Evaluating collaborative planning: a case study of a Land and Resource Management Planning process.

scenarios Building an agreement Consensus report or option report

* Strive for consensus on

management direction or agree

on a range of options Approval Final plan

* Submit consensus report or

options report for approval

* Prepare final plans based on

approval Implementation Monitoring and review Monitoring report, research reports Amendment Amend plan as required *Modified from BC IRPC 1993. Table 2. Chronology of Lillooet LRMP Process The BC government announces Lillooet LRMP process and November 1995

the Stein Valley protection decision. Lillooet LRMP commences. June 1996 Mining industry withdraws from all provincial LRMPs. February 1999 Lillooet table produces three land use options ranging June 1999

from 12% to 30% of land base as protected areas. Provincial government gives March 2001 as a completion October 2000

deadline for the first phase of the Lillooet LRMP and March 2002 for the second phase. Participants fail to reach consensus after more than March 2001

four years of negotiations on a single plan. They

submit two plans to the provincial government. Provincial government approves the second scenario (from April 2001

conservation, recreation, and tourism and community

group). New provincial government announces its intention to November 2001

override the previous government's land use decision

and requests Ministry of Sustainable Resource

Management to complete the LRMP. Provincial government releases draft LRMP for July 2004

consultation with First Nations and announces that

there are issues, including consultation with First

Nations, that must be resolved prior to a final

Cabinet decision. Provincial government signs protocol with First Nations June 2004 to

to commence government-to-government negotiations on present

land use planning and other matters in Lillooet (March 2007)

region. Modified from BC MSRM 2004 and Jim Britton, personal communication, March 22, 2007. Table 3. Outcome criteria for evaluating CP process 1. Agreement The process reaches an agreement accepted by

all parties. 2. Perceived as The process and outcomes are perceived as

Successful successful by stakeholders. 3. Conflict Reduced The process reduces conflict. 4. Superior to Other The process is perceived as superior to

Methods alternative methods. 5. Innovation and The process produces creative and innovative

Creativity ideas and outcomes. 6. Knowledge, Stakeholders gained knowledge, understanding,

Understanding and and skills by participating in the process.

Skills 7. Relationships and The process created new personal and working

Social Capital relationships, and social capital among

participants. 8. Second-order Effects The process had second-order effects including

changes in behaviors, spin-off partnerships,

umbrella groups, collaborative activities, new

practices and/or new institutions.

Participants worked together on issues or

projects outside the process. 9. Information The process produced improved data,

information, and analyses through joint fact

finding that stakeholders understand and

accept as accurate. 10. Public Interest The outcomes are regarded as just and serve

the common good or public interest, not just

those of participants in the process 11. Understanding and The process resulted in increased

Support of CP understanding of, and participants support

for, collaboration. * Source Frame et al. 2004. Table 4. Process criteria for evaluating a CP process 1. Purpose and The purpose is driven by a shared purpose and

Incentives provides incentives to participate and work

towards consensus in the process. 2. Inclusive All parties with a significant interest in the

Representation issues and outcome are involved throughout the

process. 3. Voluntary Parties who are affected or interested

Participation and participate voluntarily and are committed to the

Commitment process. 4. Self Design The parties involved work together to design the

process to suit the individual needs of that

process and participants. 5. Clear Ground As the process is initiated, a comprehensive

Rules procedural framework is established that includes

clear terms of references and operating

procedures. 6. Equal The process provides for equal and balanced

Opportunity and opportunity for effective participation of all

Resources parties. 7. Principled The process operates according to the conditions

Negotiation of principled negotiation including mutual

and Respect respect, trust, and understanding. 8. Accountability The process and its participants are accountable

to the broader public and their own

constituencies. 9. Flexible, Flexibility is designed into the process to allow

Adaptive, and for adaptation and creativity in problem solving.

Creative 10. High-Quality The process incorporates high quality information

Information into decision making. 11. Time Limits Realistic deadlines and milestones are

established and managed throughout the process. 12. Commitment to The process and final agreement include clear

Implementation commitments to implementation and monitoring.

and Monitoring 13. Effectiveness The process is coordinated and managed

Process effectively and in a neutral manner.

Management 14. Independent The process uses an independent, trained

Facilitation facilitator throughout the process. Source Frame et al. 2004. Table 5. Outcome criteria evaluation results Criterion % Stakeholder Agreement Knowledge, Understanding and Skills 94 Innovation and Creativity 88 Superior to Other Methods 75 Relationships and Social Capital 75 Second-order Effects 75 Information 75 Understanding and Support of CP 69 Public Interest 56 Perceived as Successful 25 Conflict Reduced 19 Agreement No Table 6. Process criteria evaluation results Criterion % Stakeholder Agreement Voluntary Participation and Commitment 100 Principled Negotiation and Respect 94 Inclusive Representation 81 Flexible, Adaptive, and Creative 81 Independent Facilitation 81 Clear Ground Rules 75 Accountability 75 Effective Process Management 75 High Quality Information 75 Self-design 69 Purpose and Incentives 63 Commitment to Implementation and Monitoring 56 Equal Opportunity and Resources 56 Time Limits 31