Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 3
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Austin, Zoë Smart, James C.R. Yearley, Steven Irvine, R. Justin and White, Piran C.L. 2014. Incentivising the collaborative management of mobile ecological resources. Land Use Policy, Vol. 36, p. 485.

    Mountjoy, Natalie J. Seekamp, Erin Davenport, Mae A. and Whiles, Matt R. 2013. The Best Laid Plans: Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) Group Capacity and Planning Success. Environmental Management, Vol. 52, Issue. 6, p. 1547.

    Davies, Althea L. and White, Rehema M. 2012. Collaboration in natural resource governance: Reconciling stakeholder expectations in deer management in Scotland. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 112, p. 160.


Factors influencing success among collaborative sage-grouse management groups in the western United States

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 05 October 2010

Considerable efforts have been put into collaborative conservation efforts across the globe. In the western USA, concern about declines of two sage-grouse species (Centrocercus urophasianus and C. minimus) has led to the creation of over 60 collaborative wildlife management partnership groups to develop and implement local sage-grouse management plans. These sage-grouse local working groups (LWGs) share a common goal, information, and policy environment, but were implemented in diverse ways. As a result, they provide a rare opportunity to study systematically the impact of contextual, organizational, institutional and process factors on local collaborative group success. Data from document reviews and an extensive survey of over 700 group participants from 53 sage-grouse LWGs were used to assess the success of this collaborative conservation effort and identify those group attributes that were related to successful implementation and funding of projects. Specifically, external, internal and emergent group characteristics were considered as likely predictors of LWG implementation success. The LWGs varied broadly in their achievements. The presence of a neutral facilitator, participants' feelings of ownership, groups whose local plans had more authority and early-stage group successes were significantly related to implementation success at the group level.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Lorien R. Belton. e-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

G. Bentrup (2001) Evaluation of a collaborative model: a case study analysis of watershed planning in the Intermountain West. Environmental Management 27: 739748.

R.D. Bidwell & C.M. Ryan (2006) Collaborative partnership design: the implications of organizational affiliation for watershed partnerships. Society and Natural Resources 19: 827843.

T.A. Bryan (2004) Tragedy averted: the promise of collaboration. Society and Natural Resources 17: 881896.

B.T. Clark , N. Burkardt & M.D. King (2005) Watershed management and organizational dynamics: nationwide findings and regional variation. Environmental Management 36: 297310.

A. Conley & M.A. Moote (2003) Evaluating collaborative natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 16: 371386.

M.E. Dakins , J.D. Long & M. Hart (2005) Collaborative environmental decision making in Oregon watershed groups: perceptions of effectiveness. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41: 171180.

D.A. Dillman (2000) Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. Second edition. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

M.E. Hershdorfer , M.E. Fernandez-Gimenez & L.D. Howery (2007) Key attributes influence the performance of local weed management programs in the southwest United States. Rangeland Ecology and Management 60: 225234.

M.T. Imperial (1999) Institutional analysis and ecosystem-based management: the institutional analysis and development framework. Environmental Management 24: 449465.

J.E. Innes & D.E. Booher (1999) Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65: 412423.

T.M. Koontz (2005) We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collaborative stakeholder participation on land use policy. Policy Studies Journal 33: 459481.

T.M. Koontz & C.W. Thomas (2006) What do we know and need to know about the environmental outcomes of collaborative management? Public Administration Review 66: 111121.

P.R. Lachapelle & S.F. McCool (2005) Exploring the concept of ‘ownership’ in natural resource planning. Society and Natural Resources 18: 279285.

P.R. Lachapelle , S.F. McCool & M.E. Patterson (2003) barriers to effective natural resource planning in a ‘messy’ world. Society and Natural Resources 16: 473490.

W.D. Leach (2006) Collaborative public management and democracy: evidence from western watershed partnerships. Public Administration Review 66: 100110.

W.D. Leach & N.W. Pelkey (2001) Making watershed partnerships work: a review of the empirical literature. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 127: 378385.

W.D. Leach , N.W. Pelkey & P.A. Sabatier (2002) Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 21: 645670.

R.D. Margerum (1999) Getting past yes: from capital creation to action. Journal of the American Planning Association 65: 181192.

R.D. Margerum (2007) Overcoming locally based collaboration constraints. Society and Natural Resources 20: 135152.

M.G. Mayhew , N.M. Ashkanasy , T. Bramble & J. Gardner (2007) A study of the antecedents and consequences of psychological ownership in organizational settings. Journal of Social Psychology 147: 477500.

A. Pagdee , Y-S. Kim & P.F. Daugherty (2006) What makes community forest management successful: a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Society and Natural Resources 19: 3352.

R.I. Perry & R.E. Ommer (2003) Scale issues in marine ecosystems and human interactions. Fisheries Oceanography 12: 513522.

J.L. Pierce , T. Kostova & K.T. Dirks (2003) The state of psychological ownership: integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology 7: 84107.

M.A. Schroeder , C.L. Aldridge , A.D. Apa , J.R. Bohne , C.E. Braun , S.D. Bunnell , J.W. Connelly , P.A Deibert , S.C. Gardner , M.A. Hilliard , G.D. Kobriger , S.M McAdam , C.W. McCarthy , J.J. McCarthy , D.L. Mitchell , E.V. Rickerson & S.J. Stiver (2004) Distribution of sage-grouse in North America. Condor 106: 363376.

S.W. Selin & D. Chavez (1995) Developing a collaborative model for environmental-planning and management. Environmental Management 19: 189195.

S.J. Stiver , A.D. Apa , J.R. Bohne , S.D. Bunnell , P.A. Deibert , S.C. Gardner , M.A. M.A. Hilliard , C.W. McCarthy & M.A. Schroeder (2006) Greater sage-grouse comprehensive conservation strategy. Report, Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Cheyenne, WY, USA.

S. Waage (2003) Collaborative salmon recovery planning: examining decision making and implementation in northeastern Oregon. Society and Natural Resources 16: 295307.

E.P. Weber (2000) A new vanguard for the environment: grass-roots ecosystem management as a new environmental movement. Society and Natural Resources 13: 237259.

E.P. Weber (2008) Reality and better mousetraps: a research agenda for new environmental governance institutions. Society and Natural Resources 21: 9193.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *