Constraining Collaboration: The Impacts of a Prescribed Process on the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species

Collaboration;Great Lakes;Natural Resources and Environment

Day, JenniferBulkley, Jonathan ;

University of Michigan

关键词: Collaboration;    Great Lakes;    Natural Resources and Environment;   

Others  :  https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/78394/Day_Jennifer_Thesis_December%202010.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 was passed in response to the growing threat posed by the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species into U.S. waters. Through this legislation, Congress recognized that mitigation of the impacts from aquatic invasive species was dependent upon coordinated research, education, and prevention and control programs on national, regional and state levels that could only be obtained through collaboration among various levels of government and civil society. This federal act created the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species (the Panel) as a regional collaboration and prescribed its structure, management, role and objectives. Twenty years after the Panel’s creation, this thesis reviews the evolution of the aquatic invasive species issue and the institutional response, and explores the impacts of legislated collaboration and a highly prescribed process.Data was collected from review of archival documentation, personal observation, and semi-structured interviews. The data provide three primary conclusions. First, the constraint of prescribed roles and objectives limits the perceived ability of the Panel to change the dimensions of its work and accomplishments to maintain its relevancy within an evolving institutional response to the aquatic invasive species problem. Second, the primary benefit derived from Panel membership appears to be the ;;issue network” created by the in-person attendance at meetings that facilitates sharing, learning and networking among experts and agencies in the region. Third, the prescribed structure and management of the Panel limit its flexibility to adapt to changes as the issue and institutional response evolve and yet benefit it by providing formal legitimacy, funding and critical staff support.