Creating a Sustainable Future for Fish, Water and People in the Pacific Northwest
Executive Summary
Purpose: To build capacity in people and organizations that are working on issues related to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to enable them to more effectively achieve their desired outcomes through community-based decisions and non-regulatory actions. This project does not seek to replace anything that anybody is already doing. The intent is to make these existing efforts more effective in achieving the collaborative resolution of issues. The final purpose is to increase salmon runs to historical levels, to improve the water quality to almost natural levels and to provide a high quality of life, socially and economically, for the people in the region.
Intended Outcomes: Measurable results will include improved salmon runs, improved water quality/quantity and a decrease in the incidence of conflict and litigation. Measures of social and economic well being will improve and increase. This will be made possible through improved decision-making, communications, networking, coordination, collaboration, conflict resolution, and the increased effectiveness of resource allocation and levels of trust among stakeholders.
Justification: Salmon restoration efforts in the Pacific Northwest have been going on for more that forty years and the situation has continued to deteriorate. This has resulted in more salmon stocks being listed as threatened or endangered species under the ESA. Non-point sources of pollution are creating water pollution problems for all species, not just fish.
Traditional approaches have not been successful in dealing with the complex issues involving adaptive living systems. We need to try some new approaches. It is our belief that the weak link in achieving the desired outcomes is related to how people work together, their underlying beliefs and how they make decisions.
Methods:Will focus on transformational change and capacity building in the areas of consensus building, decision-making process, leadership development, economic development and the implementation of the principles of sustainability. Recognizing that each situation is unique; approaches will be customized accordingly. One of the basic premises in the design of this project is that learning takes place most effectively by applying principles and processes while working with real conflicts and issues.
Targeted participants: (1) Bonneville Power Administration, (2) Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, (3) Washington Department of Ecology, (4) Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, (5) Washington Conservation Commission, (6) Washington Department of Natural Resources, (7) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, (8) Coordinated Resource Management Task Group, (9) National Riparian Service Team, (10) U.S. Forest Service, (11) Indian Tribes, (12) NW Indian Fisheries, (13) City of Seattle, (14) City of Portland, (15) Washington State University. We will also seek to involve stakeholders in Idaho, Montana and California.
Contact person: Donald D. Nelson, Project Director – Washington State University, P.O. Box 646310, Pullman, WA 99164-6310; 509/335-2922 (o), 509/335-1082 (fax), nelsond@wsu.edu (e-mail).
Creating a Sustainable Future for Fish, Water and People
in the Pacific Northwest Region
Donald D. Nelson
Washington State University Cooperative Extension
Purpose
The purpose of this project is to build capacity in people and organizations that are working on issues related to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to enable them to more effectively achieve their desired outcomes through community-based and non-regulatory solutions.
Project activities will be directed toward "training the trainers" on actual problem areas (i.e., building capacity in people who will in turn train others at the grassroots level to produce ever-increasing circles of influence and positive results). Conflicts can be resolved when crucial relationships between stakeholders shift from alienation, hostility and polarization to relationships based on an understanding of their differences, identification of a shared vision and a willingness to collaborate.
This project does not seek to replace anything that anybody is already doing. The intent is to make these efforts more effective in achieving collaborative resolution of issues with non-regulatory processes and procedures.
Intended outcomes
The intended outcomes are to improve decision-making, communications, networking, coordination, collaboration, conflict resolution, and the effectiveness of resource allocation and to strengthen relationships and levels of trust among stakeholders. These approaches are the basis for a more participative form of democracy, rather than the traditional representative form. This will be accomplished through training in, and application of, consensus building, holistic decision-making plus other appropriate tools, processes and frameworks (e.g., Enterprise Facilitation and The Natural Step; refer to Appendix for a description of these).
Measurable results will include improved salmon runs, improved water quality/quantity and a decrease in the incidence of conflict and litigation. Measures of social and economic well being will improve and increase.
The best possible outcomes from this effort as identified by collaborators include the following:
- Decisions are based on a shared vision of the future we want to create for our region. We determine the underlying causes of the problems we face and quit treating symptoms. This results in sustainable solutions that consider the short and long-term economic, ecological and social impacts.
- We adopt a decision-making process that is goal-driven, inclusive and collaborative. The resulting decisions produce clean water, restored salmon runs and an improved quality of life for the present and future generations of people living in the region.
- Trustand relationships are built among the people in the region that will serve as the foundation for the resolution of future issues and conflicts. There is a renewed respect for natural resources and each other. People celebrate the restoration of the salmon runs, clean and abundant water and healthy, prosperous communities.
- There is recognition and acceptance that each situation is different and that the desired outcomes can be achieved in various ways (i.e., one size does not fit all) that are consistent with the shared vision. Local, decentralized, grassroots involvement and commitment are necessary to achieve this outcome. We learn how to work collaboratively at all levels to achieve the desired outcomes (i.e., local, county, state, Federal, public, private, etc.).
- People become aware of the impacts of their actions on natural resources and learn how to minimize these impacts. The actions taken are based on an understanding of what constitutes a healthy ecosystem (i.e., effective water cycle, mineral cycle, solar energy flow and community dynamics).
