Abstract
Conflict is an inherent component of natural resource management decisions in the USA and many other countries of the world. The diversity of potential uses creates a situation where individual preferences result in the need for compromise positions and coalition formation so that the natural resources can be managed. This paper demonstrates the contribution that cooperative and non-cooperative voting models can make in understanding the potential for conflict and the incentives for individuals to form coalitions. By modelling both collaborative and non-collaborative public involvement procedures, we gain insights from the differences in solutions, the implications for stability of the alternatives and the impact of the institutional power of the USDA Forest Service. The models are applied to the case of public lands management in the Shoshone National Forest.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
