Trust factors in community–water resource management agency relationships

Abstract

A number of indicators suggest that trust is becoming a major issue for natural resource managers and planners desiring to maintain or enhance community–agency relationships. Public distrust, especially local community distrust, can have severe implications for the quality and durability of natural resource policy and management decisions. This article addresses the research problem of understanding factors of community trust in a water resources management agency. To describe trust factors in this context, a descriptive, interpretive qualitative case study approach was applied. Specifically the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and key communities nearby or adjacent to water resources managed by the Corps within the Kaskaskia River Watershed in central Illinois were examined. Trust between the communities and the Corps was the focus of analysis. This research is pertinent and practical because planners, managers, engineers, policy makers, and community stakeholders in many natural resources management situations are seeking better ways of working together that produce sustainable agency–community relationships. The findings suggest that local community trust factors relevant to the Corps are complex and critical to understanding the social context of natural resources management in the Kaskaskia River Watershed. The management significance of this research is a series of suggestions for improving relationships between communities, agencies, and agency managers based on the different factors of trust. Both formal and informal mechanisms are available to address important factors of trust.

Introduction

Trust is becoming a major issue in natural resources management. Public distrust, especially local community distrust, can have severe implications for the quality and durability of natural resource policy decisions. The public has many options for influencing policy outcomes beyond using traditional public involvement processes. Federal natural resource management agencies are mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 to use public scoping sessions and meetings as part of developing environmental impact assessments. Alternative options available to citizens include filing lawsuits, lobbying politicians, using the media, or using ballot initiative processes available in some states (Shindler et al., 2002). There is high incentive to cultivate public trust because it is extremely difficult to plan and implement management policies with opposition or distrust from the public (Buchecker et al., 2003).

Promoting trust in government agencies, not solely agencies involved with management of public natural resources, receives much attention in part because of a growing concern about reports of declining trust in the government. Longitudinal research has found that the American public's overall trust in government started to decline almost 40 years ago (Hart and Teeter, 1999). Hart and Teeter's (1999) nationwide public opinion survey for the Council for Excellence in Government found that 75% of the American public in 1964 trusted the government “just about always” or “most of the time.” By 1999, trust in the government had plummeted to a mere 29%. Decline in government trust can be problematic. Rahn and Rudolph (2002) revealed numerous governmental benefits associated with having high levels of public trust including the ability to implement flexible policies, gain compliance with government demands (tax paying, military service, etc.), and encourage positive beliefs about government activities.

Declining government trust appears to have extended into trust of federal natural resource management agencies. Researchers have concluded with much support that, “Many citizens do not trust natural resource agencies and therefore do not support their decisions or the way those decisions are made” (Shindler et al., 2002, p. 16). Bengston and Fan (1999) conducted a content analysis of media accounts of the USDA Forest Service in major newspapers and found that 40% of media reports had negative assessments of the USDA Forest Service's stewardship and ethics. They concluded that trust in the USDA Forest Service showed opportunities for improvement. Another national survey of public opinion found that only 57% of respondents expressed confidence in the USDA Forest Service's ability to contribute to good forest management decisions (Hammond, 1994). State natural resource management agencies have also experienced signs of distrust in their activities (White, 2001). Some experts believe that the current condition of trust in natural resource agencies is an “outgrowth” of public opinion toward federal government in general (Wondelleck and Yaffee, 2000).

This article addresses the research problem of understanding the factors of trust in a natural resources context. This problem is pertinent and practical because planners, managers, engineers, policy makers, and community stakeholders in many natural resources management situations are seeking better ways of working together to encourage sustainable community–agency relationships (e.g., Frenz et al., 2000, Stein and Anderson, 2002, Cvetkovich and Winter, 2003). A descriptive, interpretive qualitative case study approach was applied with the purpose of identifying and describing the factors of trust in a natural resources context. Specifically this study looked at one agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and key communities located nearby or adjacent to managed natural resources, specifically water resources.

The study area was the Kaskaskia River Watershed located in central and southern Illinois. This watershed includes 10% of the land area in Illinois—5840 square miles or 3.7 million acres. The Kaskaskia River flows for approximately 325 miles from its headwaters, near Champaign, Illinois, to the confluence at the Mississippi River near St. Louis, Missouri. Three Corps projects—Lake Shelbyville, Carlyle Lake, and the Kaskaskia River Navigation Project—exist in the watershed. All three projects are managed for multiple purposes including flood damage reduction services for the Kaskaskia and Mississippi Rivers, water quality control, navigation, water supply, recreation, fishing and wildlife conservation. Local communities adjacent to the lakes and river are dependent on Corps management for access to public lands. Over 90% of Illinois is privately owned and agricultural production is the predominant land use (80% of land area) in the watershed (Illinois Department of Natural Resources, 2001).

Local Corps managers developed an interest in learning about community trust as they experienced conflict between community groups trying to influence management decisions. Some community members advocated for the Corps entering their communities in the 1960s and 1970s, while other community members were reluctant and even hostile when the Corps flooded private lands to create the lake projects. Farmers, including some with multiple generations of farmland ownership, were displaced when the water covered their land. Some community members remain upset over the taking of private land. More recently, some community members have blamed the Corps for failed community and economic development projects. Significant conflict occurred between recreation and tourism interests and the farming community over water releases from the dam that flooded recreation areas upstream or flooded fields downstream, depending on the release.

Corps personnel attempted to resolve the conflict by encouraging the creation of a single community-based group. The Kaskaskia Watershed Association (KWA) was formed in 2000 as this single community-based group that acts as an “umbrella organization” to bring together the many interests and groups within the watershed. Community stakeholders now use this group to reach consensus prior to approaching the Corps and then collaborative management decisions are implemented. Current managers at Carlyle Lake described positive and trusting relationships with many of the newly formed citizen organizations in the watershed. Corps managers suspected a high level of trust among active participants in the KWA. However, Corps managers were unsure of the larger community trust in their agency, managers, and resource management. Furthermore, they were specifically interested in understanding what factors encouraged trust or distrust of their agency. This study examines the community–agency relationships in the Kaskaskia River Watershed because of the agency, type of natural resources managed, interest of local Corps managers, community dependence on water resources, multiple uses of water resources, and diverse history with evidence of trust and distrust by community members.