Tribal-Federal Collaboration in Resource Management

Abstract

The increase in collaborative projects involving American Indian tribes and natural resource management agencies in the United States reflects two emergent trends: 1) the use of collaborative approaches between agencies and groups in managing natural resources; and 2) the concurrent increased recognition of American Indian rights, institutionalization of consultation processes, and a general movement of Indian self-determination. This article focuses on institutional mechanisms that bring together tribes and natural resource management agencies in collaborative processes to achieve mutually desired resource management objectives. Using qualitative analysis of data from ten collaborative projects across the United States, we identify attributes of collaborative arrangements emerging from tribal–federal collaboration: decision-making authority; transfer of funds from agency to the tribe(s); the level of mutual dependency; the sharing or transfer of various forms of knowledge, including scientific and cultural; and responsibility for conducting management field work. Examining the similarities and differences across the attributes, we characterize the projects into five types (co-management, contractual, cooperative, working relationship, and conservation easement), and find that considerable variation exists in the forms and functions of tribal–federal collaborative arrangements. We explore two types of collaborative arrangements in more depth to better understand what factors influence the integration of traditional ecological knowledge. Comparing gray wolf (Canis lupus) recovery in Idaho and forest restoration in northern California, we find that traditional ecological knowledge was a key factor in initiating both collaborative projects, but also that the application of traditional ecological knowledge on-the-ground differed. Donoghue et al. / Tribal–Federal Collaboration Forests (Lesko and Thakali 2001), the Navajo hogan project (KenCairn 2002), and Yakama Nation huckleberry management on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest (Fisher 1997). Contracts, memoranda of understanding, and partnership agreements define the collaborative processes and rules for many types of natural resource projects. Although mechanisms provide structure to collaboration, many aspects of stakeholder participation are not formally defined, including how mutual objectives are identified, how information is shared, how work is done on-the-ground, how financial and human resources are used, and how knowledge is respected, shared and transferred. Norms and culture shape the roles and responsibilities of participants in collaborative processes. Resource management agencies have rules and procedures and a culture of management; American Indians have distinct norms, beliefs, values and traditions related to the environment and resource management. Although there are many definitions and forms of traditional ecological knowledge, for many American Indian tribes, traditional ecological knowledge is the reflection of cultural norms and practices that influence how tribal members steward and coexist in natural environments. Traditional ecological knowledge is important in collaborative arrangements because it brings other forms of knowledge and practice to solve resource management problems, and creates opportunities for mutual learning and building respect for different ways of knowing. Given that these collaborative arrangements tend to explicitly define roles and responsibilities, this research asks the question to what extent do formal institutions, such as contracts and partnership agreements, limit or facilitate the integration of traditional ecological knowledge in collaborative resource management projects? And, does this vary depending on the type of institutional arrangement that governs the col-