- Insteadof thinking "either/or", we learn to think in terms of "and" -- how can we do it all? We respect all life forms and learn to live in harmony with Nature and each other. We create prosperous communities that provide a high quality of life where people care about each other.
- There is a renewed respect for Native American culture, traditions and sovereignty.
- Our efforts become a model that is replicated by other regions of the country and the world.
Justification
Salmon restoration efforts in the Pacific Northwest have been going on for more than forty years and the situation has continued to deteriorate. This has resulted in more salmon stocks being listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA.
Non-point sources of pollution are creating water pollution problems for all species, not just fish. The number of water bodies not meeting water quality standards under the CWA continues to increase. Water quantity issues also play an important role in water quality, habitat and quality of life.
These are very complex issues that involve many variables and diverse groups of people. There are no simple solutions. One fact is clear – people have caused these problems and these problems are going to have to be solved by people working together. We have a tremendous amount of knowledge and technology available. However, no one has all the answers. The challenge is how do we get everybody to come to the table, share our collective wisdom, recognize what we don’t know and make decisions that will produce sustainable results? Traditional approaches have not been successful in dealing with the complex issues involving complex, adaptive living systems. We need to try some new approaches.
The weak link
It is our beliefthat the weak link in achieving the desired outcomes is related to how people work together, their underlying beliefs and how they make decisions. Most people prefer to avoid conflict, but if confronted, especially if it threatens their survival, they will fight for one dimensional solutions, exclusive of others views or needs. This leads to confrontational battles that are often solved poorly by third parties, the courts, or the legislatures. Most people do not have the beliefs, the skills, or the inclination to do anything else.
Strengthening the weak link
It is our belief that building capacity in people, using a decision-making process that is goal-driven, inclusive and collaborative will result in decisions that produce clean water, restored salmon runs and an improved quality of life for the present and future generations of people living in the region. Trust and relationships will be built among the people in the region that will serve as the foundation for the resolution of future issues and conflicts.
Potential participating organizations in start-up phase (Washington and Oregon)
Washington State University
Bonneville Power Administration
NW Indian Fisheries Commission
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Washington Department of Ecology
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Washington Conservation Commission
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
National Riparian Service Team
U.S. Forest Service
City of Seattle
City of Portland
Indian Tribes
Others?
We expect the project participants to have the full support of their employers to participate. Individual participants will be selected through nominations by collaborating organizations, stakeholder groups and through self-nomination. The participants will function as consensus building/holistic decision-making teams that will work with the local constituencies to resolve conflicts, facilitate meetings and train others in the consensus building and holistic decision-making processes.
Ultimate scale when project is fully implemented
The intent is to initiate this project in Washington and Oregon. During this phase we will be networking with people and organizations in Idaho, California and Montana that are counterparts to those in the start-up phase in Washington and Oregon. The idea is to create an ever-increasing circle of participation to effectively deal with complex natural resource and people issues that cross-state lines and other political boundaries. Ecosystems do not respect these artificial and arbitrary boundaries.
Methods
Methods will focus on transformational change and capacity building in the areas of consensus building, decision-making process, leadership development, economic development and implementing the principles of sustainability. Recognizing that each situation is unique; approaches will be customized accordingly. One of the basic premises in the design of this project is that learning takes place most effectively by applying principles and processes while working with real conflicts and issues.
The first step to initiate this project will be to hold a Consensus Institute for stakeholder groups in the Northwest who are involved with, or will be impacted by, the ESA and CWA. We will be able to accommodate a maximum of 60 participants in this first Institute. Participants will be solicited from Washington and Oregon, but participation will also be open to interested parties from Idaho, Montana and California. It is our belief that the success of this first Institute will generate support to hold additional Institutes in other states/regions of the Northwest. Training will also be provided in the application of the holistic decision-making process. For a more complete description of the consensus Institutes and the holistic decision-making process refer to Appendix #2.
Evaluation
The purpose ofthe proposed evaluation is twofold. First, is a formative purpose to offer monitoring data to the project leaders about the project’s progress toward achieving its goal. Second, is a summative purpose for project leaders and funders to identify "What worked?" and explain "Why?"
An important feature of this evaluation design is to enable participants to monitor their individual and collective progress toward the goal of the project, particularly since the project emphasizes personal capacity building for collaboration. This participatory approach to evaluation will yield high quality data and offer participants another laboratory to practice holistic decision-making, specifically its plan-monitor-control-replan feedback loop.
For a more detailed description of the evaluation methods refer to Appendix #2.
Appendix #1
Core Training and Supplemental Models/Processes
Each Consensus Institute will be made-up of two 3-day sessions and two 4-day sessions with practicums in-between plus a graduation (a total of five sessions). Through the use of practicums, conflict resolution teams from each Institute will work on resolving conflicts between sessions. The conflicts will be real ones identified by the participants.
The learning modules contained in the Consensus Institute sessions will include: (1) process introduction, (2) managing change, (3) managing scarcity conflicts, (4) managing stereotypes, (5) managing diversity, (6) managing power, (7) managing relationships, (8) managing participatory democracy, (9) managing interview, and (10) reaching consensus.
The decision-making process taught in this project will be based on the Holistic Management model that is a goal-driven, ecosystem based, decision-making process that simultaneously considers economic viability, ecological soundness and social acceptability. Holistic decision-making recognizes the complexity and interdependencies that exist in living systems and concurrently looks at both short and long-term effects of decisions. All decisions are tested using holistic decision-making guidelines to assure movement toward a holistic goal that includes quality of life, forms of production/livelihood and the future resource base considerations. An integral part of this decision-making process is an effective monitoring system that is based on the assumption that the decisions made may be wrong. This means we need to be looking for early warning signs that we may be getting off-track and need to re-plan. This is an on-going, dynamic process. People who are not directly managing a piece of land can also use this decision-making process to produce their desired outcomes.
Other models andframeworks will be provided as optional approaches to help communities develop and implement their strategies to achieve their holistic goals. These would include traditional approaches, Enterprise Facilitation and The Natural Step program.
The Enterprise Facilitation (EF) model and processes could be introduced in appropriate situations to stimulate sustainable community economic development that is grassroots and locally controlled. These efforts could be directed toward creating new adaptive economic development opportunities, businesses and jobs around the objectives of improving water quality/quantity, salmon runs and quality of life. This model is based on the client-centered development of entrepreneurial businesses, and the expansion and retention of existing ones, in the local community. It supports local entrepreneurs in the pursuit of their dreams through a community-supported person called an Enterprise Facilitator who provides free and confidential long-term assistance to members of the community. It is responsive and complementary to traditional, reactive, top-down economic development models. Enterprise Facilitation builds capacity within a community, or region, to respond to changing economic and social conditions. It creates new employment opportunities and economic diversity that results in more jobs and more money circulating in the local economy. The result is self-sufficient people in healthy communities.
Developed in Sweden, The Natural Step (TNS) program introduces a new way of thinking about business and the future. At the heart of TNS are four guidelines, or "systems conditions" that provide a framework of scientifically based principles for aligning business activities with natural systems. They are simple, yet profound and are applicable to any organization. Within this framework, the ingenuity of an organization is unleashed to develop sustainable products and practices that can create bottom line benefits and revitalize organizational culture. Progress is made through innovation, not regulation.
The four "systemsconditions" that a sustainable society must meet are: (1) Substances from the earth’s crust must not systematically increase in nature. (2) Substances produced by human society must not systematically increase in nature. (3) The physical basis for the productivity of nature must not be systematically deteriorated. (4) The use of resources must be efficient and just with respect to meeting human needs.
TNS is being used to make strategic investment decisions by over 100 corporations and municipalities in Sweden and by major companies in the U.S. such as Interface, Inc., Mitsubishi Electric America and Collins Pine, a Northwest forest products company. It shows how environmentally sustainable practices can be a competitive strength for businesses.
Covey Leadership Training
Three Covey Leadership modules can be integrated, where appropriate, into the curriculum of this project to assist in the development of leadership skills. They provide a holistic, integrated approach to personal, interpersonal, managerial and organizational effectiveness. The modules are (1) The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, (2) First Things First and (3) Principle-Centered Leadership.
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (7H) focuses on personal and interpersonal effectiveness and includes the development of a personal mission statement. This module is based on principles that serve as guidelines for human conduct. It provides a sequential approach to move people progressively from dependence to independence to interdependence.
First Things First (FTF) presents a guide to managing your time by learning how to balance your life. Rather than focusing on time and things, FTF emphasizes relationships and results. And instead of efficiency, this new approach emphasizes effectiveness.
Principle-Centered Leadership (PCL) presents a long-term, inside-out approach to developing people and organizations. It deals with how to create more meaningful relationships and successes in the workplace. While the 7H focuses on the personal and interpersonal levels, PCL deals more at the managerial and organizational levels.
Appendix #2
Monitoring and Evaluation Methods
Claude Bennett’s hierarchy of evaluation evidences is a framework to guide data collection, analysis and interpretation. The model identifies an expected progression of steps to achieve an intended outcome.
With various Inputs, the Project conducts Activities that attract Participants whose Reactions to the activities support changes in the (K)nowledge, (A)ttitudes, (S)kills and (A)spirations (i.e., KASA changes) that, in turn, lead to Behavior changes that produce favorable Intermediate Results that contribute to the desired economic, social and environmental Outcome. Each of these "steps" is a focus for continuous monitoring – the formative, in-process assessments. Establishing logical connections among all steps helps explore the summative "What worked?" and "Why?" questions.
Techniques to gather monitoring and evaluation data include the following:
- Quantitative pre- and post-assessments and subjective retrospective assessments of individual and organizational competencies.
- Participant observation
- Document analysis
- Participant’s SNO Stories
SNO Stories represent participants’ perceptions of what things were like when they (S)tarted along this journey toward the goal; what things are like (N)ow; what the (O)utlook is. SNO Stories help participants recall what helped move them from S to N, what may have interfered and what more might have helped. They catch the participants’ judgments about what would help move from N further toward the goal. The interactive interview technique is represented graphically on a time line:
S -------------->N--------------->O --------------->Holistic Goal