Submit Content (login required)

Stakeholder Participation in Socioeconomic Analysis of Restoring the Deschutes Estuary

Last updated: 01/16/2009

Navigation

Return to Search

Introduction

Capitol Lake is an impoundment of the Deschutes River, created in 1951 through the erection of a dam that retained fresh water from the river before entry into the saltwater bodies of Budd Inlet and eventually Puget Sound. The state created the lake to realize a reflecting surface for the adjacent Washington State Capitol Building.

Capitol Lake and the Washington State Capitol Building
Capitol Lake and the Washington State Capitol Building
Courtesy: Zac Hart, NOAA
The Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan (CLAMP) Steering Committee is a multijurisdictional committee that provides guidance on lake management to the Washington Department of General Administration (GA), who has taken responsibility for maintaining and operating the lake since its inception. The committee is exploring a variety of management options for the lake. It is thought that restoring estuary processes, such as tidal inundation, could eliminate several of the problems associated with maintaining the lake environment, which include sedimentation, invasive species, and compromised water quality. To explore this possibility, the CLAMP steering committee initiated the Deschutes Estuary Feasibility Study (DEFS), which includes a socio-economic study called the Net Benefits Analysis (NBA). The NBA, which is the topic of this case study, is an effort to assess potential changes in the value of various social and economic attributes if the estuary were restored.

Conventional studies of the social and economic values of natural resources do not always capture the full range of values that are important to local communities. In addition, the high cost of conducting purely quantitative valuations of nonmarket goods has meant that these studies are not always feasible. The State of Washington recognized these issues and requested assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Coastal Services Center to design the NBA.

Integrating local input in both the project development and analysis stages has been found to be a superior approach for involving the public in natural resource management decision-making (Casagrande 1997; Heinz Center 2002; Imperial 2005; McCool and Gutherie 2001). These types of studies have also shown that approaches merely presenting management options for public comment often lead to conflicts between different interest groups. Based on these experiences, the Center and state staff worked to develop an approach that would engage local and regional stakeholders in each stage of the NBA.

Credit: NOAA Coastal Services Center

Methods, Tools, and Data

Methods:

Stakeholder Analysis
A critical task in planning the public participation aspect of this case study was identifying those individuals and groups that should be targeted for involvement in the process. Because Capitol Lake is part of the state capitol campus and thus represents state interests, a regional perspective was an important facet of the participatory process. State staff created a list of invitees using an early draft of a CLAMP communication strategy that identified local and regional constituent groups. The CLAMP steering committee recommended several additional groups. The invitation list included local and regional business and trade associations, local and regional environmental groups, an educational organization, neighborhood and historic groups, and a local tribe. The local newspaper ran an article that outlined the community involvement effort and solicited interested individuals to contact WDFW staff.

Focus Groups
Focus group
Focus group 1
Courtesy: Zac Hart, NOAA
The project team designed a series of meetings consisting of two three-hour focus group sessions, followed by a three-hour public meeting. The focus groups and public meeting were designed to allow participants to achieve three specific objectives:

In the focus group sessions, a professional facilitator asked a sample of community members to provide responses and opinions on specific questions regarding the NBA. The public meeting gave the broader community an opportunity to review and add to the work of the focus group, as well as to offer new ideas and input. The meetings were held in the evening at locations in downtown Olympia. Each of these meetings was professionally facilitated, and a professional stenographer recorded the proceedings and provided summary notes.


Discussion of Results

Focus group participants identified more than fifty attributes of the Deschutes Basin that they felt should be included in the NBA. They organized these attributes into eight categories and gave the categories creative names that described the value of those attributes. The public meeting participants also contributed to the first objective. Several of their suggestions echoed or built upon ideas identified by the focus group, and many public meeting participants described their attributes in sentences or long phrases. A handful of public meeting attributes had not been identified in the focus group and thus added new dimensions to the categories. The three-hour time frame constrained the evening's activities, so public meeting participants were not asked to specify whether they thought these attributes should be qualitatively or quantitatively analyzed. Even so, the longer, narrative-style attributes mentioned by many participants in the public meeting provided details that were useful in the context of the NBA.

The focus group fulfilled the second objective by working together to recommend qualitative or quantitative analysis for each attribute. The group recommended quantitative analysis for 47 percent of the attributes and qualitative analysis for 34 percent of the attributes. Participants recommended both kinds of analysis for the remaining 19 percent of the attributes. In addition, the focus group provided detail to guide analysis for all but 7 of the 53 attributes.

Both the focus group and public meeting participants created lengthy lists of public involvement suggestions that satisfied the third objective of the stakeholder involvement process. The focus group produced a list of more than 100 ideas about how the public could be involved in future decision-making. In addition, the focus group offered ideas on improving agency outreach and communications. The public meeting participants added 35 more suggestions.

NBA participants accomplished all three objectives of the stakeholder involvement process and enjoyed working together. The results of the NBA will provide critical socioeconomic information in the broader study to assess the feasibility of restoring the Deschutes Estuary.


Contacts/Resources

Contacts
Publications
Links
Sources Cited in This Case Study