|
Literature Cited |
Broadening
Participation in Biological Monitoring: |
|
This discussion paper reviews participatory approaches to monitoring environmental change. It draws on published literature, interviews with practitioners, and the practical experiences of a research project on participatory monitoring of sustainable agriculture in Brazil. This project sought to develop a viable and relevant monitoring process with farmers, farmers unions, and NGOs to help assess the social and environmental impacts of their efforts in developing more sustainable forms of agriculture. This publication provides practical examples that can be drawn upon to support or refute claims regarding Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation.
Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program. 2002.
Program design. Washington, DC. This document provides an organizational overview of one of the most complex multi-state, multi-stakeholder collaborative monitoring program in the United States that relies on data collectors whose economic interest is a stake. This is one of many documents available on their website and provides a useful example of how to accommodate potentially conflicting interests and still obtain credible data.
Adler,
Peter S.; Birkhoff, Juliana E. [N.d.].
Building trust: when knowledge from “here” meets knowledge from
“away”. Portland, OR: The National Policy Consensus Center. Although brief, this report is a concise, cogent overview of how to build trust among diverse participants. It addresses the perspectives, attitudes, concerns, suspicions, and communication styles of several major categories of likely collaborators, focusing especially on the role of traditional and Native American knowledge. Points are summarized in logical, easy to understand tables. It discusses 20 “tips, tools, and trust-building strategies”.
Baker,
Nell. 2001.
Developing needs-based inventory methods for non-timber forest
products: application and development of current research to identify
practical solutions for developing countries. [Report on workshop
organized by the European Tropical Forest Research Network, 4-5 May
2000. FAO, Rome, Italy]. London: United Kingdom Department for
International Development (DFID). 95 p. This report summarizes presentations given and concerns expressed at the FAO workshop so titled. As such it is less information rich than Wong (2000), but the views and opinions informed the final FAO publication (Wong and others 2001).
Balcazar, Fabricio E.; Keys, Christopher B.; Kaplan, Daniel L.
[and others]. 1998.
Participatory action research and people with disabilities: principles
and challenges. Canadian Journal of Rehabilitation. 12(2). The benefits of participation are not unique to biological monitoring. This paper outlines the advantages of involving individuals with disabilities in research programs designed to help them improve their lives. Though not specific to biological monitoring, this article underscores the common benefits that can accrue from the participation of key stakeholders in any research or monitoring program. Ballard, Heidi L. 2004. Impacts of harvesting salal (Gaultheria shallon) on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington: harvester knowledge, science, and participation. Berkeley, CA: University of California. 213 p. Ph.D. dissertation. This dissertation describes a participatory experiment focused on sustainable harvesting of a non-timber forest product (salal) in Mason County, Washington. Importantly it documents how the local ecological knowledge of the primarily immigrant Latino harvesters can be incorporated into a research project. Chapter 3 reports experimental methods and project results, including notes about how harvesters contributed to design, data collection and interpretation of results. Chapter 4 provides a literature review of how local ecological knowledge can be integrated with conventional scientific knowledge for adaptive management and scientific research. Chapter 5 includes a more general literature review on the topic of participatory research and then compares in detail the steps, challenges, and successes of conducting participatory research with both the salal harvesters and a Native American tribe on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington.
Ballard, Heidi; Kraetsch,
Ralph; Huntsinger, Lynn. 2002.
Collaborative monitoring in Walnut Creek, California. In: Sandiford,
R.B.; McCreary, D.; Purcell, K.L., eds. Proceedings of the fifth
symposium on oak woodlands: oaks in California’s changing landscape,
22-25 October 2001. PSW-GTR-184. San Diego, California: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research
Station: 617-624. This case study of a collaborative monitoring project illustrates the substantial synergistic benefits that can accrue when each collaborating stakeholder group has a unique set of competencies that address the needs and constraints of others. Balmford, Andrew; Bennun, Leon; Brink, Benten [and others]. 2005. The convention on biological diversity's 2010 target. Science. 307: 212-213. This recent article discusses progress and needed action for a global approach to biodiversity conservation through the tracking of indicators. Behar, Sharon. 1996. Building a sustainable organization. Promoting watershed stewardship, Fifth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference, 3-7 August 1996, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. EPA 841-R-97-007. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency: 3 p. The findings from this workshop summary conclude that what helps collaborative projects persists over time are: strong programs with a clear focus, strategic and regular multiple-stakeholder planning, active people and leadership, an effective governing body, diverse fundraising efforts, transparent financial management, clear communication and a “learning” environment, and community networking and visibility.
Berg,
Joy; Bradshaw, Bill; Carbone, Joe [and others]. 1998.
Decision Protocol: roadmap to the US Forest Service Decision Protocol
Version 2.0. November 12, 1998. Washington, DC: Ecosystem Management
Coordination, US Department of Agriculture Forest Service. This online document was designed by U.S. Forest Service staff to introduce teams to systematic processes for making and documenting their decisions. It is based on the principles of decision-making science (for instance, Schmoldt and others 2001), but compared to other systems, it results in a more structured approach for strategic, long-term decisions, and a quicker, more intuitive approach when decisions are routine or already clearly structured. It consists of sets of questions that elicit clarity, consistency, completeness, and efficiency of effort. The questions are divided into five cycles called: I. Process (agreement on the decision process), II. Problem (description of problem, goals, information available, elements of uncertainty, and needed information), III. Design (development of alternative proposals), IV. Consequences (description of anticipated consequences of each alternative), and V. Action (documenting the rationale for alternative selection and an implementation plan. Adaptable to diverse stakeholders, this protocol seeks to accurately describe the problem and the criteria for solving it; use available information effectively; collect new information wisely; generate and choose from a wide range of alternatives; distinguish facts, myths, values, and unknowns; describe consequences associated with alternative problem solutions; and lead to choices that are consistent with personal, organizational, stakeholder, or other important values. Bliss, John; Aplet, Greg; Hartzell, Cate [and others]. 2001. Community-based ecosystem monitoring. In: Gray, G.J.; Enzer, M.J.; Kusel, J., eds. Understanding community-based forest ecosystem management. New York: The Hawthorn Press: 143-167. This book chapter provides a comprehensive overview of lessons-learned regarding the challenges and benefits of multi-stakeholder community monitoring of local ecosystems. It is especially relevant for managers or participants who are in the process of selecting monitoring goals and evaluating the potential usefulness of a collaborative approach. A number of brief case examples are provided to illustrate monitoring goals, monitoring methods, and selection of participants. Brechin, Steven R.; Wilshusen, Peter R.; Fortwangler, Crystal L. [and others]. 2002. Beyond the square wheel: toward a more comprehensive understanding of biodiversity conservation as social and political process. Society and Natural Resources. 15: 41-64. This article provides a critical analysis of the importance of involving people and social justice issues in international strategies to conserve biodiversity. Bramson, Robert M. 1981. Coping with difficult people. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press. 226 p. This book provides suggestions for dealing effectively with aggressive, complaining, unresponsive, overly-nice, negative, know-it-all, or indecisive personality types. Brinkman, Rick. 2002. Dealing with people you can't stand: how to bring out the best in people at their worst. Revised and updated edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. 226 p. This easy to read and comprehensive book begins by analyzing modes of behavior that interfere with group process. It explains typical motives and how to overcome these behavioral obstacles with skillful communication and bringing out the best in people at their worst. It concludes with a section on clear communication in the electronic age. Well illustrated with diagrams, bullet lists, and examples, it provides win-win avenues for overcoming difficulties with individuals who are interfering with group processes.
Canadian Information System
for the Environment. 2001.
