Barrier 1: Agency decision-making processes are used and influenced by a limited number of constituencies
Fish and wildlife management has been defined as the process of making and implementing decisions to influence the interactions between people, animals, and habitats (Riley et al., 2002). Decisions occur at many levels and determine policies, regulations, programs, and practices that govern how fish and wildlife are managed. Fish and wildlife agencies have legal requirements to involve the public in many of their decisions. Input from diverse constituencies can make such decisions better and help the agency fulfill its public trust responsibilities. Even decisions without a legal requirement to involve the public can be improved when broader constituencies are provided the opportunity to be involved. Public participation in agency decisions often involves a limited number of constituencies. Reasons for this include indifference, a lack of understanding or awareness of the decision-making process or its impacts, a lack of time, mistrust or lack of confidence in the agency or government in general, language barriers, and other factors. The lack of involvement by broader constituencies in agency decision-making can lead to reduced awareness of, public support for, and satisfaction in the agency and result in decisions that may not be fully reflective of larger public interests.
Strategy 1: Modify decision-making processes at all levels to be inclusive, transparent, and collaborative.
Fish and wildlife agencies make myriad decisions, some of which affect specific constituencies (i.e., setting harvest seasons and bag limits for fish and game) and others that affect larger public interests (i.e., protection of endangered species; regulation of invasive species). Such decisions can have lasting effects and affect the quality of life and recreational pursuits of constituents. The scope of decisions can vary from state- or province-wide to those that affect a single landowner or parcel of land. As public entities, laws, regulations, and policies dictate that the public be informed of and, in many cases, invited into decision-making processes. The degree to which the public chooses to participate varies depending on the subject, presence or capacity of constituency groups, and ability of the agency to reach and engage constituencies. Modifying decision-making processes can lead to greater inclusiveness, transparency, collaboration, and trust by the public.
Step 1: Identify current decision-making processes and where and when constituencies are engaged in that process.
Tactic 1: Assess how constituencies currently engage in legal and planning decision-making processes.
To understand whether decision-making processes need to be modified, it is important to gain an understanding of the processes and how broader constituencies are currently engaged. A review of legal and planning processes can be done in-house or externally by a contractor or partner. A review should be free of bias and transparent. Because large agencies may have hundreds of decision-making processes, an agency may need to limit the scope of the review to the most impactful decision-making processes or those that are most likely to engage or affect broader constituencies.
Tactic 2: Identify key constituencies and describe how they currently, or can potentially, engage in decision-making processes.
Under the public trust doctrine, agencies have a responsibility to engage and serve all constituents. Understanding how individuals or groups currently engage, or may engage, will help the agency identify gaps or deficiencies in engagement. Agency staff and partners can collaborate to identify and acquire contact information for key constituencies. The Public Participation Spectrum developed by the International Association of Public Participation could be a useful tool to help define stakeholders’ roles in a public participation process.
Step 2: Formally assess if, how, and why constituencies engage in the decision-making process.
Tactic 1: Assess motivations and barriers to constituent participation in decision-making processes.
Constituents engage in decision-making processes for many reasons and it is important to understand their motivations as well as the reasons they do not engage. These motivations could include advancement of an agenda or mission, desire to network with agency staff or leadership, or an interest in exercising public activism. There are a number of methods that could be used to assess motivations and barriers to constituency involvement in agency decision-making. These could include a search of relevant literature or original research using mail, phone or internet surveys, focus groups, or interviews. Social scientists should be involved or consulted to ensure the results of an assessment are valid.
Tactic 2: Determine desired level of constituency participation in decision-making process.
Engagement in agency decision-making can take many forms. It can include a one-time comment on a policy or regulation or consist of a longer, more drawn out process requiring months or even years of review and input. An agency may seek technical comments on a proposed regulation or simply support. Because not all constituencies will be able to contribute to agency decision-making in the same way, it is important to identify the desired or preferred level of engagement. The benefits of engaging broader constituencies will need to be balanced with the need to make efficient, timely, and sound decisions that are in the best interest of people and wildlife.
