You are on page 1of 21

Punctuating Which Equilibrium?

Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific


Northwest Forestry
Author(s): Benjamin Cashore and Michael Howlett
Source: American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 51, No. 3 (Jul., 2007), pp. 532-551
Published by: Midwest Political Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4620083 .
Accessed: 07/01/2015 12:44
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Midwest Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Political Science.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Which
Punctuating
Equilibrium?
Understanding
inPacific
Thermostatic
Northwest
Dynamics
Policy
Forestry
CashoreYaleUniversity
Benjamin

Michael
Howlett
SimonFraserUniversity
A keytheme
contributions
topolicy
andJones
and
studies,
(1993;2002),Sabatier
Baumgartner
amongseminal
including
and
Hall
is
that
"external
outside
the
characterized
Jenkins-Smith
(1989;1993),
(1993),
subsystem,
perturbations" of policy
arecritical
thedevelopment
anddurable
which
bysometype
ofsocietal
upheaval,
policy
forexplaining
ofprofound
changes
areotherwise
Wearguethattheseassumptions,
whileuseful
manycases
prevented
byinstitutional
stability.
forassessing
intheU.S.Pacific
Northwest.
do notadequately
historical
ofpolicychange,
patterns
offorest
policydevelopment
capture
landsgoverning
the
stateandfederal
andpublic
inpolicy
ofprivate
forest
regulation
Differences
development
concerning
onpolicy
Toaddress
this
sameproblem,
andpopulation
much
dynamics.
orthodoxy
puzzle,
region,
challenge
ofthe
prevailing
thatpolicies
Thisexercise
werevisit
andexpandexisting
taxonomies
thelevels
andprocesses
ofchange
undergo.
identifying
that
on
lands
wasabsent
theexistence
a
"thermostatic"
institutional
reveals
of
setting
governing
policy
developmentfederal
durable
institutional
contained
lands.
This
thermostatic
intheinstitutions
policy
private
arrangement
objectives
governing
toundergo
inorder
tomaintain
theinstitution's
characteristics.
thatrequired
Policy
majorchange
defining
policy
settings
needtodistinguish
thatnecessitate
scientists
such"hardinstitutions"
inpolicysettings
paradigmatic
changes
fromthose
thatdonotpermit
them.

The StudyofPolicyDynamics

a muchstronger
about itemssuch as legunderstanding
islative"attention
spans"and theforcesthatcausecertain
on
thepolicyagendaoverothers(Baumissues
to
come
in
the
scientists
have,
publicpolicy
studying
Political
inthree
beeninvolved
related gartnerandJones1993,2002) andoftheroleofmacrolevel
last20years,
projects
in shapingthemobilizationofactorsand, in
to thestudyof policydynamics:
understanding institutions
own
their
howlongstanding
policyagendas (Weaverand Rockman
policiesmightbecome"punctuated" turn,
The
effectsof enduringpolicies
toward
a new"equilibrium"
andshift
path-dependent
(Jones,
Baumgart- 1993).
ner,and True1998;Jones,Sulkin,and Larsen2003; True, havebeenwelldocumented(Hacker2004;Mahoney2000;
andBaumgartner
thedual Pierson1993,2000), as has theroleof ideas (Hall 1989),
Jones,
1999)andinvestigating
on the one hand, beliefs,andnorms(Leachand Sabatier2005) inconstraininteractionof enduringinstitutions
inexplaining
and ing and shapingwhatpolicysubsystemmembersdeem
coalitions
on theother,
andsubsystem

and
thispattern
ofpolicydevelopment
(Clemens
shaping

Cook 1999; Sabatierand Jenkins-Smith


1993). The reThe disciplinehas
havebeen fruitful.
sultsofsuchefforts

appropriatepolicychange.
Four importantmethodological,epistemological,
and causal argumentshave emergedfromthisresearch.

