Filtering by
- All Subjects: Environmental Management
- Creators: Camacho, Alejandro E.
- Creators: Dooley, Kevin
This brief article, written for a symposium on "Collaboration and the Colorado River," evaluates the U.S. Department of the Interior's Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program ("AMP"). The AMP has been advanced as a pioneering collaborative and adaptive approach for both decreasing scientific uncertainty in support of regulatory decision-making and helping manage contentious resource disputes -- in this case, the increasingly thorny conflict over the Colorado River's finite natural resources. Though encouraging in some respects, the AMP serves as a valuable illustration of the flaws of existing regulatory processes purporting to incorporate collaboration and regulatory adaptation into the decision-making process. Born in the shadow of the law and improvised with too little thought as to its structure, the AMP demonstrates the need to attend to the design of the regulatory process and integrate mechanisms that compel systematic program evaluation and adaptation. As such, the AMP provides vital information on how future collaborative experiments might be modified to enhance their prospects of success.
The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP) has been identified as a model for natural resource management. We challenge that assertion, citing the lack of progress toward a long-term management plan for the dam, sustained extra-programmatic conflict, and a downriver ecology that is still in jeopardy, despite over ten years of meetings and an expensive research program. We have examined the primary and secondary sources available on the AMP’s design and operation in light of best practices identified in the literature on adaptive management and collaborative decision-making. We have identified six shortcomings: (1) an inadequate approach to identifying stakeholders; (2) a failure to provide clear goals and involve stakeholders in establishing the operating procedures that guide the collaborative process; (3) inappropriate use of professional neutrals and a failure to cultivate consensus; (4) a failure to establish and follow clear joint fact-finding procedures; (5) a failure to produce functional written agreements; and (6) a failure to manage the AMP adaptively and cultivate long-term problem-solving capacity.
Adaptive management can be an effective approach for addressing complex ecosystem-related processes like the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam, particularly in the face of substantial complexity, uncertainty, and political contentiousness. However, the Glen Canyon Dam AMP shows that a stated commitment to collaboration and adaptive management is insufficient. Effective management of natural resources can only be realized through careful attention to the collaborative design and implementation of appropriate problem-solving and adaptive-management procedures. It also requires the development of an appropriate organizational infrastructure that promotes stakeholder dialogue and agency learning. Though the experimental Glen Canyon Dam AMP is far from a success of collaborative adaptive management, the lessons from its shortcomings can foster more effective collaborative adaptive management in the future by Congress, federal agencies, and local and state authorities.
In the first essay, I investigate the financial impact of a buyer-initiated supplier-focused sustainability improvement program on suppliers’ profitability. The results indicate that a supplier sustainability program may lead to short-term financial loss but long-term financial gain for suppliers, and this effect is contingent on supplier slack resources. The second essay of this dissertation focuses on the consumers and investigates their reactions to two types of firm environmental sustainability claims – sustainable production versus sustainable consumption. The results indicate that firm sustainable consumption claims increase consumers’ purchase, thus leads to larger firm sales, whereas firm sustainable production claims decrease consumers’ buying intention, then result in smaller firm sales. Therefore, I show that, contrary to extant belief, firm environmental sustainability can decrease consumers’ intention to buy. Finally, a firm may be impacted when some of its upstream or downstream stakeholders, or its own operations, are impacted by a natural disaster, which are becoming more frequent due to climate change. In the third essay I study the joint effect of market attention and donation timing on firm stock returns based on the experiences of firms who donated to the 2017 Hurricane Harvey. I conclude that neither the first donors nor the followers can mitigate the negative stock returns due to disasters. However, firms who match their donation timing with market attention experience less negative stock market returns compared to other counterparts.