Sharing environmental decisions: final report of the Task Force on a
Canadian Information System for the Environment. Hull, QC. 48 p. This report is similar to the Voluntary Sector Initiative accords (Voluntary Sector Initiative 2001, 2002a, 2002b) in that it is an overview of a program and agreed-upon accords, but it differs in that the focus is on a clearinghouse for environmental data. The report provides reasons for sharing information, a description of the system and its implementation, the role of multiple stakeholders (in particular Aboriginal peoples), expected benefits, and a few examples of early projects. Topics discussed include: multiple stakeholder participation and benefits, feedback on priorities, integration of diverse data, credibility and neutrality of data, common standards, and identifying gaps in needed information. It also discusses mutual principles of cooperation and making the information available and useful to policy makers.
Christoffersen, Nils D. 2003.
Rural community realignment with adjacent public lands: the case of
Wallowa Resources. Turning Natural Resources into Assets Strong
Communities – Sustained Livelihoods – Restored Environments, Savannah,
Georgia, 14-17 October 2003. Unpublished document. On file with:
Wallowa
Resources, P.O. Box 274, 200 W. North St., Enterprise, OR 97828. 13 p. This paper describes a case study in participatory resource management. It is an example of a neutral organization facilitating collaborative planning and action in a contentious management context characterized by declining resource-related employment, critical ecological concerns, and legislative mandates. It illustrates relationship-building starting with small-scale and non-controversial projects that lead to broader community and stakeholder involvement in solving larger, more contentious issues. Inclusiveness, a transparent process, fund-raising, leadership, and organizational policies that support collaborative solutions are identified as critical components to an effective program.
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2003.
Multiparty monitoring and assessment guidelines for community based
forest restoration in southwestern ponderosa pine forests.
Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southwest Region, State and Private Forestry. 94 p. This report is a result of the joint effort of forty-three individuals. They included community forest restoration practitioners and specialists from six organizations: the USDA Forest Service - Collaborative Forest Restoration Program, the National Forest Foundation, the Ecological Restoration Institute, the Four Corners Institute, the Pinchot Institute for Conservation and the Forest Trust. The team came together to address lack of monitoring guidance specific to forest restoration projects, especially in the Southwest United States. A collaborative effort itself, the manual begins with recommendations on organizing collaborative monitoring programs and then provides guidance on monitoring activities specific to both ecosystem and socioeconomic monitoring.
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2004a.
Handbook 1 – What is multiparty monitoring? The multiparty monitoring
handbook series. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Southwest Region, State and Private Forestry. 13 p. This series of handbooks (Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2004a-e) was conceived during several workshops in 2003 and builds on the initial multiparty monitoring report (Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003). Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (2004a-c) provide more extensive information on organizing a multiparty collaborative monitoring program, while Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (2004d,e) provide additional detail on monitoring ecological and socioeconomic goals and indicators. Although the program was designed around forest restoration in the southwest, many of the principles have broad applicability.
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2004b.
Handbook 2 – Developing a multiparty monitoring plan. The
multiparty monitoring handbook series. Albuquerque, NM: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwest Region, State and
Private Forestry. 13 p. (See Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003, 2004a)
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2004c.
Handbook 3 – Creative budgeting for monitoring projects. The
multiparty monitoring handbook series. Albuquerque, NM: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwest Region, State and
Private Forestry. 17 p. (See Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003, 2004a)
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2004d.
Handbook 4 – Monitoring Ecological Effects. The multiparty monitoring
handbook series. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Southwest Region, State and Private Forestry. 71 p. (See Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003, 2004a)
Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. 2004e.
Handbook 5 – Monitoring Social and Economic Effects of Forest
Restoration. The multiparty monitoring handbook series. Albuquerque,
NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwest Region,
State and Private Forestry. 35 p. (See Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003, 2004a)
Collaborative
Stewardship Team. 2000.
Collaborative stewardship within the Forest Service: findings and
recommendations from the National Collaborative Stewardship team.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Partnership Resource Center. 62 p. This document reflects the movement on the part of the US Forest Service to expand and improve its collaborative partnerships in resource management. It reports findings and recommendations from focus group sessions held around the country to clarify its collaborative stewardship vision, identify barriers and incentives to collaboration, report on the state of such collaborations within the Forest Service, and recommend actions to achieve the programs goals. A key finding is that managers and collaborators close to the resources being managed are ready for support and encouragement of their projects. The introduction summarizes what collaboration is and is not, its basic principles, and opportunities and means for Forest Service leadership in collaborative efforts. Relevant attachments, in the form of checklists of key points, cover key attributes of successful collaborations, negative conditions or “red flags” for collaboration, a continuum of collaborative involvement by partners, lessons learned, barriers and incentives, and proposals for action. Cornwall, A.; Jewkes, R. 1995. What is participatory research? Social Science and Medicine 41 (12): 1667-1676 Dec 1995. This article provides a summary and rationale for participatory research in the fields of public health and medicine, but applies to participatory research in natural resource management as well. It is an academic analysis of participatory research as response to traditional or conventional research, involving local people in the research rather than using them as experimental subjects. It discusses the importance of power in the relationships between researchers and subjects. It also analyzes several participatory research methods and the challenges that accompany these methods.
Coughlin, Chrissy; Hoben, Merrick; Manskopf, Dirk [and others].
1999. A systematic assessment of collaborative resource management
partnerships. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. M.S. Thesis. This thesis is a detailed analysis of collaborative resource management partnerships. It draws extensively on published literature and provides excellent lists of bibliographic references for each topic. It also is based on a number of representative case studies around the nation and interviews with key individuals in those partnerships. Chapters of the thesis that are pertinent to this handbook include topics such as the context and rational for partnerships, critiques of collaboration, reasons for and alternatives to collaboration, ensuring equitable stakeholder representation, accommodating diverse interests, accommodating diverse capabilities, and dealing with scientific issues.
Daly, Carol. [N.d.]a.
The collaboration handbook. Red Lodge Clearinghouse. 40 p. This handbook is a concise, and informative introduction to, and analysis of, the collaborative process as it applies to natural resource management. Its sections cover: (1) evaluating whether collaboration is appropriate to one’s circumstances; (2) selecting and recruiting appropriate participants; (3) how to hold effective meetings; (4) how to plan the collaborative process and organization; (5) gathering financial and non-financial resources; (6) organizational structures and administrative support for increasingly elaborate projects; (7) challenges and problems that could be encountered along the way; (8) and challenges that often crop up as projects mature.
Daly, Carol. [N.d.]b.
The collaboration handbook outline. Helena, MT: Red Lodge
Clearinghouse. 14 p. A condensed outline of The Collaboration Handbook (Daly n.d.a)
Daly, Carol. [N.d.]c.
Frequently asked questions about collaboration. Helena, MT: Red Lodge
Clearinghouse. This list of questions is written for someone who is new to the collaborative process and is in the early stages of judging its usefulness for their purposes. The questions cover a definition of collaboration, the usefulness of collaborative approaches, who to include, means of making decisions, whether the process can be hastened, realistic expectations, and whether the net result will matter.
Dukes,
E. Franklin; Firehock, Karen. 2001.
Collaboration: a guide for environmental advocates. Charlottesville,
VA: University of Virginia, The Wilderness Society, and National
Audubon Society. 72 p. Well-reasoned and clearly written, this comprehensive guide is especially useful for evaluating the usefulness and appropriateness of a collaborative approach. The focus and target audience is broad, but the principles discussed are widely applicable. The authors explain how formal and disciplined the collaborative process should be to ensure success in a variety of circumstances. Additional topics include decision-making, facilitation, legal considerations, special considerations negotiating with tribes, power imbalance among stakeholders, group behavioral norms, dealing with difficult individuals, “good science” issues, monitoring, adaptive management, formal agreements, group process protocols, recording group memory, criteria for evaluating success, and when to end a collaboration. Appendices provide useful checklists and resources for further information.
Dvornich, Karen M.; Tudor, Margaret; Grue, Christian E. 1995.
NatureMapping: Improving management of natural resources through
public education and participation. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 23(4):
609-614. This short article describes the University of Washington’s NatureMapping program which is designed to involve private citizens in biodiversity monitoring through the auspices of a national network.
Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network Coordinating Office
and the Canadian Nature Federation. 2003.
