Authors: Holly Wise Bender, Wade E. Martin
Addresses: Integrated Resource Solutions, LLC, 1109 Four Mile Canyon, Boulder, CO 80302, USA. ' Department of Economics, 1250 Bellflower Blvd., California State University, Long Beach, CA 90840-4607, USA
Abstract: Conflict is an inherent component of natural resource management decisions in the USA and many other countries of the world. The diversity of potential uses creates a situation where individual preferences result in the need for compromise positions and coalition formation so that the natural resources can be managed. This paper demonstrates the contribution that cooperative and non-cooperative voting models can make in understanding the potential for conflict and the incentives for individuals to form coalitions. By modelling both collaborative and non-collaborative public involvement procedures, we gain insights from the differences in solutions, the implications for stability of the alternatives and the impact of the institutional power of the USDA Forest Service. The models are applied to the case of public lands management in the Shoshone National Forest.
Keywords: committee games; voting models; cooperative games; amendment agenda; the win set; the core; Shapley Value; conflict management; conflict resolution; public lands.
International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 2003 Vol.3 No.2, pp.149 - 167
Published online: 27 Jan 2004 *Full-text access for editors Access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article