ENVIRONMENTAL
ANTHROPOLOGY
&-*.*'
Vjh-X
_
, :.;>
'
Community Participation in Watershed Management
If environmental problems were simply the result of technical failure,
we could count on technological improvements to make human activities
efficient, non-polluting, and sustainable. But environmental problems are
more than technical problems. They reflect human choices made both in
the past and present, by households and governments, nationally as well as
globally. These choices are shaped by particular values.
Environmental values reflect the varied ways people experience, understand,
and care for the world around them. If community members feel that water
protection projects reflect their values and address their concerns, they are
more, likely to get involved with and provide much needed support for these
projects.
In recognition of the importance of stakeholder involvement to project
sustainability, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has
promoted community-based environmental protection and watershed protec-
tion. This Review highlights some general guidelines for community participa-
tion strategies, using examples from projects sponsored through a coopera-
tive agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
Society for Applied Anthropology.
What is a "Community"?
Developing successful community participation strategies - strategies
that have a positive effect on project outcomes - takes careful plan-
ning and analysis. The first question concerns the meaning of "com-
munity." Is this a community of place, based on life in a shared geographic
setting? Or is this a community of interest, based on shared values?
In either case, "community" implies shared action. Without this, community is
reduced to a social category, a class of persons sharing certain attributes and
interests. Community, strictly speaking, refers to persons who not only share
place and interests, but who also act collectively to further those interests.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
ANTHROPOLOGY
SfAA environmental
anthropology internship
projects emphasized a
variety of techniques to
give voice to local
perspectives in watershed
management planning
and implementation.
>Morro Bay Estuary
Community involvement in
estuary planning £ management
Chesapeake Bay^v
Watershed mgmnt includes multiple -^
perspectives Anacostja
Community values & restoration
planning
Broad River
Watershed planning includes local
knowledge
Procedural Fairness
Community participation efforts can influence whether environmental
programs are perceived as fair. When people say that environmental
management programs are unfair, they are really talking about two
different, often difficult to separate, dimensions of fairness. One dimension
involves outcomes - is the distribution of benefits and burdens "fair"?
Several different distribution principles may be applied: e.g., "equal" - where
every stakeholder receives exactly the same measure of benefit and burden,
regardless of size; or "proportional" where each stakeholder receives ben-
efits and burdens in proportion to their size, need, or other relevant factor
The other dimension involves procedure—is the process by which decisions
have been reached considered fair? A process is considered fair according
to some or all of the following attributes:
• Accessibility to decision-making process
• Diversity of views represented
• Opportunities to participate meaningfully
• Integration of concerns.
Accessibility to decision-making process!
Is the process open to all stakeholders, or just a limited few?
By what criteria are access and eligibility to participate limited,
either directly or indirectly?
In most cases, there are no explicit criteria that limit public participation.
However, outreach efforts tend to focus on stakeholders who are the most
vocal, the most organized, or who wield the most obvious influence in
promoting or blocking environmental protection. Unless other strategic
efforts are made, minority or low-income populations are not represented
among these groups.
-------
Community Participation in Watershed Management
For example, in Alabama and Georgia, Environmental Anthropology
Project intern Sandra Crismon attended county fairs and hosted
information booths where she distributed outreach material on
watershed planning efforts. She came into contact with a cross-
section of the population and elicited their perceptions of watershed
conditions and needs. Through these and other methods, racial
minority stakeholder groups and a wide range of other stakeholders
were identified who had been unrecognized in previous outreach
efforts.
Diversity of views represented: To what extent does
stakeholder involvement identify and select participants who
represent the widest possible range of interests, positions,
and values?
The Broad River is one of the last free flowing rivers in Georgia and is
critical to the health and economic well being of the region's popula-
tion. As in most watershed protection efforts, the challenge here was
to determine how to get residents actively to support river conserva-
tion efforts. In other words, what could transform a "community of
place" into a "community of joint action?"
To help answer this question, Environmental Anthropology Project
intern Stephanie Paladino collected data from residents of Madison
County about environmental values, public knowledge, interests, and
concerns involving land use management and river conservation. Not
surprisingly, real estate developers, business owners, wage laborers,
farmers, and civil servants expressed a variety of priorities, ranging
from building roads and facilitating population growth to keeping the
area rural and limiting housing developments.
