Abstract
This study examines the process of shoreline regulation through the citizen-led permitting process by local wetlands boards in Virginia, focusing on the perceptions of the permit decision-making team and the factors considered in their decision making. Analysis of the decision process reveals the intricacies of the management of tidal wetlands and how they affect the long-term sustainability of wetlands. Results show that the process of compromise and negotiation with property owners is valued highly as part of the permit-seeking process, resulting in very few permits being denied. Decision makers perceived that environmental change and increased flooding are risks to their community, but also that their decisions are balancing environmental concerns and protecting wetlands. This perception that permit decisions appropriately protect tidal wetlands is at odds with studies by wetlands scientists that suggest the citizen regulatory process fails to achieve the no net loss of wetlands policy goals and does not result in sustainability for wetlands.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study contain confidential information. Summarized data is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Applegate JS (1997) Beyond the usual suspects: the use of citizens advisory boards in environmental decision making. Ind L J 73(3):903–957
Arkema KK, Guannel G, Verutes G, Wood SA, Guerry A, Ruckelshaus M, Silver JM (2013) Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms. Nat Clim Change 3:913.https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1944
Battisti, C. (2017). How to make (in)effective conservation projects: look at the internal context! Anim Conserv 20(4):305–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12353
Battisti C, Cerfolli F (2021) From citizen science to citizen management: suggestions for a pervasive fine-grained and operational approach to biodiversity conservation. Isr J Ecol Evol 68(1–4):8–12. https://doi.org/10.1163/22244662-bja10029
Beierle TC, Crayford J (2002) Democracy in practice: public participation in environmental decisions. RFF Press, Washington, DC
Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manage 90(5):1692–1702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001
Berman M, Mason P, Nunez K, Tombleson C (2018) Implementing sustainable shoreline management in virginia: assessing the need for an enforceable policy. https://doi.org/10.21220/V5NF3W
Blader SL, Tyler TR (2003) A four-component model of procedural justice: defining the meaning of a fair process. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 29(6):747–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029006007
Bradshaw JG (1990) Monitoring of compliance with permits granted by local wetlands boards. Wetlands Program Technical Report No. 90-A Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary. https://doi.org/10.21220/m2-1dc4-rj34
Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Center for Coastal Resources Management (2012) Regulatory Fidelity to Guidance in Virginia’s Tidal Wetlands Program. Retrieved from http://ccrm.vims.edu/publications/pubs/Permit_Fidelity_2012.pdf
Clark JR (2018) Coastal zone management handbook. CRC Press
Crossett K, Ache B, Pacheco P, Haber K (2013) National Coastal Population Report, Population trends from 1970 to 2020. NOAA State of the Coast Report Series. NOAA, Washington, DC
Dryzek JS (2009) Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comp Polit Stud 42(11):1379–1402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414009332129
Gilovich T, Griffin DW, Kahneman D (eds) (2002) Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgement. Cambridge University Press, New York
Goosen H, Janssen R, Vermaat JE (2007) Decision support for participatory wetland decision-making. Ecol Eng 30(2):187–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.11.004
Hauer ME, Evans JM, Mishra DR (2016) Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nat Clim Change 6(7):691–695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2961
Hays DG, Singh AA (2011) Qualitative Inquiry in Clinical and Educational settings. Guilford Press
Hildreth RG (1993) The Public Trust Doctrine and coastal and ocean resources management. J Envtl L & Litig 8:221–236
Hui I (2017) Shaping the coast with permits: making the state regulatory permitting process transparent with text mining. Coastal Manage 45(3):179–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2017.1303694
Irvin RA, Stansbury J (2004) Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort? Public Adm Rev 64(1):55–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00346.x
Jones JC, Lynch MP (1978) Local environmental management—can it work? A case study of the Virginia Wetlands Act. J Coast Zone Manage 4(1–2):127–150.https://doi.org/10.1080/08920757809361770
Kahn AE (1966) The tyranny of small decisions: market failures, imperfections, and the limits of economics. Kyklos 19(1):23–47
Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New York
Kalinowski P, Baker Y (2014) Tidal wetlands protection in virginia: time for an update. virginia coastal policy center. 13. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/vcpclinic/13
Kirwan ML, Megonigal JP (2013) Tidal wetland stability in the face of human impacts and sea-level rise. Nature 504:53–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12856
Malysa LL (1996) A comparative assessment of state planning and management capacity: tidal wetlands protection in Virginia and Maryland. State Local Gov Rev 28(3):205–218
Massaua MJ, Thomas CW, Klinger T (2016) The use of science in collaborative management of marine environments. Coastal Manage 44(6):606–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2016.1233797
Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D (2015) Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Anal 35(7):1230–1251. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12360
Morelli F, Tryjanowski P, Benedetti Y (2016) Differences between niches of anthropocentric and biocentric conservationists: wearing old clothes to look modern? J Nat Conserv 34:101–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2016.09.005
National Research Council (2008) Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Odum WE (1982) Environmental degradation and the tyranny of small decisions. Bioscience 32(9):728–729
Rawat P, Yusuf J-E, Covi M (2021) Cognitive bias in decision making about development permits for living shorelines: the case of wetlands boards in Virginia localities. Ecol Eng 173:106423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106423
Saitgalina M, Yusuf J-E, Olanrewaju-Lasisi T (2022) Between the public and the private interest: the interrelationship of intermediary roles of environmental nonprofits in coastal resilience. Adm Soc 54(10):2048–2074. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221112293
Saitgalina M, Yusuf J-E, Covi M (2023) Shoreline management and coastal resilience in Virginia: analysis of the roles of environmental nonprofit organizations in encouraging living shorelines. Coastal Manage 51(4):172–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2023.2199790
Sanborn T, Jung J (2021) Intersecting social science and conservation. Front Mar Sci 8:676394.https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.676394
Spidalieri K (2020) Where the wetlands are—and where they are going: legal and policy tools for facilitating coastal ecosystem migration in response to sea-level rise. Wetlands 40:1765–1776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-020-01280-x
Stafford S, Guthrie AG (2020) What drives property owners to modify their shorelines? A case study of Gloucester County, Virginia. Wetlands 40:1739–1750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-020-01358-6
Terry G, Hayfield N, Clarke V, Braun V (2017) Thematic analysis. In: Willig C, Stainton Rogers W (eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, vol 2. Sage, pp 17–37
Trinczek R (2009) How to interview managers? Methodical and methodological aspects of expert interviews as a qualitative method in empirical social research. In: Bogner A, Littig B, Menz W (eds) Interviewing Experts. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp 203–216
Venkatachalam L (2008) Behavioral economics for environmental policy. Ecol Econ 67:640–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.01.018
Weber M, Krogman N, Foote L, Rooney R (2017) Natural capital and the political economy of wetland governance in Alberta. J Environ Planning Policy Manage 19(3):279–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1308248
Webler T, Tuler S, Krueger R (2001) What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environ Manage 27(3):435–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002670010160
Funding
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant number 1600062. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We thank two anonymous reviewers and the editor for providing helpful comments to improve and clarify this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors (Wie Yusuf, Michelle Covi, Pragati Rawat, Marina Saitgalina) contributed to the study design, data collection, and analysis. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Pragati Rawat, Wie Yusuf, and Michelle Covi and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Beyond the grant funding, the authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yusuf, JE., Covi, M., Rawat, P. et al. Balance by Compromise and Negotiation: Does a Citizen-led Shoreline Regulatory Process Achieve Environmental Policy Outcomes?. Wetlands 44, 9 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-023-01763-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-023-01763-7