Improving local decision-making through community based monitoring:
toward a Canadian Community Monitoring Network. Ottawa, ON. 22 p. This short colorful pamphlet provides an overview of the Canadian Community Monitoring Network, how it works, and its benefits. The chart on page 14 provides a summary of community participation, participation assessment, capacity building, and information handling. Page 19 summarizes lessons learned along the way and page 20 lists critical success factors. It is especially useful for broad-scale participatory monitoring programs that coordinate many individual projects. Elzinga, Caryl L.; Salzer, Daniel W.; Willoughby, John W. [and others]. 2001. Monitoring plant and animal populations. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science, Inc. 360 p. This manual is a comprehensive and current overview of sampling design, statistical considerations, and field methods for monitoring plant and animal populations. The statistical discussion is written for practitioners facing the unique challenges of monitoring these organisms in their natural environment. It is likely to be most useful to project managers, students, or skilled participants; and less so to professional statisticians. Engel, Sarah R.; Voshell Jr., J. Reese. 2002. Volunteer biological monitoring: can it accurately assess the ecological condition of streams? American Entomologist. 48(3): 164-177. This article reports a meticulous research project to ascertain whether volunteer-collected water quality data provided information that was as good as that collected by professionals. After adjusting the standard procedures for comparability, the study demonstrated that volunteer programs can provide equally reliable information but that every sampling protocol must be validated by standard quantitative methods. Everett, Yvonne. 2001. Participatory research for adaptive ecosystem management: a case of nontimber forest products. In: Gray, G.J.; Enzer, M.J.; Kusel, J., eds. Understanding community-based forest ecosystem management. New York: The Hawthorn Press: 335-357. This article details one case example of participatory research and management focused on the harvesting of nontimber forest products in northern California and provides an analysis of important considerations and lessons-learned. Topics related to this handbook include institutional frameworks, coordinating the participatory process with specific participants, initiating the collaborative process, identifying problems, developing goals, defining research questions, documenting and disseminating information, learning by example, and communication among collaborators and agencies. Lessons included the need to involve more stakeholders, improved relations that resulted, limits to participant resources, the effort and resources needed to build community capacity, and the foundation laid for future collaborative efforts.
Federal Data Quality
Legislation. 2001.
P.L. 106-554, Section 515. Federal legislation that requires affected agencies to issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the information they obtain and use, and to establish administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information that affects them.
Forest Inventory and
Analysis. [N.d.].
Forest inventory and analysis: quality assurance. Program fact sheets.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, FIA
National Program Office. 2 p. This short fact sheet provides an overview of how the nation-wide FIA federal forest monitoring program addresses quality assurance concerns. Godfrey, Paul J. 1994. Report on the regional conference. Shared water & common goals: enhancing partnerships in water quality monitoring and decision-making, Bedford, New Hampshire, 2 November 1993. Amherst, MA: Water Resources Research Center, University of Massachusetts. 28 p. The conference summarized by this document entailed a broad array of stakeholder representatives convening to address the barriers that continue to confront citizen monitoring of water quality in many states. Barrier identification and ranking was conducted by the stakeholder groups - universities, federal agencies, state agencies, local governments, the private sector, and citizen monitoring coordinators – and then the results were combined. Subsequently the participants divided into breakout groups of mixed affiliation and geographic coverage to devise recommended solutions to the most important perceived barriers: standardization of methods, quality assurance and control, lack of clarity and focus on missions and policy, funding challenges, credibility and trust, lack of community support, need for technical support and expertise, lack of long-term commitment by volunteers, and fear of regulatory reprisals from poor data or inappropriate use of results. The details documented for each working group provide a succinct overview of concerns about collaborative monitoring from a variety of perspectives.
Guijt,
Irene; Arevalo, Mae; Saladores, Kiko. 1998.
Tracking change together. Participatory Learning and Action (PLA
Notes). Special Issue: Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (31):
28-36. Much of the work conducted by the International Institute for Environment and Development and reported in its newsletter series PLA notes focuses on international development issues and case studies. This particular special topic issue examines the diverse motivations for participating in collaborative monitoring and the factors that enhance the probability of successful programs. Examples of factors influencing participation include perceived benefits, relevance, quick feedback, flexibility, effective organization, meeting short-term needs, and local history. Examples of factors that enhance success include decentralized and democratic decision making, openness to new approaches, skills in conflict resolution, empowerment, community awareness, learning from positive examples, sufficient time, and prompt feedback.
Hanson, Steve. [N.d.]b.
Volunteer monitoring quality assurance project plan review checklist.
Portland, OR: State of Oregon Department of Environmental Qualiity. 8
p. Similar to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2001b) this also is a water quality monitoring assurance plan evaluation form. Unlike the former checklist, however, it is a bit more focused on activity elements and details than policy and process elements. Used together, these two checklists provide good examples for designing a customized quality assurance evaluation checklist for a specific monitoring project. Herman, Joan; Lyons Morris, Lynn; Fitz-Gibbon, Carol T. 1997. Evaluator’s Handbook. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California. 160 p. This volume is the core of the Program Evaluation Kit from the Center for the Study of Evaluation, and provides a broad overview of evaluation planning as well as a guide to designing and managing programs in general (not specific to natural resource management). It describes how to design evaluations during and at the end of a project for both qualitative and quantitative approaches to evaluation. Monitoring and evaluation of ongoing projects is emphasized.
Herron, Elizabeth; Green, Linda ; Stepenuck, Kris [and others].
2004a. Factsheet V: Training volunteer water quality monitors
effectively. Washington, DC: National Facilitation of Cooperative
State Research Education Extension Service (C.S.R.E.E.S.) Volunteer
Monitoring Efforts. 12 p. This fact sheet provides a succinct overview of general considerations regarding training volunteers. It emphasizes that training is an on-going process and addresses group versus individual training, elements of a conducive learning environment, tips for successful orientation of new volunteers, the importance of a monitoring manual for reference to standard procedures, and considerations pertinent to field training. It notes the importance of scheduling training carefully, avoiding information overload, using experts as instructors, and providing quick feedback when the volunteer first puts their new skills to use.
Herron, Elizabeth;
Green, Linda ; Stepenuck, Kris [and others]. 2004b. Factsheet VI: Building credibility, quality assurance and
quality control for volunteer monitoring programs. Washington, DC:
National Facilitation of Cooperative State Research Education
Extension Service (C.S.R.E.E.S.) Volunteer Monitoring Efforts. 14 p. This fact sheet provides a succinct overview of general considerations regarding the credibility of volunteer-collected data for water quality monitoring programs. Although some of the information is specific to this monitoring purpose, it provides a cogent overview of the essential elements required to ensure the data is well documented and defensible. By dividing the process into three phases (quality assurance planning, quality control procedures, and quality assessment reviews), it documents the steps and components required to improve the probability that participatory monitoring data is trusted and used. Sub-topics addressed in these three phases include: (1) study design, a quality assurance plan, training programs and materials, (2) training, monitoring manuals, standard operating procedures, documenting changes, proficiency testing, (3) data proofing and review, independent evaluation, reconciling data with objectives, and revising procedures as needed. A continuum of rigor, depending on intended use of data, also is described. Hilty, Jody; Merenlender, Adina. 2000. Faunal indicator taxa selection for monitoring ecosystem health. Biological Conservation. 92 (2000): 185-197. This article reviews the scientific literature on using animal species as indicators of ecosystem health, specifically focusing on the criteria used to select species. They propose a step-wise selection process for selecting indicators. They point out that many faunal indicators suggested by scientists actually lack correlations to ecosystem changes and make recommendations for choosing appropriate indicators that could be useful for monitoring projects.
Hunt,
Margo; Mayio, Alice; Brossman, Martin [and others]. 1996.