In spite of these differences, residents shared a strong sense of
community and attachment to the land they called home. Residents
placed a high value on individual rights, but they also recognized the
importance of collective rights and the necessity of laws to help keep
the balance between the two. Taking care of the environment was
associated with both collective rights and the idea of being a good
neighbor.
Photo: Stephanie Paladino
Nearly everyone
cares about the
environment.
However, people
disagree enormously
about how best to
act for its protection.
Environmental Justice
Environmental justice has at its core the
notion that environmental burdens and
benefits should be evenly distributed, and
that the process by which decisions are
made should be fair. The Environmental
Justice movement in the United States
grew out of the 1960s Civil Rights
movement as advocates argued that
minority communities were not offered
equal protection under the law for all
environmental statutes and regulations.
Activists generally point to three different
kinds of inequity: Procedural - are
governing rules, regulations, and
evaluation criteria applied uniformly?
Geographical - why do some neighbor-
hoods, communities, and regions receive
direct benefits, such as jobs and tax
revenues, from industrial production while
the costs, such as the burdens of waste
disposal, are sent elsewhere? Social -
environmental decisions often mirror the
power arrangements of the larger society
and result in overloading minority and
low-income communities with noxious
facilities.
In response to mounting pressure from
the Environmental Justice movement,
President Clinton signed Executive Order
12898, directing all federal agencies to
adopt strategies to pay special attention
to burdens placed on low-income and
minority communities. The United States
Environmental Protection Agency has
responded by making environmental
justice concerns key components of
environmental impact statements
prepared under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act.
Environmental justice should play a key
role in the scoping analysis, that is, the
identification and definition of the range of
actions, alternatives, and impacts that will
be considered in an environmental impact
statement.
Environmental justice analysis must
consider the cumulative impacts of
multiple actions along with impacts from
a single proposed project. For example,
a project that will result in a permitted
discharge to nearby surface waters may
be of concern to populations who rely on
fishing and who already get their drinking
water through lead pipes; the cumulative
effects of both the projected discharge
and the existing lead pipes must be taken
into account. Adequate public participa-
tion is crucial to incorporating ehviron-
rnental justice considerations into the
United States environmental Protection
Agency's actions, both to enhance the
quality of the analyses and to ensure that
potential affected parties are not over-
looked and excluded from the process.
For additional information, see: http://
www.eDa.gov/swerosps/ei
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
ANTHROPOLOGY
Environmental Values
Environmental planners want their
preservation, enhancement, and
restoration plans to serve the
public interest, and need long-term
public support for their efforts.
Anthropologists suggest that
lasting environmental policy
solutions are best grounded in
public value orientations, not
opinions. While opinions tend to
be ever-shifting and subject to
manipulation by marketing and
advertising campaigns, value
orientations tend to be more deep-
seated, change more gradually,
and are less susceptible to
purposeful manipulation. In
thinking about the role of values in
environmental policy-making, the
following three questions are
Important:
(1) How can we learn about
public values? Ethnographic
(qualitative) research is a
productive complement to surveys
as a systematic data collection
method. Values are variable
across a population, not mono-
lithic, and surveys help us
understand this variability.
Qualitative research helps us
understand the richly textured
meanings of any particular
position along a distribution of
values.
(2) What values matter, in the
context of environmental
planning and management?
Rather than talk about attitudes
and opinions - "How strongly do
you feel about the environment?
How much would you be willing to
pay to keep salmon from extinc-
tion?" -environmental planners
and managers should consider a
more encompassing set of values,
having to do with "consent,"
"liability," "equity," and "time."
Consent; What sort of collective
agreement forms the basis of
management decisions? Does
support for a decision have to be
unanimous, or does a principle of
majority rule apply? Does
agreement have to be explicitly
spelled out in a formal, legally
binding document, or is business
done more informally, "by a
handshake."
In this project, the data collection activities themselves supported outreach
and education efforts, and stimulated broader participation in public hearings
and planning processes. The research findings helped project planners think
more broadly about ways to frame outreach efforts so as to focus on the
commonalities that would support watershed protection efforts rather than
highlight differences among individual perspectives.
