKinney,LandUse,Growth,andtheFutureoftheBitterrootValley

(2012).

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Whatisasituation(orconflictorstakeholder)assessment?Whydoit?Whatmayhappenifyoudon'tcompletethistypeofassessment?

2. Whatchallengesorobstaclesmayemergeincompletingasituationassessment,andwhatstrategiescanbeemployedavoidand/ormitigatesuchproblems?

3. UsingthecasestudyLandUse,Growth,andtheFutureoftheBitterrootValley,breakintosmallgroups.Assume“civicleaders”fromthevalleyareinterestedinexploringhowtomovethisconversationforwardinlightofthisrecenthistory,andhaveaskedyourteamforsomeadvice.Duringyoursmallgroupdiscussions:

• Identifywhatcategoriesofpeopleshouldbeinterviewedandwhybycreatinga“stakeholdermap.”

• Articulate3-5questionsthatyouthinkwouldbemostinterestingandcompellingintermsofassessingwhetherstakeholdersmightbereadytoengageinsometypeofpublicprocess.

• Usetheanalyticalframeworks(i.e.,thestakeholdermapandthechecklist)todetermineifsometypeofcollaborationisappropriateinthiscaseand/orifsomeothertypeofpublicprocessmightbemoreappropriate.

• Usingthetheoryandmethodspresentedinthereadings(includingtheIAP2Framework),whatwouldyourecommendintermsofthiscase?

August2017 Page16

8.DESIGNINGANEFFECTIVECOLLABORATIVEPROCESSOneoftheprimaryvaluesofcompletingasituationassessmentisthatitallowsyoutotailorthecitizenparticipation,collaborativeproblemsolving,ordisputeresolutionprocesstomeettheneedsandinterestsofcitizens,stakeholders,andthedecision-makers.Usingtheinformationgatheredthroughthesituationassessment,theparticipantsarenowreadytodesignaneffectiveprocessthatincludes(1)aninterest-basedworkplan;and(2)asetofgroundrules(includingthesideboardsorconstraintsinfluencingtheprocess;howtoincorporatenon-localinterestsinlocaldecision-makingprocesses;andsoon).

Readings

1. ThomasDietzandPaulC.Stern,eds.PublicParticipationInEnvironmentalAssessmentAndDecisionMaking(2008):111-135.

2. SusanCarpenterandW.J.D.Kennedy,ManagingPublicDisputes:APracticalGuideToHandlingConflictAndReachingAgreements(Jossey-Bass,1991):92-136.

3. MatthewMcKinney,DesigninganEffectiveCollaborativeProcess(CenterforNaturalResources&EnvironmentalPolicy,2015):28pages.

4. MatthewMcKinney,ManagingEffectiveMeetings(CenterforNaturalResourcesandEnvironmentalPolicy,2015):13pages.

5. RockyMountainSpottedTrout:AResourceManagementDisputeOnFederalLands–GeneralInstructionsForPart1:NegotiatingTheProcess

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Usethediscussionpaper“WhatDoWeMeanByConsensus?”toreviewthekeyissuesindesigninganeffectivemulti-partyprocess:(a)Representation–whoshouldbeinvolved?(b)Decision-making–howwillthegroupmakedecisions?(c)Groundrules–togoverntheprocess;(d)Scientificandtechnicalinformation–whatinformationisneededandhowwillthegroupgatherandanalyzeit?(e)Resourceconstraints--timeandmoney.Emphasizetheneedtotailortheprocesstomeettheneedsandinterestsofstakeholders,andinawaythatrespectslegal,institutional,political,cultural,economic,andscientificconstraintsorsideboards.

2. Practicedesigningacollaborativeprocess.Priortoclass,readtheGeneralInstructionsforthemulti-partynegotiation“RockyMountainSpottedTrout:AResourceManagementDisputeOnFederalLands–Part1:NegotiatingTheProcess.”Theinstructorwillleadyouthroughthis90minuterole-playexercise.