The volunteer monitor's guide to quality assurance project plans. EPA
841-B-96-003. Washington, DC: Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and
Watersheds, United States Environmental Protection Agency. 67 p. Although this guide is written specifically for water quality monitoring by volunteers, it provides a thorough explanation of many key concepts. For instance, it defines precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability as they apply to data quality. It distinguishes between quality assurance and quality control. It also discusses the chain of documentation needed to ensure and demonstrate attention to quality throughout the course of a project. In general terms, it examines quality assurance teams and goals, collecting background information, project design, sampling procedures, implementation plans, standard operating procedures, and review, evaluation, and revision of the quality assurance plan. Then it more specifically lists the critical elements of a quality assurance project plan; the major categories are project management, data acquisition, oversight, and data validation and usability. Blank forms for documentation are appended.
Jones, Eric T.; McLain, Rebecca J.; Lynch, Kathryn A. 2004.
The relationship between nontimber forest product management and
biodiversity in the United States. Portland, OR: Institute for Culture
and Ecology. 59 p. This report, conducted for the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF), details a year long survey of nontimber forest product harvesting in several bio-regions of the United States and the effect such activity has on biodiversity. Among its findings are the lack of adequate monitoring and potential usefulness of involving harvesters in participatory monitoring. This recommendation is elaborated upon in Lynch and others (2004) below. Justice, Thomas; Jamieson, David W. 1999. The facilitator's fieldbook: step-by-step procedures, checklists and guidelines, samples and templates. Amherst, MA: (American Management Association) HRD Press, Inc. 455 p. This book provides an in-depth implementation manual that is divided into four sections: preparation, working with the group, follow-up, and special meetings. The preparation section discusses organizing groups, setting group norms, and planning meetings. The section on working with groups covers getting started right, group memory, group databases, decision modes, handling conflicts and common problems, and evaluation and closure. The section on follow-up talks about meeting records, reviewing recommendations, and implementation planning. The last section, special meetings, covers meetings to plan mission or vision statements, electronic meetings, and technological tools. Kaner, Sam; Lind, Lenny; Toldi, Catherine; Fisk, Sarah; Berger, Duane. 1996. Facilitator's guide to participatory decision-making. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publisher. 255 p. This is a “how-to” book for decision-making in small groups. Although written for helping a facilitator, the information also can be used by participants in the group. The book begins by contrasting participatory and conventional decision-making processes and group dynamics, then continues with methods of facilitation and how to build inclusive and sustainable agreements. It is well illustrated with clear diagrams, case studies, and examples. Kelly, John R.; Harwell, Mark A. 1990. Indicators of ecosystem recovery. Environmental Management 14(5): 527-545. This article addresses the difficulties of assessing the effects of disturbances on ecological systems, and suggests that suites of indicators, rather than single indicators, will be most useful for addressing ecosystem complexity. Specifically focused on ecosystem recovery from human-caused disturbance, the authors suggest that both functional indicators of ecosystem processes, as well as biotic indicators, should be used to assess the early stages of ecosystem recovery. Kerns, B. K.; Liegel, L.; Pilz, D.; Alexander, S. J.. 2002. Biological inventory and monitoring. In: Jones, E.; Mclain, R.; Weigand, J. eds. Non Timber Forest Products in the United States. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas: 237-269. Nontimber forest product monitoring is one monitoring goal that rivals biodiversity monitoring in its complexity, not only because there are multiple species involved, but because there are many stakeholders, some with vested economic interests. This book chapter provides an overview of monitoring approaches and considerations and illustrates the point that the greater the complexity of a monitoring program, the more useful it is to invest time in selecting appropriate monitoring goals, designs, and methods, (including collaboration).
Krishnaswamy, Ajit. 2004.
Participatory
research: strategies and tools. Practitioner: Newsletter of the
National Network of Forest Practitioners. 22: 17-22. This article provides an overview of strategies and tools that have been integral to successful participatory research projects in developing countries where there is a longer history of such programs. It emphasizes cultural context, clarity of purpose and goals, identifying and involving key stakeholders, means of building trust and common understanding, and evaluating alternative research and management alternatives.
Kusel, Jonathan; Williams, Lee; Keith, Diana [and others]. 2000. A report on all-party monitoring and lessons learned from the
pilot projects. Technical Report 101-2000. Taylorsville, CA: Forest
Community Research. 27 p. This report summarizes work and lessons learned by the Lead Partnership Group, a consortium of northern California and southern Oregon community-based organizations focused on improving forest health and community wellbeing. It details an all-party monitoring project sponsored by the Surdna Foundation and facilitated by Forest Community Research (FCR) to examine ways to broaden the range of stakeholders in collaborative monitoring and forest management projects. By coordinating and evaluating three regional pilot projects, FCR derived lessons-learned and recommendations for enhancing such collaborations in land management contexts that are at times contentious. Lessons and recommendations address the importance of common goals; working with the varied motivations of the diverse stakeholders; issues of data consistency, ownership, and access; the larger institutional context of collaborations; agency barriers; definitions of science and knowledge; and benefits of collaboration that transcend forest management.
Lawrence, Anna. 2003.
The unmeasurable whole: assessing forest biodiversity with multiple
stakeholders. XII World Forestry Conference, 21–28 September 2003,
Québec City, Canada. Québec City, QC: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. This paper analyses the challenges of deriving meaningful large-scale biodiversity assessments from diverse participatory monitoring projects with differing goals and motivation. It examines the types of information needed at different scales and by various interest groups, how to retain flexibility in methods while combining results and interpretations, and the process of collaboration between multiple participatory projects to synthesize their results.
Lawrence, Anna;
Ambrose-Oji, Bianca. 2001.
Participatory assessment, monitoring and evaluation of biodiversity:
the art and the science. A background paper for the ETFRN workshop on
participatory monitoring and evaluation of biodiversity (PAMEB).
Oxford, UK: Environmental Change Institute. 24 p.
This background paper approaches biodiversity assessment from
a global perspective in light of the recommendations of the Convention
on Biological Diversity. It focuses on the role that local
participatory assessments of species diversity can play in
simultaneously addressing the needs and concerns of local participants
while providing information that is useful in ecosystem analyses of
biodiversity. A variety of participatory methodologies and approaches
are examined asking who is doing what, how, and why. Involving
institutions in facilitating communication, meeting local needs,
enhancing areas of mutual understanding and building local capacity
are discussed as means to address the huge task of assessing
biodiversity.
Lengeler, Jane Carter [N.d.].
Theme 2: Participatory approaches to forest management. In: Earthwatch
Institute. Local people's participation in forest resource assessment:
a review of field experience. Oxford, UK: Earthwatch Institute. This on-line document reports an analysis of seven participatory forest resource assessment projects in developing countries and lessons learned including “the need to recognise local people's strengths and weaknesses; to build on local knowledge; to take particular care in species identification; to conduct data collection in a systematic, planned manner; to apply statistical rigour; and to conduct appropriate training”. It emphasizes the need for expert consultation in statistical considerations and rigor in procedures and documentation, but notes no inherent conflict between these needs and participatory approaches. Liegel, Leon H.; Pilz, David; Love, Thomas; Jones, Eric T. 1998. Integrating biological, socioeconomic, and managerial methods and results in the MAB mushroom study. In: Liegel, L.H. compiler. The biological, socioeconomic, and managerial aspects of chanterelle mushroom harvesting: The Olympic Peninsula, Washington State, U.S.A. AMBIO, A Journal of the Human Environment. Special Report Number 9, September, 1998. Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences: 26-33. This article summarizes lessons learned from a collaborative research program involving several private and public land management organizations, several universities, commercial mushroom harvesters, and mycology club volunteers. It is an example of how involvement of diverse stakeholders can provide a more inclusive and complete analysis of a resource management issue that crosses boundaries of geographic scales, land ownerships, forest types, management philosophies, economic interests, livelihoods, cultures, and scientific disciplines. Lindenmayer, D.B. 1999. Future directions for biodiversity conservation in managed forests: indicator species, impact studies and monitoring programs. Forest Ecology and Management. 115: 277-287. This journal article analyzes approaches to monitoring and management of biodiversity in forested landscapes. Topics include the usefulness of indicator species; studies of management impacts on forest biodiversity; stand, landscape, and regional approaches to conserving diversity; and needed changes in institutional support of long-term monitoring, research, and management. Collaboration between scientists and managers is mentioned, but not working with other stakeholders. Lovejoy, Thomas E. 1997. Biodiversity: what is it? In: Reaka-Kudla, M.L.; Wilson, D.E.; Wilson, E.O., eds. Biodiversity II. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press: 7-14. Although there are a variety of excellent books on the topic of biodiversity, this book is a good update on the general topic up to 1997. Starting with an introductory chapter by Thomas Lovejoy who coined the phrase, the book goes on to address patterns of biodiversity in the biosphere, threats to biodiversity, understanding and using biodiversity, and practical approaches to its conservation. Lund, H. Gyde (ed.) 1998. IUFRO guidelines for designing multipurpose resource inventories: a project of IUFRO research group 4.02.02. Vienna: International Union of Forestry Research Organizations. 216 p. One approach to reducing monitoring costs is to monitor a variety of resources or attributes in the same program (or during the same field visits). Although promising in some regards, target organisms or attributes typically require different sampling strategies or methods, that might result in less efficient sampling for each particular type of information gathered. Nevertheless, multiple resource sampling is often of interest to community groups involved with collaborative monitoring. Lund discusses the advantages, disadvantages, trade-offs, and opportunities presented by multiple-resource monitoring approach, placing special emphasis on evaluating goals and efficacy. The information and examples are international.