Opportunities to participate meaningfully:
Does the process allow participants to tell their stories clearly and fully
or represent their viewpoints in ways that are meaningful to them? Is
there evidence that their interests and concerns have registered?
Public documentation is important so that when participants offer their
views, something is not lost in translation.
Developing appropriate public outreach messages is an important means of
letting community members know they've been heard. On the other hand,
trying to engage the public with images that do not ring true, or emphasizing
priorities that are not shared by local communities can alienate or even
antagonize much needed collaborators.
The importance of registering participant viewpoints is well-illustrated by
Environmental Anthropology Project intern Michael Kronthal's work with
residents in three different neighborhoods located east of the Anacostia
River, in Washington, DC. Kronthal attended community meetings and
public events, interviewed local residents to document use patterns associ-
ated with current river conditions, and identified varied interests and views
concerning watershed improvement projects.
Most residents voiced negative sentiments concerning the river, its condition,
and restoration plans. They thought of the river in terms of the surrounding
overgrown lots, high grass, trees, and underbrush that provided opportuni-
ties for drug dealing and other criminal activity that threatened their personal
safety. Residents were also concerned that the river was polluted and an
environmental health risk.
While some informants reported calming feelings when visiting or observing
the river, they also noted disappointment, sadness, and anger at the river's
decline, and the loss of a perceived time when the river was not polluted and
their neighborhoods were relatively safe.
Community perceptions of river space as a setting for negative social
experience contrasted with the values and visions of project planners, who
viewed the natural features of river habitat as a social good. To encourage
broader community support for river restoration efforts, outreach messages
needed to acknowledge these negative realities. Restoration plans needed
to include steps to transform a local hazard into a setting that encouraged
healthy, pleasurable experiences. Without acknowledging and addressing
neighborhood resident concerns associated with the river, outreach efforts
would have little chance of success.
4
-------
Community Participation in Watershed Management
Photo: Monica Hunter
Volunteers assist with estuary habitat assessment in Morro Bay.
Integration of concerns:
To what extent do the ultimate decision-making authorities
report back to participants on how decisions are responsive
to interests and concerns, or why they have not been?
In Morro Bay, California, a coalition of community groups and residents
documented the unique characteristics of a local estuary, monitored
conditions, developed the means to fund conservation efforts, and
developed the political support to secure State and National Estuary
Program (NEP) status.
However, once national program status was achieved, conflict erupted.
Bird hunters and bird watchers, economic development interests and
anti-growth advocates, habitat preservationists and recreational tourism
proponents, citizen activists and environmental professionals: all had
their own ideas of how the estuary should be managed. This was
especially problematic since the long-term plans for monitoring and
implementing habitat protection depended on broad-based support of
community volunteers.
Environmental Values continued...
Liability: Who is considered
responsible for environmental
problems? When the salmon
population declines precipitously, do
all people in the watershed see
themselves as partly responsible, or
do they feel it is somebody else's
fault? Do they assign themselves
responsibility for making the
changes necessary to restore the
habitat that supports the fishery, or
do they see this as someone else's
obligation?
Equity. Consider the different
principles of fairness that might be
at work, including both distributive
(outcome) fairness and procedural
fairness discussed earlier.
Time: There are social and cultural
variations in ideas about how far
into the future today's actions have
important consequences.
(3) Under what conditions do
values change, and why? As we
try to involve the potentially affected
public - to gain insights about their
values - we are bound to hear
people voice concerns about
threats to traditional values. While
we know that values are more
stable than opinions, we also know
that long-held values do change.
They change as a result of
commodification (a market being
created for goods and services that
formerly were not for buying and
selling) and as a result of globaliza-
tion (a demand for local goods and
services from distant places). Value
changes tend to occur rapidly
through immigration and contact
between different ethnic groups and
social classes, and via incorporation
into regional/global markets.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
ANTHROPOLOGY
After analyzing the history of community involvement in the estuary
project, environmental anthropologist Monica Hunter discovered that
one underlying source of the conflict was that community members felt
disenfranchised by the decision-making authorities. Community-based
volunteers who had been essential research partners in the formative
planning stages of the national estuary now felt relegated to the more
passive role of the informed "public."
