Abstract
For decades, natural resource agencies in the United States have attempted to restore ecosystems using adaptive management, a process that emphasizes experimental learning to reduce uncertainty. Most studies show that it rarely occurs in practice and explain implementation failures as organizational issues. This study draws on policy implementation theory to suggest that behaviors and attitudes of individuals may better explain implementation gaps. This comparative case study finds differences between experts implementing adaptive management in the Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Geological Survey. These include differences in attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors aimed at promoting individual autonomy, performance standards, and defending individual interests on the job. Policy implications are twofold: first, that individual behaviors impact adaptive management implementation and intrinsic motivation to perform such functions. Second, regardless of agency, experts view their work as a social good. This suggests that a devolved planning process may remedy implementation obstacles.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.