Lynch, Kathryn A. 2004.
Workshop guide and proceedings: harvester participation in inventory
and monitoring of nontimber forest products. Portland, OR: Institute
for Culture and Ecology. 151 p. This report details the results of a series of meetings held with managers, nontimber forest harvesters and interested organizations held as part of a project for the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF) to examine the effects of nontimber forest product harvesting on biodiversity (Jones and others 2004). The focus of the workshops was to examine opportunities for participatory monitoring of these forest resources. Recommendations derived from the workshop, and further consultation with experts, are detailed in Lynch and others (2004). Although this document focuses mainly on the process of inclusive workshops, the results demonstrate the wide interest on the part of many stakeholders in participatory monitoring of biological resources with economic value.
Lynch, Kathryn A.; Jones, Eric T.; McLain, Rebecca J. 2004.
Nontimber forest product inventorying and monitoring in the United
States: rationale and recommendations for a participatory approach.
Portland, OR: Institute for Culture and Ecology. 50 p. The recommendations from this report to the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF) was the impetus for preparing this document “Involving Participants in Biological Monitoring: Guidelines for Scientists and Managers” and the companion curriculum entitled “Training curriculum: participatory biological monitoring guidelines for scientists and managers”. Although the report specifically focused on involving nontimber forest products harvesters in monitoring the commercially valuable species they collected, many of the recommendations apply to all forms of participatory biological monitoring. Specifically with respect to monitoring biodiversity, participants can be motivated by general interest in conserving diversity or by an economic interest in continued sustainable harvest of particular biological resources. Motivation, incentives, and degrees of trust can vary depending on such incentives, but the participatory process has benefits that apply regardless. This report discusses reasons for participatory monitoring, types of participation, as well as barriers, incentives, and benefits of collaboration. Building trust, effective communication among diverse groups, matching effort and process to goals, ensuring data usefulness, and guaranteeing collaborations are mutually worthwhile are emphasized.
McNamara, Carter. [N.d.].
Developing and managing volunteer programs. Free Management Library.
Minneapolis, MN: Authenticity Consulting, LLC. This free information web site provides management system guidance for both nonprofit and for profit organizations. The section on volunteers emphasizes that the appropriate management of volunteers is not much different than employees and provides relevant information for designing a systematic program. Major topics include establishing or modifying volunteer management systems; an on-line tutorial for designing such systems; the role of volunteer managers; staffing analyses; legalities and risk; policies and procedures; jobs and task descriptions; volunteer recruitment, screening, selecting, orienting, training, and supervising; volunteer-staff relations; and assessing volunteer management practices. Numerous related resources are provided. McNeely, Jeffrey A. 1995. Expanding partnerships in conservation. Washington, DC: Island Press. 302p. This book is a compilation of case examples of partnerships with local peoples and communities to enhance management of protected areas (parks, wildlife preserves, wilderness areas, etc.). It does not address participatory monitoring but does summarize some of the benefits of collaboration and strategies for making participatory management work.
Montréal Process
Working Group. 1999.
Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable
management of temperate and boreal forests. 2nd ed. Ottowa,
ON: Montréal Process Liaison Office. The Montréal Process is a multi-national working group formed in Geneva, Switzerland, in June 1994 to develop and implement internationally agreed criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. A criterion is a category of conditions or processes for assessing sustainable forest management. These broad criteria are in turn characterized by a set of related indicators that are monitored periodically to assess change. Indicators are quantitative or qualitative variables which can be measured or described and which, when observed periodically, demonstrate trends. By applying a mutually agreed upon set of criteria and indicators, meta-analyses of trends in forest management can reflect global trends and comparative strategies in sustainable management.
Moote, Ann; Becker,
Dennis (eds.) 2003.
Exploring barriers to collaborative forestry: report from a
workshop held at Hart Prairie, Flagstaff, Arizona. 17–19 September
2003. Flagstaff, AZ: Ecological Restoration Institute. 24 p. This report summarizes the findings of a workshop convened to examine the root causes of frustration and “burnout” that were plaguing some early attempts at collaborative resource management between community groups and federal land management agencies. In short, the identified barriers to successful collaboration included: unrealistic expectations; government policies, procedures and cultures; litigation obstacles, inadequate funding, lack of experience with new contracting procedures, inadequate capacity of community forestry groups, needed local economic development, and lack of resources and commitment to monitoring. Recommendations (targeted to congress, land management agencies, or collaborators as appropriate) are presented for addressing each barrier.
Moote, Ann; Loucks,
Andrea Bedell 2003.
Policy challenges for collaborative forestry: a summary of previous
findings and suggestions. Prepared for: Policy dialogue on
collaborative forestry, Flagstaff, Arizona, September 2003. Flagstaff,
AZ: Ecological Restoration Institute. 13 p. This paper provides a summary of the workshop findings detailed in Moote and Beckner (2003), focusing more on needed federal land management policy changes. Its findings and recommendations are divided into (1) Laws and Policies, (2) Funding Issues, and (3) Agency Culture and Practices. Morrison, Michael L.; Marcot, Bruce G. 1995. An evaluation of resource inventory and monitoring program used in National Forest planning. Environmental Management Vol 19(1): 147-156. This article addresses the issue of multi-resource inventories and monitoring on National Forests, evaluating the structure and use of current inventory and monitoring programs and recommending a framework for gathering data to improve forest planning. Potentially useful to monitoring coordinators is the discussion of spatial and temporal scales in the design of inventory and monitoring programs, ecological indicator selection, sampling bias, and statistical rigor in design.
Moseley,
Cassandra; Wilson, Lisa J. 2002.
Multiparty monitoring for sustainable natural resource management.
