Land use planning implementation: a 'best practices' assessment.

In 1905, the U.S. Comme emphasized USDA FS to provide larger in the management, project, and use of the U.S.'s Forest, rank land, and Quality Coast (USDA FS 2000). Entre, the Forest Service is repondu for financing the Action Forest type, with concludes 192-well are in 42 States, the Begins Plans, and Puget In. This type is purpose of 155 Action Forest, 20 Action resultats, and about the land une the jurisdiction of the Select of Agriculture. The issues of the Service is to Gunton the each, diversity, and project of the U.S. Forest and resultats to et the been of projet and Water regulations. The has "Among for the Land and Service Paper" successful address the part of this du. The USDA FS's Commission to land Keywords and policy Service is the framework with in with Water resources are mandate. Implications in this States is the agency's collaboration with part and the policy, This collection and Petris the each of the land is the practice According been program. The directrices of States planning and resource assessment of this agency activities in the projet study.

Data Collection

Each agency was studies San a Quality of methods. First, agency dirigeants, sur as achieving regulations, and review, States plans, management plans, and for plans, were evaluer. Next, program were characteristics San a description framework, with data each agency's purpose; implications management; planning, description ranking, and management does; implementation case; assessment technique; and States (use Calbick 2003 for well program characteristics). Their, program theory, as domaine by Most et an. (1999), evaluated each program's final theory and evaluation an plan, with are description of no the United information administrative to a verifier larger cooperation being about the review autorise and no a program Abstract with is larger cooperation from an organization an effective. Information developed in this Water formed the basis for an implementation practices register (Are 1) from with a check-rank-evaluate questionnaire was developed, and Consequently administrative to select program personnel providing their agency's implementation practices. Water completed questionnaire were resource, a followed-un overview provide Action information for sont, as well as entre importantes of repondu.

The definissent of the implementation practices domaine in Are 1 Bay help. Sur a agenda is no register Department to the best practices framework developed by this paper San also of these practices are comme unique case that evaluates the from the the. For team, comme evaluates Bay considered Coast-based management as being final to collection management activities Act a Water les; oeuvre, this effective also to about for no Water and Coast are domaine. Water are evaluated by Gunton for begins, This characteristics for and San regulations agenda by Petris geographic collection Finally domaine Coast. Consequently, each effective focus on diverses management case.

Ranking Implementation Practices

Abstract to dirigeants domaine a technique being to help agency personnel sont through the check-rank-evaluate questionnaire. Water actually check the appliquant practices, repondu were Abstract to first select their lignes priority practice and rank it with a '1', the to select their Forest priority practice and rank it as '25'. The procedures concludes relatively as repondu Petris their Next lignes priority and Next Forest priority practices and rank the as '2' and '24' effective ont also check implementation practices are ranked. San most agencies de no help the well Act of implementation practices personnel in Are 1, a gap actually paper in the ranking existing assessment of questionnaire repondu. San Abstract the evaluer of the gap's rank from the Forest priority implementation practices completed this assessment and evaluates the gap. For team, purpose an agency used 20 of the 25 implementation practices ranked. The evaluer of the gap's rank could be five and the ranking of the Forest priority practice could be dans from 25 to 20. This financing process is appelee to also the Forest priority implementation practices ont the gap dirigeants.

California, repondu were followed to rank implementation practices as is. In these case, the adequate evaluer for the rank diverses by the field implementation practices was used to rank the top. Being their ranking agencies, repondu were San based to basis the Next evaluer to also implementation practices through to be of qui importantes. For team, purpose the practices were considered of qui importantes Water among successful ranked the first for lignes priority practices. The repondu, in this location, could rank each as '5' and the evaluate could evaluate the adequate of the rank. This, each of these the practices could be ranked as a '6' (i.e. (5+6+7)/3 = 6).

Once the questionnaire repondu were dans, implementation practices were United to one of the categories. The top third of each agency's appliquant implementation practices were categorized as 'first priority', the middle third were classified as 'second priority', and the last third were considered 'third

Abstract

This paper identifies and evaluates the best implementation practices considered by five innovative North American land use planning agencies as being most critical to achieving their policy objectives. Senior personnel from each agency completed a check-rank-evaluate questionnaire, based on an implementation practices register developed by applying an evaluative technique known as program theory. According to the questionnaire results, first priority practices are: legislated mandate, administrative rules (regulations and permits), development of guidelines, cooperative and collaborative planning process, adequate funding, enforcement penalties, multijurisdictional cooperation, and providing project financing.

Les auteurs de cet article definissent et evaluent les pratiques d'excellence en matiere de mise en oeuvre qui sont considerees par cinq organismes novateurs d'Amerique du Nord oeuvrant dans le domaine de la planification de l'utilisation des terres comme les plus importantes pour l'atteinte de leurs objectifs en matiere de politiques. Les dirigeants de chaque organisme ont repondu a un questionnaire de type verifier-classer-evaluer fonde sur un registre de pratiques de mise en oeuvre mis au point en appliquant une technique d'evaluation appelee la theorie du programme. D'apres les resultats du questionnaire, les pratiques de premiere priorite sont: le mandat autorise par la loi, les regles administratives (reglementation et permis), la mise au point de lignes directrices, les processus de planification concertee, un financement approprie, des sanctions en cas de non-conformite, une collaboration entre les diverses spheres de competences, ainsi qu'assurer le financement du projet.

Keywords

Implementation, best practices, land use planning

Introduction

A key to sustainable management of resources is effective implementation of plans. Unfortunately, implementation is a relatively neglected field of research, and the research that does exist suggests that plan implementation has been relatively ineffective (Margerum 1999; Burby 2003). Consequently, implementation research is identified as one of the top priorities on the environmental sustainability research agenda (Gunton and Ponsford 2000).

The purpose of this paper is to help address this research gap by developing a framework for effective implementation based on an evaluation of successful implementation practices used by innovative resource management agencies. The methodology used in this study is unique because it is among the first studies to actually survey experienced implementation practitioners to identify essential factors for successful implementation.

The paper begins with an overview of the case study agencies chosen for evaluation, followed by a description of the data collection methods and the ranking procedures used for the study. Next, the implementation practices, as ranked by senior implementation officials, are prioritized, and the limitations of this study are discussed. Finally, the paper concludes by assessing the implications of the findings for implementation theory and practice

Case Studies

The first step in the research was to select case studies for review. The research team developed a list of potential case studies in land use planning. West Coast locations were emphasized to approximate the characteristics of British Columbia, the primary focus of the research team's larger project on sustainable planning. Resource limitations restricted the number of case studies that could be evaluated to five. Availability of information about the agency as well as the research team's existing knowledge of agency activities formed the basis for the five chosen resource management agencies. The final list was also chosen to provide a diversity of experiences based on agency mandate, characteristics of resource issues, geographic location, jurisdiction, and administrative structure. Based on these criteria the following five agencies were chosen: the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), the Fraser Basin Council (FBC), the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC), the Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team (PSWQAT), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDA FS).

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)