To counter this effect, and to strengthen volunteer participation during
the transitional period, Hunter worked with a coalition of groups and
residents to publish an estuary newsletter. This project brought volun-
teers and NEP staff together to identify and work with diverse stakehold-
ers. The newsletter also created a public arena for local voices and
sustained community interest as the roles and duties of community
volunteers evolved from activist/advocate to stewards of the estuary.
The importance of integrating community knowledge and concerns into
the project design is highlighted in a study of community responses to
Pfiesteria, a toxic microorganism responsible for fish kills in Chesapeake
Bay. As part of a project sponsored by the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Society for Applied Anthropology and the Pocomoke River
Alliance, environmental anthropologist Shawn Maloney conducted
participant observation with Pocomoke River watershed residents,
scientists, and policy makers.
One of the project's objectives was to communicate local interests and
concerns about nutrient management, environmental protection/restora-
tion, and Pfiesteria to state and federal decision-making bodies, in order
to strengthen the role of local resource users in preventing further
outbreaks of Pfiesteria.
The project succeeded in documenting local knowledge and concerns,
strengthened local awareness of the issues, and increased involvement
in community-based organizations. However, efforts to include the local
community voice at the level of regional politics were less successful.
In terms of procedural fairness, participants devoted time and energy to
sharing their viewpoints and concerns, but saw no evidence that their
efforts had any impact.
-------
Community Participation in Watershed Management
Summing Up
To be successful in achieving environmental goals, public participa-
tion strategies must begin with a clear definition of "community"
and inclusive identification of stakeholders. Projects must then
adhere to the steps of procedural fairness outlined above.
Photo: Ed Liebow
Widely promoting community participation without a strategic plan grounded in local realities, or without
attention to procedural fairness, leads to community burn out. Repeated calls for public participation
results in apathetic or distrustful responses to outreach efforts if community members believe their work
is in vain.
For community participation to contribute to the success of environmental
goals, environmental planners must depart from scripted notions of what
participation entails. Meaningful community participation implies giving
local people the opportunity to help define the problems, develop and
prioritize remedies, and implement changes in ways that they perceive
as being beneficial and that will contribute to equitable and sustainable
environmental practices.
For additional information:
Community Based Environmental
Protection
http://www.epa.gov
ecocommunity/
Crismon's report on Participation
and Environmental Justice Issues
in EPA Region 4 Watershed
Projects
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/
crismon.html
Paladino's report on Perceptions
of a Changing Environment in
Madison County
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/paladino/
paladino.html
Kronthal's report on Local
Residents, the Anacostia River
and "Community"
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/kronthal/
kronthal.pdf
Hunter's report on community
participation and Friends of the
Morro Bay Estuary
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/hunter/
hunter.pdf
Maloney's report on the Pfiesteria
project in the Chesapeake Bay
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/maloney/
malonevfinal.pdf and
http://www.sfaa.net/eap/malonev/
maionev.html
For more information about the
Pfiesteria controversy in the
Chesapeake Bay, please see the
article by: Michael Paolisso and
Erve Chambers (2001), Culture,
Politics, and Toxic Dinoflagellate
Blooms: The Anthropology of
Pfiesteria. Human Organization:
-------
•*y Skagit River
Jt Cower Elwha Klallam Tribe w
Colunnlia Plateau ^* Clark Fork
* Umatilla River
- The Society for Applied Anthropology
Niagara Fails ^^Tuscarora
Nation
* Morro Bay Estuary
Pocomoke River A
Bloomimjton * ^*
Hamilton County
*Zunl Pueblo ~~\
Cherokee Nation
Environmental Anthropology Projects focused on community-based
approaches to environmental protection throughout the U.S.
Environmental anthropologists analyze and resolve human
and ecological problems posed by energy extraction and
use; agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining, and other
resource development; pesticide exposure, toxic waste
disposal, and other environmental health issues;
environmental restoration; tourism, public lands,
and cultural resource management; the protection
of traditional knowledge, values, and resource rights;
and environmental education
The Society for Applied Anthropology
was incorporated in 1941, with the mission
of promoting the scientific investigation of
"the principles controlling the relations of human
beings to one another" and the wide application of
those principles to practical problems."