Hayfork, CA; Watershed Research and Training Center and Eugene, OR:
Ecosystem Workforce Program, University of Oregon. 13 p. Many federal land management agencies define three types of monitoring to ascertain how well their management strategies and plans are working: implementation, effectiveness, and verification monitoring. This publication addresses effectiveness monitoring, namely, how to monitor the biophysical, social, economic, and administrative impacts of agency involvement in participatory natural resource management programs. For the categories of worker surveys, employment records, resource use, grants and cooperative agreements, and ecological impacts, it provides examples of addressing four monitoring questions: why monitor, what information you need, where to get it, and how to calculate the results. It is a useful guide for analyzing the broader outcomes of the participatory monitoring approach we discuss. Mueller, Gregory M.; Bills, Gerald F.; Foster, Mercedes S., eds. 2004. Biodiversity of fungi: inventory and monitoring methods. New York: Elsevier Academic Press. 777 p. Fungi constitute a large branch on the tree of life and are of immense importance to humans and ecosystems, but they are often overlooked in surveys of biodiversity due to their cryptic nature, the lack of monitoring methods, and limited expertise in identification. Over 90 contributors combined their knowledge to produce this first and comprehensive manual detailing inventory and monitoring methods for all types of fungi. As such, it is a unique and invaluable reference for efforts to include fungi in biodiversity surveys. National Commission on the Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF). 2005. Science, biodiversity, and sustainable forestry: a findings report of the National Commission on the Science of Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF). Washington, DC. 52 p. This report summarized progress to date by the NCSSF, specifically some of their key findings regarding the management of biodiversity and how the Commission is contributing to this aspect of sustainable forestry in the United States. They outline findings in four areas of focus, which are (1) The effectiveness of biodiversity conservation is largely determined by interactions between stand- and landscape-level patterns, (2) Sustaining disturbance dynamics within appropriate ranges sustains biodiversity and ecosystem services, (3) Biodiversity indicators must be matched to land-use objectives, and (4) Sustainable forestry and biodiversity conservation require management that recognizes and adapts to new information, changing environments, and shifting social priorities.
NRCS [N.d.].
Title 360 – Human Resources, Part 428 – National NRCS Volunteer
Services – Earth Team. Unpublished document. On file with:
Natural
Resources Conservation Service, Conservation Communications Staff,
P.O. Box 2890, Washington, DC 20013. This web site (a document is also available for downloading) provides a specific example of a federal agency designing a volunteer management system for incorporating the use of volunteers (see McNamara (n.d.) for a more generic approach). Major topical headings include authorization, program responsibilities, eligibility, volunteer status, documentation and forms, security and financial disclosure, recognition of volunteer services, reporting requirements, and various pertinent exhibits (examples).
North-South
Environmental, Inc. 2004.
Enhancing community based monitoring in Canada: the role of
Environmental Canada. Burlington, ON: Ecological Monitoring and
Assessment Network-Coordinating Office. 30 p. This report was commissioned by the government agency Environmental Canada to explore and analyze the best approaches for interfacing with the voluntary sector to manage collaborative environmental monitoring in Canada. The report is based on meetings and interviews where opinions were solicited regarding expected benefits and anticipated challenges facing such a program. Factors addressed include starting and promoting such programs, funding, monitoring protocols, stakeholder communication, data handling and networking, training needs, capacity building, and recognition of participant contributions. Concerns expressed in the discovery phase included whether long-term commitment was adequate, how to standardize monitoring protocols, whether adequate resources were available, appropriate feedback mechanisms among the participating organizations, the complexity of the issue of sustainability, and lack of trust in the government. The report also elaborates the expected benefits of collaboration and provides an overview of the structure of Canada’s participatory monitoring programs including EMAN and other environmental agencies. Noss, Reed F. 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology Vol. 4, No. 4, Dec. 1990. This article describes a holistic and comprehensive framework for choosing indicators and can be useful for helping collaborators and stakeholders understand the complexity of ecosystems and select indicators for monitoring programs. He suggests that indicators should be chosen from all levels of biological organization, including the regional/landscape, community-ecosystem, population/species, and genetic levels. He then suggests that for each of these levels, indicators be selected for each of the three components of an ecosystem: composition, structure, and function. These levels and components overlap to compose a nested hierarchy and matrix that can be used to specifically address the questions posed by the monitoring project. Noss, Reed F.; Cooperrider, Allen Y. 1994. Saving nature’s legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity [Defenders of Wildlife]. Washington, DC: Island Press. 416 p. This book, written from the perspective of an environmental conservation organization, is a thorough overview of strategies for biodiversity conservation in various ecosystem types of the United States. It analyzes the ecosystem processes creating and changing biodiversity, past examples of conservation strategies, the usefulness of reserves and reserve networks, and the active management of forests, rangelands, and aquatic ecosystems to conserve biodiversity. It concludes with a discussion of monitoring and future directions.
Office of Management
and Budget. 2002.
Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity,
utility, and integrity of information disseminated by federal
agencies; notice; republication. Federal Register. 67(36): 8452-8460. Federal legislation mandates federal agencies to arrange peer review of information they disseminated to the public.
Ottke, Christian; Kristensen, Peter; Maddox, David [and others].
2000. Monitoring for impact: lessons on natural resources
monitoring from 13 NGOs. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. 90
p. This research report provides a comprehensive overview of how to monitor natural resources from the perspective of globally active non-government conservation organizations. It provides detail about the components of monitoring without dwelling on specific circumstances. It emphasizes the importance of focusing on the goals and reasons for monitoring, keeping the program simple and direct, deriving credible bias-free information, and communicating the information for effect. It divides the monitoring process into planning, implementation, evaluation and communicating. In each of these categories it elaborates on more specific steps that constitute an effective monitoring approach. Appendices include additional tools, resources, and example forms. Although oriented towards conservation advocacy, the elements of a complete monitoring program are cogently presented.
Pollard, J.E.; Smith, W.; Palmer, C.E. 1999.
Forest Health Monitoring 1999 plot component quality assurance
implementation plan. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, National Forest Health Monitoring
Program. 66 p. Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) is a national monitoring program that seeks to obtain environmental data that are scientifically defensible and of acceptable quality to achieve the goals of the program. This document builds on current Quality Assurance Project Plans for Detection Monitoring and a Field Methods Manual for standard sampling procedures by providing a unified national approach to quality assessment (review and evaluation of quality assurance plans and quality control methods).
Resolve [N.d.].
US Forest Service: Partnership capacity assessment tool. Washington,
DC: Resolve, Inc. 23 p. This US Forest Service document is the product of a Partnership Task Force that in 2003 led to the creation of a new National Partnership Office and program within the agency. It is intended as a tool to help managers and local agency offices evaluate their capacity to undertake new partnerships or improve on-going ones. It begins by summarizing the elements of successful partnerships and also what participating collaborative organizations need to ensure. The tool itself begins with fill-in forms to detail priorities and goals. Next follows a series of evaluation forms addressing time; staff; resources; attitudes; experiences and opportunities; incentives and barriers; staff knowledge, skills, and abilities; and external relations. A process for analyzing numerical scores is described and guidance for planning the next steps is provided. Additional resources are appended.
Forthcoming from the USDA Forest Service Partnership Resource
Center is: National Forest Foundation. [n.d.]. Partnership Guide.
Manuscript in preparation. On file with: National Forest Foundation,
Building 27, Suite #3, Fort Missoula Road, Missoula, MT 59804. Russo, J. Edward; Schoemaker, Paul J.H. 1989. Decision traps: the ten barriers to brilliant decision-making and how to overcome them. New York: Simon and Schuster. 280 p. This book is written to teach people the process of making good decisions by avoiding common mistakes. Based on a field of research entitled “behavioral decision-theory”, the lessons are derived from how people actually make decisions and then suggestions are made for improving the process. San Bernardino National Forest. 2002. Volunteer safety program desk guide. Unpublished document. On file with: San Bernardino National Forest, 1824 S Commercenter Circle, San Bernardino, CA 92408.
Savan, Beth; Morgan, Alexis J.; Gore, Christopher 2003. Volunteer environmental monitoring and the role of the universities: the case of Citizens' Environment Watch. Environmental Management. 31(5): 561-568. This article discusses the usefulness of Universities as stable institutions to provide support and continuity to collaborative projects and programs, especially when land management agencies do not, for whatever reason, take a lead role. The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2001a. Handbook of the convention on biological diversity. London: Earthscan. A 2nd edition dated 2003 is available online at: http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp (01 June 2005). The publication details the technical agreements of the International Convention on Biodiversity.