Tactic 3: Join or establish a community of practice for constituency engagement.
Public engagement is a discipline that is not unique to the fish and wildlife profession. Networking with others who participate in constituency engagement, both inside and outside an agency, can serve as a means to share practices and innovations and provide support. Some agencies may have established communities of practice that regularly meet, whereas there may be a need to form a new practice where none exists. The International Association of Public Participation has a number of regional and state/provincial chapters that could serve this purpose.
Step 3: Identify opportunities to increase constituency involvement in the decision-making process.
Tactic 1: Develop a plan to improve outreach to nonparticipating constituencies.
An agency may need to develop new approaches or strategies to reach nonparticipating constituencies. A plan, using targeted outreach, can help overcome barriers to participation. An agency should review past engagement strategies, identify successful tactics previously used and consult counterparts in other agencies for advice. New approaches to engagement could include virtual participation at public meetings or forums, engaging constituencies in places and at times convenient to them, holding regularly scheduled listening sessions across the state or province, using social media for outreach, making use of census and other data to target audiences and selecting meeting topics that appeal to broader constituencies.
Tactic 2: Identify organizations that can help reach nonparticipating constituencies.
An agency’s capacity or standing may make it difficult to reach certain desired constituencies through traditional communication channels. Organizations that represent the interests of key constituencies might be more effective avenues to reach and communicate the importance of participating in agency decision-making. Organizations that could be engaged include local conservation or recreation groups; professional, religious, or community organizations; academic institutions; or business groups.
Tactic 3: Identify and evaluate potential changes to legal and planning processes.
Making changes to legal and planning processes to broaden constituency engagement can be complex and time-consuming. Identification of potential changes and an evaluation of the impact of those changes is important. Changes may require approval by an agency’s governing board or even legislature. Providing a clear justification for, and understanding of, potential unintended consequences is also paramount. Potential changes should be vetted with constituencies that would benefit from increased involvement in agency decision-making as well as those who might feel as though they are losing influence.
Step 4: Make decision-making processes more inclusive and transparent.
Tactic 1: Where necessary, change legal and planning processes.
Once agency leadership agrees to make changes to legal and planning processes, the changes should be made in a transparent and timely manner. If the process to make changes takes a long time or encounters obstacles, key constituencies should be informed. Constituencies who would benefit from the changes could serve as a guiding coalition to support implementation of the changes.
Tactic 2: Conduct outreach to improve accessibility to diverse constituencies.
Once changes are made to the agency decision-making process, those changes should be communicated to thought leaders, the public, and constituency organizations. The new approaches or strategies developed to engage broader constituencies should be employed to help get the word out and build anticipation for future engagement.
Tactic 3: Collaborate with external organizations to engage nonparticipating constituencies.
One of the most effective means for reaching broader constituencies may be through constituency organizations. An agency could use existing relationships or build new relationships with the leaders of key constituency groups. Durable relationships built on mutual respect, trust, and shared purpose is essential. Meeting constituency groups at their regular meeting locations or in places and at times convenient to them will help build a lasting commitment to collaboration.
Step 5: Assess if diverse constituencies are more engaged in the decision-making process.
Tactic 1: Develop metrics for measuring broader constituency engagement.
The use of quantitative and qualitative measures to assess and track constituency engagement will help determine whether progress is being made and if adaptive changes are needed. Measures could include the number and diversity of existing and new constituencies who engage in agency decision-making processes, the level of their engagement, and their satisfaction. Measures should be relatively easy and inexpensive to collect, analyze, use, and report and be meaningful to determine if a change in course is needed.
Tactic 2: Measure constituency engagement and modify processes as needed.
Once an agreed-upon set of measures are identified, a process to collect data on constituency involvement in decision-making should be set in place. The timeframe for collecting and reporting data should be determined and those responsible for data collection and reporting should be identified. Successful outcomes or lessons learned should be shared and communicated within the agency and among its partners.
© Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Agencies must assess whether diverse constituencies are engaged in agency decision-making processes.