In 1996 the Society established the Environmental
Anthropology Project, funded through a five-year
cooperative agreement with the U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. The aims of the project
were to provide technical support for community-
based approaches to environmental protection
and to improve the understanding of how cultural
values and social behavior affect environmental
management decisions.
Theresa Trainor served as EPA's project officer
from the project's inception. Barbara Rose
Johnston directed the project for its first four
years'; Robert Winthrop served as director for the
final year of the project. The Review series was
produced by Barbara Rose Johnston, and
Gabrielle O'Malley and Edward Liebow of the
Environmental Health and Social Policy Center.
The Reviews solely reflect the views of their
authors, not those of the Environmental Protection
Agency. Society officers (including Jean Schensul,
John Young, Linda Bennett, and Noel Chrisman)
and a project advisory group provided oversight
during the course of the agreement. Many Society
members served as mentors for the project's
interns and fellows, and as reviewers for its
reports and publications.
The Society for Applied Anthropology is grateful
for the financial support and professional coopera-
tion of the Environmental Protection Agency and
its staff. For more information on the Society and
the Environmental Anthropology Project,
please see our web site: www.sfaa.net.
Society for Applied Anthropology
PO Box 2436 .
Oklahoma City, OK 73101-2436
Non Profit Organization
US Postage
PAID
Oklahoma City, OK
Permit No. 1010
© 2001 Society for Applied Anthropology. This Review has been prepared by the Society for Applied Anthropology, and does not imply any
official EPA endorsement of or responsibility for the opinions, ideas, data or products presented in the Review.
-------
The Society for Applied Anthropology
President
NOEL J. CHRISMAN
Past-President
LINDA A. BENNETT
Secretary
WILLIE L. BASER
Treasurer
THOMAS A. ARCURY
Editor, HO
DONALD D. STULL
Editor, PA
ALEXANDER M. ERVIN
Editor, Newsletter
MICHAEL WHITEFORD
20.02 Annual Meeting
Program Chair
BENJAMIN BLOUNT
Board Of Directors
SUSAN L. ANDREATTA
E. PAUL DURRENBEROER
, SUE ESTROFF
STANLEY E. HYLAND
EDWARD B. LIEBOW
KRISTIN V. LUNDBERG
NANCY J. PAREZO
SFAA Office
P.O. Box 2436
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73101-2436
(405)843-5113
(405)843-8'553-FAX
; E-MAIL:
INFO@SFAA.NET
WEB PAGE:
WWW.SFAA.NET
Publications
HUMAN ORGANIZATION
PRACTICING ANTHROPOLOGY
SpAA NEWSLETTER
Dear SfAA Colleagues:
AUG 2 3 2002
In 1996 the Environmental Protection Agency and the Society for Applied
Anthropology entered into a five-year cooperative agreement establishing the
Environmental Anthropology Project. Its aim: to increase the access of
communities and policy makers to anthropological expertise in the solution of
environmental problems.
In all, thirty fellows and interns received funding under this agreement. While
working with EPA staff and community organizations, they applied their
anthropological skills and insights to a wide range of environmental
challenges, from minimizing the human costs of ecological restoration in south
Florida, and analyzing the implications of a habitat conservation program for
Washington state farmers, to mapping the perceptions of risk in communities
surrounding a nuclear power plant in Michigan. More information about the
Environmental Anthropology Project is available on the SfAA web site:
http ://www. sfaa.net/eap/abouteap.html.
Many SfAA members contributed to the project's success as director, members
of its advisory committee, mentors for project interns, and editors for the
project's reports and publications. Enclosed is a final product of the
Environmental Anthropology Project, a series of five Reviews highlighting
themes and issues in environmental anthropology, primarily illustrated by
work conducted under this project. These include: (I) Human Dimensions of
Environmental Policy; (2) Community Participation in Watershed
Management, (3) Restoring the Florida Everglades: Social Impacts; (4)
Environmental Stewardship in Indian Country; and (5) Making a Difference in
the World: Applied Anthropology' Internships. The five Reviews are available
as a set for classroom use at a modest cost from the Society office.
With warm regards,
Noel Chrisman
SfAA President
Theresa Trainor
EPA Project Officer
Rob Winthrop
Director, Environmental
Anthropology Project
-------
------- |