August2017 Page17

9.BUILDINGAGREEMENTONSCIENTIFICANDTECHNICALINFORMATIONManylanduse,naturalresource,andenvironmentaldisputesrevolvearounddisagreementsoverscientificandtechnicalinformation.Thissessionwillconsiderdifferentwaysofknowingandpresentaframeworkfor“jointfactfinding”or“collaborativelearning.”Itwillalsoexaminetherolesofscientificinformationandtechnicalexpertsinpublicdecision-making.

Readings

1. RonaldD.BrunnerandToddiA.Steelman,BeyondScientificManagement(2005):1-14.2. GailBingham,WhentheSparksFly:BuildingConsensusWhentheScienceIs

Contested(2003):20pages.3. HermanA.Karl,etal.,ADialogue,NotaDiatribe:EffectiveIntegrationofScienceand

PolicythroughJointFactFinding,Environment49(2007):20-34.4. JuliaM.WondolleckandClareM.Ryan,WhatHatDoIWearNow?AnExamination

ofAgencyRolesinCollaborativeProcesses,NegotiationJournal(1999):selectedpages.

5. MatthewMcKinney,Co-ManagingtheFisheryResourceinFlatheadLake(2013):38pages.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. AccordingtoBrunnerandSteelman,whatisthehistoricalroleofscienceandtechnicalexpertsinshapingnaturalresourceandenvironmentalpolicy?Whataretheimplicationsofthislegacytoday?

2. Whatcausesconflictoverscientificandtechnicalinformation?SeetheessaysbyBinghamandKarl.

3. Whatisthepurposeandgoalofjointfactfinding?Howdoesitdifferfromtheconventionalapproachtoaddressingscientificandtechnicalissues(i.e.,scientificmanagement)?Whatarethekeystepsinjointfactfinding?

4. AccordingtoWondolleckandRyan,whatarethevariousrolesthatscientificandtechnicalexpertsplayinmakingdecisionsandresolvingconflict?WhatbarriersmayemergeinmovingfromthehistoricalroleofscientificandtechnicalexpertstotheframeworksuggestedbyWondolleckandRyan?

5. Applythetheoryandmethodsofjointfact-findinginthecasestudy“Co-ManagingtheFisheryResourceinFlatheadLake.”

August2017 Page18

10.DELIBERATINGANDDECIDING

Oncetheparticipantshavenegotiatedanagreementontheprocess,itistimetonegotiateoverthesubstanceoftheissues.Duringthissession,wewillreviewthetheoryandmethodofmutualgainsnegotiationinamulti-party,multi-issuecontext.Theessenceofmulti-partynegotiationistolearnfromeachotherwhatisjointlydesirableandpossible.Thisrequirescooperationtoshareyourinterests,learnaboutotherpeople’sinterests,andcreateoptionsandpackagesthatmeetasmanyinterestsaspossible.Italsoinvolvessomedegreeofcompetition(toadvanceyourindividualinterest)andtheimperativeofimplementation–thatis,makingcommitmentsandfollowing-through.Intheterminologyofdeliberativedemocracy,thisstepfocusesondeliberatinganddecision-making.

Readings

1. LawrenceSusskind,PaulLevy,andJenniferThomas-Larmer,TheMutualGainsApproach(1999):1-40.

2. SusanCarpenterandW.J.D.Kennedy,ManagingPublicDisputes:APracticalGuidetoHandlingConflictandReachingAgreements(1991):137-154.

3. MatthewMcKinney,BestPractices:DeliberatingAndDeciding(2015).4. MatthewMcKinney,TheRoleofFacilitatorsandMediators(2012):29pages.5. LawrenceSusskind,etal.,TheFiveLivesofaNeutral:TheRolesandResourcesof

NeutralsinMultipartyNegotiation(2003):138-142.6. RockyMountainSpottedTrout:AResourceManagementDisputeonFederalLands–

GeneralInstructionsforPart2:NegotiatingtheIssues

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Whatarethekeyelementsofmutualgainsnegotiation,and“why”iseachoneoftheseelementscriticalforsuccess?

2. Inlightofthesekeyelementsandgiventhenaturalstagesofgroupdevelopment,howwouldyousequenceissuesinawaytobuildtrust,respect,communication,understanding,andultimatelyagreement?Whatstrategiesmightbeeffectiveinmanaginggroupdynamics(e.g.,usingcaucusesawayfromthetabletoclarifyinterests,options,andpackages;buildingcoalitionsamongdiverseintereststopackageoptions;etc.)?

