Tyler A. Scott

Do Collaborative Groups Enhance Interorganizational Networks

Collaborative governance and organizational networks are popular and well-documented topics, but the relationship between them is not always clear. This article examines the extent to which publicly sponsored collaborative groups are associated with network ties between individual organizations. It does so by applying exponential random graph models to model how co-membership and co-participation in a publicly sponsored collaborative group is associated with the likelihood of two organizations engaging directly in three types of network ties: consultation, planning, or management. Our data come from a member survey of 57 collaborative groups that involve independent public, nonprofit, and private organizations in collective efforts to restore marine areas and freshwater ecosystems. We find that the probability of observing a network tie between two organizations increases with the extent to which both organizations participate in the same collaborative group, but that the association diminishes as the number of groups to which they belong increases. The association is strongest for organizations that report that participation in a collaborative group has increased their access to information and resources and their awareness of other organizations. Given that public agencies often use collaborative groups as a means to foster relationships between organizations in a policy network, it is important to know whether the initiation and sponsorship of collaborative groups is associated with the formation of interorganizational network ties.

Flexible, collaborative, and meaningful? The case of the US coastal nonpoint pollution control program

Flexibility and collaboration are a common prescription for complex, transboundary problems such as nonpoint source (NPS) water pollution. This paper examines the case of the United States Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program (CNPCP), under which all 28 coastal states must develop comprehensive NPS management programs. The CNPCP allows states to satisfy requirements using voluntary, non-regulatory measures, and grants considerable flexibility in terms of institutional coordination and public participation. Thus, it is unclear whether compliance – which is incentivized with Federal funds – should be associated with improved environmental outcomes. Using a remotely sensed land cover census of 800 coastal counties from 1996 to 2010, this paper tests whether compliant programs – and particular participation and coordination mechanisms – are associated with different rates of forest and wetlands conversion. Approved states are associated with decreased rates of forest and wetlands conversion, but minimal differences are found with respect to specific participation and coordination strategies.

Is Collaboration a Good Investment? Modeling the Impact of Government Support for Nonprofit Collaborative Watershed Management Councils.

This paper couples data concerning 2500 grants given to local watershed management councils by an Oregon state agency, the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB), with 20 years of monthly water quality data sampled at 141 sites around the state. I examine whether public input, in the form of grant funding, to nonprofit watershed councils impacts water quality, and further compare the impacts of different grant types, such as restoration projects or stakeholder outreach. These data present some of the first evidence regarding the effect of collaborative management outputs on environmental outcomes (Carr et al. 2012; Koontz and Thomas 2006). In modeling these effects, this paper also makes a methodological contribution by demonstrating how spatio-temporal ecological and epidemiological modeling techniques can be used to test policy theory and analyze policy impacts using extant data. Specifically, I use integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA) (Rue et al. 2009) and stochastic partial differential equations (SPDE) (Lindgren et al. 2011) to fit a hierarchical Bayesian model that accounts for spatial and temporal dependency. I find that increased public support (in the form of OWEB grant funds) for nonprofit watershed council education and outreach actions are strongly linked to water quality improvements. Support for council administrative purposes and scientific or technical activities are also associated with improved water quality over longer timer periods. The impacts of restoration projects are positive on average but more uncertain.

Does Collaboration Make Any Difference? Linking Collaborative Watershed Groups to Environmental Outcomes.

This paper addresses addresses two research questions: (1) Do publicly supported collaborative environmental management groups improve environmental outcomes?; and (2) How do collaborative groups with different levels of responsibility, formalization, and representativeness compare in this regard? Using a representative watershed quality data series, the EPA’s National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA) and Wadeable Streams Assessment (WSA), in conjunction with a watershed management regime database coded for this analysis, it tests the relationship between collaborative governance and watershed quality for 357 watersheds. Since these are observational data, a multilevel propensity score matching method is used to control for selection bias. Using the augmented inverse propensity weighted estimator (AIPW), I estimate the average treatment effect on the treated (ATE) for six different water quality and habitat condition metrics. Collaborative watershed groups are found to improve water chemistry and in-stream habitat conditions. I then use hierarchical linear regression modeling (HLM) to examine how group responsibilities, inclusivity with regard to membership, and formalization affect the predicted impact of a collaborative group. Groups that engage in management activities (in comparison to coordination or planning) are found to achieve greater environmental gains. Limited differentiation is found with regards to the presence of a group coordinator, increased goal specificity, or greater stakeholder diversity.