YaleUniandEnvironmental
isprofessor
ofenvironmental
andpolitical
SchoolofForestry
Cashore
Studies,
science,
Benjamin
governance

Mountain
230Prospect
Room206,NewHaven,CT 06511-2104(benjamin.cashore@yale.edu).
MichaelHowlettis Burnaby
Street,
versity,
ofPoliticalScience,SimonFraserUniversity,
British
Professor,
Columbia,CanadaV5A 1S6(howlett@sfu.ca).
Burnaby,
Department
on
Wearegrateful
to GinaGlazeforvaluableresearch
assistance
and to ConstanceMcDermott
and GraemeAuldfortheircollaborations
relatedprojects.
Forcomments
on drafts
ofthisessaywethankCraigThomas,FrankBaumgartner,
RobertRepetto,
reviewers,
anonymous
in Chicago.We are
in a panelheldduringthe2004 annualmeetingoftheAmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation
as wellas participants
on our earlier
to GraceSkogstad,
RichardSimeon,Jeremy
Wilson,KentWeaver,
Raynerforinsights
GeorgeHoberg,and Jeremy
grateful
theRockefeller
Brother's
work.FinancialsupportcomesfromtheCanadianEco-Research
Fund,theMerckFamilyFund,the
Tri-council,
and theCanadianEmbassyin Washington's
CanadianStudiesGrantProgram.
theUSDA NationalResearch
FordFoundation,
Initiative,
AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience,Vol.51,No. 3, July
2007,Pp. 532-551
?2007, MidwestPoliticalScienceAssociation
532

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ISSN 0092-5853

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

533

infive
ofourapproach
Wedemonstrate
thevalidity
thatanyanalysis
First,thereis widespread
acceptance
introduction
second
ofpolicydevelopment
in natureand analytical
this
a
secmustbe historical
steps.Following
an overview
ofouranalysis
ofkeytrends
coverperiodsof yearsor evendecadesor more.1Sec- tionprovides
in
in different
inthePacific
Northwest
and forest
ond,scholars
region
policydevelopment
engaging
methodological
This
data
set
was
over
a
time
that
enhave
compiled
by
perspectives hypothesized
25-year span.
epistemological
ofsomeofthemost
a comprehensive
review
the undertaking
duringpolicychangeusuallycomesaboutthrough
offorest
and important
features
thatcausewidespread controversial
effects
of"external
manageperturbations"
measures
to
natural
in
it
has
forests,
ment,including
"preserve"
disruptions existing
policypractices.2
Thirdly,
andtheir establish
beenagreedthatpolitical
institutions
zones,limitannualratesofcut,protect
riparian
generally
The
androadbuilding.
embeddedpolicysubsystems
actas theprimary
mech- endangered
speciesandhabitat,
of
in
anismsof policyreproduction
and
Martin
data
set
reveals
a
(Botcheva
puzzling
pattern policychange the
andCook1999).Fourthly,
different
onewhichinvolves
2001;Clemens
"paradigmatic" region,
typesofpolicydya
in
in
which
values
the
subnamics
on
state
and
federal
lands.
The
orthodox
change, process
deep
policy
prevailing
are
to
a
fundamental
view
of
is
unable
to
this
system altered,
leading
adequately
capture
realignment
policychange
ofotheraspectsofpolicydevelopment,
is understood
onsocietal
would
to puzzle,sinceitsemphasis
perturbations
occuronlywhenthepolicyinstitutions
That
the
themselves
are havepredicted
is,
policyconvergence.
emphasis
In theabsenceofsuchprocesses
forunderstandtransformed.
societalchanges
as critical
anypolicy on profound
to follow"incremental"
orderis overwhelmed,
pat- inghowtheexisting
leadingpolchangesarehypothesized
dramatic
terns(Deeg2001;Genschel
and
to
undertake
1997).
icysubsystems governments
of25yearsofforest
Ouranalysis
thesignificance
policydevelopment policychangesin response,
emphasizes
intheU.S.Pacific
Northwest
in
theselast ofsuchhistorical
which
institutions
become
(PNW)challenges
junctures
threearguments
inthenowprevailing
and
on
the
variables
first
orthodoxy
"dependent"
constraining
change then
natureofpolicydynamics.
In thiscase,dramatic
and allowingit to occur(Steinmo,
policy suddenly
collapsing
in
federal
forest
lands
this
took
and
of
Thelen,
1992).Thehistorical
changegoverning
patterns
region
Longstreth
in
the
of
absence
institutional
a
the
same
and
place
change,
prompting policydevelopment
governing
population
ofthefoundations
inourtwocasesisinconsistent
reassessment
oftheorthodox
viewof thesameproblem
diverged
theimporwiththisprevailing
andhighlights
policydynamics.
orthodoxy
of
The
third
section
Thiseffort
revealed
thatwidely
taxonomies tance solving
thisanomalous
accepted
puzzle.3
usedtodescribe
historical
ofpolicydevelopment detailsandjustifies
classificathenewpolicycomponent
patterns
A fourth
in
the
resolve
this
issue.
resulted
conflation
of
distinct
tion
framework
to
have,inadvertently,
required
ofthese"hidden"
toreview
Ouruncovering
and section
thenappliesthisframework
changeprocesses.
changeand
morecomplex
of
in
different
levels
of
Pacific
Northwest
forest
patterns policydevelopment
polchallenges stability
thewaymostpolicyscholars
measure
andclassify
overall icydevelopment
overa 25-year
on
timeperiod.Drawing
as either"paradigmatic"
or "incremen- thiscase,a fifth
a theory
of
sectioninductively
advances
policydynamics
tal"(Howlett
and Ramesh2002;Lindner2003;Lindner "thermostatic
institutions"
toaccountforthepatterns
of
andRittberger
We
that
these
in
these
case
identified
studies.
2003). argue
shortcomings divergence
needcorrecting
iftheroleand influence
ofinstitutions
on policydevelopment
istobe properly
understood
and The (Commonly
Understood)Puzzle:
workon policydynamics
is to advance.We proposea
DivergentPatternsofForestPolicy
newclassification
ofpolicyelements
thathelpsto overDevelopmentin theU.S.
cometheseproblems,permitting
a moreempirically
rich
of
and
the
role
understanding policychange
playedby
institutions
withinit.

