The Coastal Barrier Resources Act: Has It Discouraged Coastal Development?

Despite an effort by Congress to design a market-based public policy to limit development on certain coastal barriers and protect the federal treasury from paying for recovery from expensive natural disasters, growth continued on these shifting sands. In enacting the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, federal policymakers may have overlooked the key role of state and local governments, as well as the role of local developers, landowners, and realtors in shaping development on coastal barriers. By itself, the act will not prevent development. In fact, it appears that development in areas designated under the act will occur if (1) development pressure is strong enough to overcome the disincentives posed by the act, and (2) state and local governments facilitate development. For example, a local government may substitute its own subsidies for those withdrawn by the federal government. Nothing in the act prevents this from occurring. This article examines the key forces affecting development in areas designated under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) and seeks to explain why development has occurred in some designated areas, despite the withdrawal of federal subsidies. Using case studies of selected coastal barriers designated by the act, as well as surveys of state coastal managers and key informants, the research shows that the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, by itself, will not prevent development from occurring in the designated coastal areas.     

Sense of Place as a Source of Tension in Canada’s West Coast Energy Conflicts

Canada’s west coast has been a hotspot of environmental conflict, most recently in defense of climate action and natural places under threat by energy development. This study examined sense of place as a source of tension in conflicts sparked by two energy proposals. The Bute Inlet run-of-river hydroelectric project would power British Columbia’s remote Central Coast, and the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion would transport bitumen from Alberta’s oil sands to tankers for export. Surveys, interviews, and mapping were used to investigate the depth and character of participants’ sense of favorite places and places expected to be affected by the projects, with appreciation, concern, and responsibility for nature as organizing themes. We discovered a regional, nature-centric sense of place on the south coast, and a sense of place among Albertans linked to that province’s oil and gas economy and its reputation as Canada’s chief breadwinner. Ties to natural places were found to underpin environmental advocacy by tapping into deep place connections as well as place connections conveyed through network ideologies and the protests themselves. We outline for consideration key characteristics of a regional sense of place, and offer ways to mitigate place-based economy versus environment conflicts.     

Caught in a Maelstrom: Implementing California Marine Protected Areas

The first attempt to implement the 1999 California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) to establish marine protected areas (MPAs) ended contentiously in 2002. The initial MLPA process is examined by a statutory analysis and an analysis of stakeholder network relationships and beliefs. The failure of the initial MLPA process can be understood by a combination of factors: (i) Insufficient financial support from the California State government; (ii) Unclear, unranked and inconsistent statutory objectives; (iii) The application of a science-based process that excluded affected stakeholders; (iv) Implementing officials who lacked expertise in designing and managing political processes; and (v) A community of stakeholders who were polarized into coalitions of proponents and opponents of MPAs. The article concludes by discussing limitations of its methods and analysis and by offering strategies for learning from policy failures.     

Nearshore Restoration in Puget Sound: Understanding Stakeholder Values and Potential Coalitions

Restoration of nearshore ecosystems presents many challenges for stakeholder involvement. Using surveys and interviews we examined stakeholder values, preferences, and potential coalitions surrounding nearshore restoration in the Whidbey sub-basin of Puget Sound. Most stakeholders in our study believe that Puget Sound nearshore problems are severe and urgent, and that it is worth investing in restoration. They do not agree on the causes of nearshore degradation, yet support stronger regulatory enforcement and increased public ownership as possible solutions to nearshore problems. Five potential stakeholder coalitions were identified based on shared values. These values reflect a varied spectrum of support for public sector solutions to nearshore problems and were labeled: No Government Intervention, Property Rights, Private Land Stewardship, Protect Undeveloped Areas, and Large Scale Restoration. The potential coalitions identified confirm the Advocacy Coalition Framework hypothesis that coalition members who share values do not necessarily share stakeholder demographics or preferences. This study demonstrates one method for understanding local stakeholders, and will help managers direct project resources, planning, and management, through reliance on both stakeholder and scientific input. In addition, managers can use information about stakeholder values and potential coalitions to more effectively frame communication products and stakeholder involvement activities.