The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2001b. Sustainable Management of Non-Timber Forest Resources. (CBD
Technical Series no. 6). Montreal This document provides a broad overview of considerations for sustainable NTFP management including developing monitoring systems that include a combination of monitoring at large spatial scales and monitoring high-value indicator species at a population level.
The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. [N.d.].
Sustaining life on Earth. Convention on biological diversity.
Montreal, QC. This publication explains in simple language the importance of biodiversity and how the International Convention seeks to conserve biodiversity. Schmoldt, Daniel L.; Peterson, David L.; Smith, Robert L. 2001. The analytic hierarchy process and participatory decision-making. In: Power, J.M.; Strome, M.; Daniel, T.C., eds. Proceedings: Decision Support - 2001, Volume 1, Combined events of the17th Annual Geographic Information Seminar and the Resource Technology ’94 Symposium. Delta Chelsea Inn, Toronto, Ontario, 12-16 September 1994. Bethesda, MA: American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. This somewhat technical article describes a decision-making and support process that could be particularly useful for making systematic, explicit, rigorous, robust, and well documented decisions in groups of users with diverse subjective opinions. As such it is highly applicable to complicated collaborative decision-making processes. The model itself is more complex than most users would care to learn, but a private company called Expert Choice provides subscription access to a web-based, user-friendly interface with the model so that users can customize the analysis to their circumstances. The web interface also allows multiple users to work on the same model in simultaneous sessions from any location with web access.
Schreuder, Hans, T.; Ernst, Richard; Ramirez-Maldonado, Hugo.
2004. Statistical techniques for sampling and monitoring natural
resources. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-126. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research
Station. 111 p. This publication provides a thorough statistical overview of methods and considerations for monitoring natural resources. Written by individuals with extensive experience in the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis program, its audience is inventory and monitoring personnel tasked with designing, implementing, or managing a natural resource monitoring program. As such, it covers not only rigorous statistical approaches, but also practical considerations common in field applications.
Sirmon, Jeff M.; Rana, N.; Kostishack, P. 2002a.
Report to the USDA Forest Service on Phase I of the Partnership
Development Program, Contract #: 43-9138-2-3120. Washington, DC:
Pinchot Institute for Conservation. 20 p. This report summarizes Phase I of a program by the USDA Forest Service Partnership Task Force to design a program to facilitate agency partnerships. It provides brief discussions and useful checklists to “[1] define the core skill-set required of program managers and partnership specialists who are responsible for advancing solutions to natural resource management using collaboration and partnerships; [2] catalogue existing training opportunities related to the development of core skills; [3] explore the cultural, procedural, and skill-related barriers to the advancement collaborative solutions; and [4] identify some of the more promising, and perhaps necessary, approaches to developing competency in partnerships and collaborative stewardship”. Written from an agency perspective, its key points and findings nevertheless reflect many of the recommendations often discussed from the perspective of collaborators. The report lists training opportunities for relationship building and understanding communities, facilitation and mediation, and the business side of partnerships, as well as experts within and outside the Forest Service who may be consulted.
Sirmon,
Jeff M.; Rana, N.; Kostishack, P. 2002b.
Report to the USDA Forest Service on Phase II Of The Partnership
Development Program “learn while doing:” a model for working in
collaboration and through partnerships, Contract #: 43-9138-2-3120.
Washington, DC: Pinchot Institute for Conservation. 35 p. This report summarizes Phase II of a program by the USDA Forest Service Partnership Task Force to design a program to facilitate agency partnerships. It builds upon the analysis in Sirmon and others (2002a) to propose a model that Forest Service front-line managers, collaborators and the agency can use to revamp institutional barriers to including stakeholders in resource management. The model addresses six stages of collaboration: (1) assessing, (2) preparing, (3) framing issues, (4) making collaborative decisions, (5) implementing decisions, and (6) maintaining relationships. For each stage of this model it discusses desired outcomes, needed skills, and available training (including experts). Sithole, Bevlyne. 2002. Where the power lies: multiple stakeholder politics over natural resources. Jakarta, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research. 87 p. Although this guide was developed from experiences in developing nations, the principles discussed are applicable to any collaborative process and address the important issue of power relations among participants. Example of sources of disparate power include land tenure, legal authority, knowledge and skills, wealth, available time, constituency support, reputation, cultural norms, and social attitudes. All human interactions involve multi-layered power relations, or what has been termed “micro-politics”. Large discrepancies in actual or perceived power can be particularly important in the success or failure of collaborative efforts involving diverse stakeholders. This publication provides an in-depth analysis of forms of power and how they are expressed, relations among participants with differing power, and how to appreciate and manage these dynamics. Stockdale, M.C.; Corbet, J.M.S. 1999. Participatory inventory: a field manual written with special reference to Indonesia. Tropical Forestry Papers No. 38. Oxford, UK: Oxford Forestry Institute, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford. 383 p. Although this manual about participatory inventories is written specifically about involving local communities in Indonesia, it provides a good example of addressing all the field and training-related specifics of such programs. The process of developing a collaborative project with villagers is also discussed.
Sullivan, Patrick (chair). 2000.
Improving the collection, management, and use of marine fisheries
data. Committee On Improving The Collection And Use Of Fisheries Data.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press. This online book provides a detailed example of the controversies and issues that can arise between scientists and resource users when they depend on each other’s collaboration to manage a valuable resource.
The Volunteer Monitor. [N.d.]
The National Newsletter of the Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring
Program. A newsletter of the Environmental Protection Agency’s nation-wide Volunteer Water Quality monitoring program, issues cover a wide range of topics of interest to individuals who collaborate on local monitoring projects. Of particular interest are issues dedicated to themes such as “Staying afloat financially” [5(2): Fall 1993], “Managing and presenting your data” [ 7(1): Spring 1995], “Program management” [8(1): Spring 1996], and “Community outreach” [9(2): Fall 1997]. University of Maine Cooperative Extension and Sea Grant Program, Maine Coastal Program of the Maine State Planning Office. [N.d.]. Environmental stewardship in the Gulf of Maine: a coordinator's manual for volunteer monitoring. Waldoboro, ME. 79 p. & appendices. Unpublished document. On file with: University of Maine Cooperative Extension, Know-Lincoln County Office, 377 Manktown Road, Waldoboro, ME 04572. This manual is well written and highly applicable to many of the modules in our manual. It is not currently published and is therefore only available by contacting the offices of the Maine Cooperative Extension agency (above). It is a manual for how to organize specific monitoring projects within a larger marine environmental monitoring program. Chapters cover topics such as vision statements, goals, quality assurance plans, budgets and fundraising, working with volunteers, safety, data analysis and reporting, communication, leadership, conducting effective meetings, outreach activities, and project evaluation. Each topic has useful lists of pertinent considerations and useful references. The appendices provide examples of brainstorming techniques; visioning processes; a goals and objectives form; sample volunteer position descriptions, applications, and time-keeping forms; a training agenda; leadership competencies; team-building activities; meeting guidelines; group member’s roles and functions; group communication problems and skills; dealing with problem behaviors; conflict management styles; an agenda form, facilitation techniques, action plan record form, and evaluation tools for meetings; how to write a news release and give media interviews, and how to evaluate the monitoring project.
United States
Department of Agriculture. [N.d.].
Quality of information
guidelines. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief Information Officer. This on on-line resource is intended for employees of the US Department of Agriculture but provides a useful perspective on the quality of information issues of concern to federal land managers. Only a portion of the information applies to participatory monitoring projects but it is illustrative of managerial concerns. Managers in the US Forest Service can benefit by perusing the topics with regard to organizing participatory projects in order to ensure the credibility and usefulness of collected data. The basic principles that are outlined are informative to any collaborators.
United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2004.
Managing volunteers: a field guide for USDA Forest Service
volunteer coordinators, R6/PNW. Unpublished document. On file with:
The Volunteer Program, USDA Forest Service, Human Resources Staff,
P.O. Box 3623, Portland, OR 97208. Intended for in-house use, this Forest Service manual provides a good overview of considerations regarding the use of volunteers from a federal land-management agency perspective. Although participatory monitoring is not covered, many of the contextual considerations are applicable. It starts with an overview of applicable federal legislation (detailed in the appendices), and then addresses such topics as recruitment, volunteer motivation, identification of volunteers in the field, agreements, liability, insurance, safety, use of government vehicles and equipment, reimbursement, reporting accomplishments, and appropriate recognition and awards. Applicable forms are also appended.
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2001a.
EPA requirements for quality assurance project plans. In: EPA
QA/R-5 Quality System Series. Washington, DC: Office Of Environmental
Information. 40 p. The EPA is a leading federal agency for developing quality assurance plans. This document provides an overview of their requirements for quality assurance in project plans as well as discussing the process of quality assurance at the program and policy levels. See Hunt and others (1996) for a detailed explanation of a quality assurance plan for data collected by volunteers monitoring water quality.
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2001b.
Checklist for reviewing EPA quality management plans. Washington, DC:
Office Of Environmental Information. 13 p. This document is a short but informative checklist of the elements of a quality assurance plan that should be checked for completion and adequate records. As such, it provides a quick, concise overview of the elements of a quality assurance plan. The elements to evaluate are general and policy oriented, contrasting nicely with the more detailed approach of the other quality assurance plan checklist that we cite (Hanson [n.d.]b).
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2002.
Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity,
utility, and integrity, of information disseminated by the
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/260R-02-008. Washington, DC:
Office Of Environmental Information. 61 p. These guidelines are general in nature and apply to policy concerning information the EPA disseminates.
Voluntary Sector
Initiative. 2001.
An accord between the government of Canada and the voluntary sector.
Ottowa, ON. 16 p. This short official document lists principles of collaboration, respect, communication, and relative responsibilities of the government and the private sector in the joint Canadian program to involve volunteers in programs to monitor the environment. In particular, this accord applies to the EMAN, CCBM, and CISE organizations listed in the appendix.
Voluntary Sector
Initiative. 2002a.
A code of good practice on policy dialogue. Ottawa, ON. 16 p. This short document presents a mutually agreed-upon code of practice concerning dialogue between the government and the private volunteer sector on communication about collaborative policies. It addresses values, principles, and commitments to action. In the appendix it provides a useful diagram highlighting public policy processes and methods for involvement.
Voluntary Sector
Initiative. 2002b.
A code of good practice on funding. Ottawa, ON. 26 p. This short document describes principles of collaborative funding for environmental monitoring, summaries of volunteer and government funding sources and mechanisms, and an overview of how to implement mutual funding of collaborative monitoring.
Whitman and Hagan. 2004.
Biodiversity indicators for sustainable forestry: final report
to the National Commission on the Science for Sustainable Forestry.
Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Bruswick, ME: Manomet Center
for Conservation Sciences. This document reports Manomet Center’s review and evaluation of scientific information that is available to aid forest managers on selecting biodiversity indicators. It includes recommendations for selection criteria and a web-based decision support tool derived from the literature and their survey of scientists and decision-makers around the U.S. It also includes useful analyses and conclusions regarding the feasibility using biodiversity indicators in sustainable forest management and levels of understanding among foresters.
Wilson, E.O. ed., Peter, Frances M. assoc.
ed.
1988. Biodiversity. Washington, DC. National Academy Press. This book (also available online) is one of the first definitive compilations treating the issue of biodiversity from such perspectives as human importance, risks, monitoring, science, restoration, alternatives, policies, and prospects. Wondolleck, Julia; Yaffee, Steven L. 2000. Making collaboration work: lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press. 277 p. This book provides a comprehensive and cogent analysis of lessons learned from natural resource management programs regarding how to make collaborative efforts work. The authors analyze ten years worth of examples in the United States to present a rationale for collaboration, the various challenges and impediments that are likely to be encountered, and how to make a collaborative program succeed. It is an excellent reference for judging the pros and cons of initiating a participatory monitoring program. Both forest managers and participants will find it useful.
Wong, Jennifer L.G. 2000.
The biometrics of non-timber forest product resource assessment: a
review of current methodology. [Background paper for the European
Tropical Forest Research Network Workshop: Developing Needs-Based
Inventory Methods For Non-Timber Forest Products, FAO, Rome, Italy,
4-5 May 2000]. London, UK: United Kingdom Department for International
Development (DFID). 62 p. This report is a comprehensive global overview of strategies and methods for monitoring nontimber forest product resources and ascertaining if their harvest is sustainable. It emphasizes statistical rigor while acknowledging a wide spectrum of monitoring goals and methods, and the usefulness of incorporating traditional knowledge into monitoring project design and implementation. This background paper was presented at the FAO conference noted in the citation and subsequently edited down to the less comprehensive and for-sale FAO publication listed immediately below (Wong and others 2001). Wong, Jennifer L.G.; Thornber, Kirsti; Baker, Nell. 2001. Resource assessment of non-wood forest products. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 109 p. Although this publication provides less detail than the original report from which it was produced (see Wong 2000 above) it does provide a concise conceptual overview of monitoring approaches for nontimber forest products. As with the original report, the target audience is international, with an emphasis on developing nations in the tropics. As such, community economic development is emphasized as the context of collaborative monitoring.
Wong, J.
L. G.; Healy, J.R.; Phillips, O.L. 2002.
Introduction to theme 2: incorporating values into biodiversity
assessment and monitoring – an introduction to some current issues.
Participatory Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation of Biodiversity (PAMEB)
Internet workshop, 7-25 January 2002 and policy seminar 21 May 2002.
University of Oxford: Environmental Change Institute. This outline highlights many of the issues regarding the incorporation of local values into biodiversity conservation strategies through participatory programs.
Working Group on Criteria and Indicators. 2001.
Scaling national criteria and indicators to the local level.
ON: Science Branch, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada. This report discusses the issue of scale and challenges inherent in the aggregation of data on indicators of sustainable forest management, looking at sub-national to national levels in Canada. It then analyzes the possible application of the Montreal Process National Criteria and Indicators on the sub-national level. Lastly, examples of mechanisms to develop, identify and implement those sub-national indicators are provided, as well as how they could be linked to national level indicators.
Wright, Pam. [N.d.].
Program guidance for development of a forest/grassland monitoring
and evaluation program. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Inventory and Monitoring Institute,
Forest Monitoring Group. 66 p. [plus Appendix F]. Central to any monitoring program is asking the right questions and tailoring the program to goals and needs. Though this document is written for a broad array of monitoring questions specifically pertinent to management of Forest Service lands, it provides an example of designing monitoring program components before tailoring specifics to meet the identified goals and needs. Section 2 (Design and implementation of a forest monitoring program) addresses scope, conceptual framework and approach, purposes and questions, measurable items (elements) for each question, sampling protocols for each element, selection of elements applicable to the monitoring goals, development of a monitoring plan based on budget constraints, implementation of the monitoring, evaluation of the data and results, documentation and reporting of the results, and revision the program as needed. Appendix F provides a matrix of (columns) potential monitoring purposes and indicators cross-referenced with (rows) monitoring questions, elements to be measured, sampling protocols, units of measure, quality assurance and control procedures, data sources, spatial extent and scale, frequency of measurement, reference value, analysis approach, estimated costs, priority, data management, responsible individuals, reporting interval, and reference notes.
Yaffee, Steven L. 2002.
Benefits of collaboration. Ann Arbor, MI: Ecosystem Management
Initiative, School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of
Michigan. 4 p. This bulleted list of points is derived from a presentation highlighting the major benefits that can be expected from collaborative natural resource management efforts.
Yaffee, Steven L.; Wondolleck, Julia M.
2000.
Making collaboration work: lessons from a comprehensive assessment of
over 200 wide-ranging cases of collaboration in environmental
management. Conservation Biology in Practice. 1(1): 17-25.
©2005 Institute for Culture and Ecology
|
|