3. Howimportantisittoengageanimpartial,nonpartisanfacilitatorand/ormediatortohelpcatalyze,convene,andcoordinateamultipartynegotiationorcollaborationprocess?Whatvaluedoesa“processmanager”add?Whatrolesandresourcescantheyplayasaneutralprocessmanager(see“FiveLives”essay)?

4. Practiceparticipatinginacollaborativeprocess,eitherasanegotiatororamediator.Priortoclass,readtheGeneralInstructionsforthemulti-partynegotiation“RockyMountainSpottedTrout:AResourceManagementDisputeOnFederalLands–Part2:NegotiatingTheProcess.”Theinstructorwillleadyouthroughthis90-120minuterole-playexercise.

August2017 Page19

11.ENGAGINGUNAFFILIATEDCITIZENSOneofthegrowingchallengesinpreventingandresolvingnaturalresourceconflictsishowtoengageunaffiliated,rankandfilecitizens.Theprevioussessionshavefocusedlargelyonhowtocatalyze,convene,andcoordinatemultipartycollaborativeprocesses,whichtypicallyattractindividualsandgroupsthatareorganizedandhaveanidentifiablestakeinanissueordecision.Thissessionwillfocusonemergingtheoriesandmethodstoengagethe“silentmajority,”includingtheuseofdeliberativedialoguemethodsandcollaborativetechnologies.

Readings

1. MattLeighneigner,TheNextFormofDemocracy:HowExpertRuleIsGivingWaytoSharedGovernance...AndWhyPoliticsWillNeverBetheSame(2006):1-9.

2. ThomasDietzandPaulC.Stern,eds.PublicParticipationinEnvironmentalAssessmentandDecisionMaking(2008):192-221.

3. KenSnyder,PuttingDemocracyFrontandCenter(2006):8pages.4. JasonGershowitzandColinRule,ApplyingInformationandCommunication

TechnologytoMultipartyConflictResolutionProcesses(2012):5pages.5. AmyLee,OnlineDeliberativeDecision-Making(KetteringFoundation2013):3

pages.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Whatistheproblemofmobilizingandengagingunaffiliatedcitizens?Whocaresifpeoplechoosetonotparticipateinnaturalresourcesdecision-making?

2. Whatisthedifferencebetweenaboundedvs.anunboundedpublicprocess?How,ifatall,dothetheoriesandmethodsofcollaborativeproblemsolvinghelpinformthedesignandimplementationofanunboundedprocess?

3. Whataresomekeyprinciplesandmethodstoidentify,mobilize,andrecruitindependent,unaffiliatedcitizens–togettheirattentionandgettheminvolved?

4. Whataresomeofthemostinnovativeandcompellingmethodsto“engage”peopleeitherface-to-face,virtually,orsomecombination–onceyouhavetheirattentionandtheyshow-up?

5. Iftimeallows,studentswillworkinsmallgroupstodevelopastrategicplantomobilizeandengageunaffiliatedcitizensinnationalforestplanning.Amongotherthings,explain:

a. Whataresomeinnovative,effectivetoolstoidentify,mobilize,andrecruitcitizens?

b. Howmightcollaborativetechnologiesimprovepublicparticipationinnationalforestplanning?

c. Whatmightconstraintheuseofdeliberativedialogue,collaborativetechnologies,andsimilarapproachestopublicparticipationinnationalforestplanning?Thinkintermsofthedecision-makeraswellascitizens.

August2017 Page20

12.IMPLEMENTINGAGREEMENTSANDADAPTIVEMANAGEMENTWhilethetheoryofcollaborationisrelativelystraightforward,thereareanumberofproblemsthatariseinpractice.Duringthissession,wewillexamineproblemsandstrategiesrelatedtoimplementationandadaptivemanagement,reviewtheroleofprocessmanagers(facilitatorsandmediators)andcollaborativeleaders,considertheevidenceontherelativeeffectivenessofcollaboration,andevaluatealternativemetricstomeasuretheperformanceand“success”ofcollaboration.

Readings

1. MatthewMcKinney,Land-UsePlanninginSweetwaterCounty:BestPracticesforCommonImplementationProblems.

2. LawrenceS.BacowandMichaelWheeler,EnvironmentalDisputeResolution(1984):145-154.

3. WilliamR.PotapchuckandJarleCrocker,ImplementingConsensus-BasedAgreements(2004):527-555.

4. JuliaM.WondolleckandStevenL.Yaffee,MakingCollaborationWork:LessonsfromInnovationinNaturalResourcesManagement(2000):47-68.

5. WilliamClark,AdaptiveManagement:HealThyself(Environment2002);1page.

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Usingthecasestudy“Land-UsePlanningInSweetwaterCounty:BestPracticesForCommonImplementationProblems,”examinesomeofthecommonproblemsrelatedtoimplementingnegotiatedagreements.Reviewtheproblemsandstrategiesidentifiedinreadings2-4listedabove.

2. Onechallengecommontomost,ifnotall,naturalresourcepolicyandconflictresolutionishowtomakedecisionsinthefaceofuncertainty–scientific,political,institutional,andsoon.Therealityisthatwemakedecisionseverydaybasedonincompleteknowledgeandinformation.

a. Explainthedimensionsofthisproblemassuggestedbythereadings.b. Whiletheideaofadaptivemanagementmakesalotofsense,whyisitso

difficulttoimplementinpractice?c. Whatarethekeyingredientstoeffectiveadaptivemanagementinpractice?

August2017 Page21

13.TOWARDMOREEFFECTIVEGOVERNANCEWhiletheuseofcollaborationisoftenchallenging,thirtyyearsoftheoryandpracticesuggestthatitmaybepossibletoimprovegovernancebymovingbeyondtheuseofcollaborationtoaddresssingleissuesonanadhocbasis,todesigningsystemsthatcanrespondtothe“streamofdisputes”thatcharacterizenaturalresource,environmental,andotherpublicpolicyconflict.Thissessionwillreviewprogressinreformingsystemsofgovernance,andexplorewhethercollaborationsuggestsanewformofdemocracy.Wewillalsoexaminehowtheemergingideaseofcollectiveimpactandnetworkgovernancemayimprovegovernance.DanielKemmis,anationallyrecognizedauthorandspeaker,willjoinusforthissession.

Readings

1. DanielKemmis,ThisSovereignLand:ANewVisionforGoverningtheWest(2001):128-142(seereadinginSession5).

2. JuliaM.Wondolleck,ACrackintheFoundation?RevisitingECR’sVoluntaryTenet,ConflictResolutionQuarterly(2010):5selectedpages.

3. DanielKemmisandMatthewMcKinney,CollaborationandtheEcologyofDemocracy,KetteringFoundation(2011).

4. JohnKaniaandMarkKramer,CollectiveImpact,StanfordSocialInnovationReview(2011):36-41.

5. LynnScarlettandMatthewMcKinney,ConnectingPeopleandPlaces:TheEmergingRoleofNetworkGovernanceinLargeLandscapeConservation(2016).

QuestionsandDiscussion

1. Howhasnegotiationandcollaborationbeenintegratedintonaturalresourcedecision-makingoverthepast20-25years?Howdoesthetheoryofdisputesystemsdesignsupportthistrend?Whataresomeoftheconcernsordrawbackstothistrend(seeWondelleckandKemmis)?

2. How,ifatall,doesthetheoryandpracticeofcollaboration,particularlytheorganicemergenceofcommunity-basedcollaboration,suggestanewpoliticaltheory?Whatarethepracticalimplicationsofthistheorytonaturalresourcepolicyandconflictresolution?

3. Inadditiontocollaboration,severalothermodelsofproblem-solving,socialchange,andgovernancehaveemergedduringthepastdecadethatmayimprovetheeffectivenessofnaturalresourcespolicy,conflictresolution,andgovernance.

a. Howarethetheoriesandpracticesofcollectiveimpactandnetworkgovernancesimilartoanddifferentfromcollaboration?

b. Whataretheimplicationsofallthesemodelstoleadership?Inotherwords,whattypeofleadersdoweneedtoshapewise,durablesolutionstonaturalresourceproblems?