From the Forest to the Sea: Lessons in Managing Public Space Morgan Gopnik, Ph.D. Open Channels/EBM Tools Network Webinar March 18, 2015 From the Forest to the Sea: Lessons in Managing Public Space Morgan Gopnik, Ph.D. Open Channels/EBM Tools Network Webinar March 18, 2015

“Congress, working with the National Ocean Council, … should establish a balanced, ecosystem-based, offshore management regime that sets forth guiding principles for the coordination of offshore activities …” USCOP 2004

“ecosystem-based” “efficient” “coordinated” “integrated” “consistent” “comprehensive”

Sunnyside, WA North Sea Belgian Marine Spatial Plan Belgium

U.S. EEZ (4 million sq. mi.) U.S. Public Lands (1 million sq.mi.)

Can ocean managers learn from public land managers?

Forest-ocean timeline Forest Reserve Act Forest Service Multiple Use Act Wilderness Act Forest Planning Act Truman Proclamation Exec. Order for MSP 200-mile EEZ Marine Sanctuaries Act NOAA Forest Ocean

“[The] demand for use of resources is becoming intense and there is little doubt that demands will continue to grow… forest resources are not adequate to fully satisfy these individual desires for space.” Forest Service, 1963 Echoes of ocean policy?

“[Ecosystem management] would impose constraints upon single purpose approaches to the [land], and would arouse hostility among individuals whose single purpose pursuits would thereby be constrained.” Caldwell, 1970 Echoes of ocean policy?

Question #1 Is the EEZ like a national forest, in a meaningful, policy- relevant sense? Question #2 Has over a hundred years of forest management produced any “lessons for success,” particularly with respect to multiple-use planning and management? Question #3 How might forest-based lessons be used to improve MSP implementation?

= ? ≠ =

Understanding policy elements Source: Sabatier and Weible 2005 Source: Ostrom 2005

Similarities between national forests and the EEZ Transition from laissez-faire to state management Stressed, but intact and diverse ecosystems that transcend political boundaries Similar bundles of goods and services Public-trust responsibilities Overlapping laws and agencies Multiple-use mandates and resulting conflicts Divergent local and national interests Evolving ecological and social understanding

Research methods Document review government records, reports, and regulations academic, legal, and popular writings Confidential interviews 82 forest & ocean users, scholars, and managers Thematic analysis of transcripts Case studies site visits to National Forests met with agency staff, loggers, ENGOs, and community members Willamette NF, OR Siuslaw NF, OR Croatan NF, NC

Balancing competing goals Scale of solutions National Local Public trust duty Broad representation Large ecosystem scale Local knowledge Community engagement Better monitoring and enforcement

Balancing competing goals Degree of uniformity Standardized Flexible Certainty Consistency Sets a “floor” Context specific Adaptive Innovative

Balancing competing goals Style of decisionmaking Can adapt Objective Science-based Collaborative Technocratic Political Judicial Representative Legitimate Stable Seeks compromise Builds trust Less adversarial Independent Respected Weight of law

What this all means for MSP in the U.S. Lessons for: Congress The NOC and federal agencies The RPBs and states The Courts Stakeholders The research community

“… planning has been controversial. Some … have argued that the process is too technical and expensive … [But] it creates valuable inventories, offers the potential of engaging the public, … and holds out the promise of creating ordered and principled decisionmaking.” Wilkinson, 1987, on Forest Service planning Then or now?

Questions? For further info: