Abstract
This article examines the mandate reputation of the Endangered Species Act in its implementation context. Federal wildlife funding programs and laws are treated as messages to state wildlife agencies, and variety among state environmental conditions and agency management decisions shape the interpretation of federal messages. Innovations in planning for habitat protection in state, coastal zone, and county land use are treated as adaptations to the difficulties of conventional implementation. The Endangered Species Act's significance as a federal mandate is found to be questionable. The federal role as a regulator of endangered species protection is argued to be legitimate, but flexibility and collaboration with state and local interests in wildlife planning are also called for.
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 callMore From: Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management
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.