'This observation
is explicitly
raisedin everyprojectby Baumand
on
andinPaulSabatier
Jones
gartner
punctuatedequilibrium
and Hank Jenkins-Smith's
workon"advocacy
aswellas
coalitions,"
in thebroadfieldofhistorical
institutionalism.
beingimplicit

PacificNorthwest

Forestscientistsand conservationbiologistshave found


in the region delineatedby the
temperaterainforests

3AppendixA presentsa snapshotof keyaspectsof changeand


intheU.S.PNW'which
over30yearsofpolicydevelopment
stability
on thisrelationship,
seeHall(1989)aswell
2Forexplicit
hypotheses
isbasedon a lengthier
review.
Thispolicyreview,
as well
qualitative
as theplethoraofliterature
Sabatierand Jenkins-Smith's as ourbroaderresearch
applying
on forestry
drawson 13yearsof
conflicts,
The modelwe
(ACF) framework.
AdvocacyCoalitionFramework
research
thatincludedprimary
and secondary
documentanalysis,
betweenthose"fauxparadigmatic" as wellas over100semistructured
developallowsfordistinctions
interviews
from1993through
policychangesthat"vacillate"back and forthfollowing
changes 2004 withmembersof theforestpolicycommunities
in Canada
in factors
suchas thepartisancomposition
ofgovernments
from and theUnitedStates,includinginterviews
in BritishColumbia,
durableparadigmatic
casesfollowing
shocks.
9/11-type
theU.S. PacificNorthwest
as wellas OttawaandWashington,
DC.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

534

territorial
ofOregonandWashington
boundaries
Stateto general
isthatdespite
however,
public.Whatisnoticeable,
behometomanythreatened
andendangered
and
the
of
all
of
this
and
societal,
species,
impacts
legislation,
litigation,
haveprovided
in these policyattention,
evidence
thatdecadesoflogging
untilveryrecently
forest
on-the-ground
areashas causeddeterioration
of forest
and practices
did notalterenoughto haveanydramatic
efecosystems
thefloraandfaunathatdependon them(Franklin
levels
trees
the
1994; fecton commercial
harvesting (howmany
KohmandFranklin
for commercial
forest
cutin a givenyear).
1997;Noss1993).Responsibility
products
industry
thisdeterioration
is dividedbetween
theU.S. Thatis,untiltheearly1990s,harvesting
onboth
addressing
patterns
federal
and
which
has
over
federal
forest
lands
underwent
a
that
jurisdiction
complete
private
pattern
government,
forest
landsitownsinthisarea(roughly
wouldbestdescribe
as "incremental"-up
50percent
ofthe theliterature
forest
ismanaged
down
shifts
from
to
but
tomainthe
"Naand
land,thebulkofwhich
through
year year, appearing
ormarginal
tionalForestSystem"),4
andthegovernments
ofOregon tainsomekindof"progressive"
equilibrium
andWashington
as we overtime.
Statewhichhaveprimary,
though,
willseebelow,notexclusive,
on forin theearly1990s
however,
regulatory
authority
Significantly,
beginning
estlandsthatareprivately
held(roughly
40 percent).5
a discernible
difference
couldbe seenbetweenon-thethe"first
wave"ofenvironmentalism
inthe groundforest
on federal
forFollowing
management
requirements
1960s(Paehlke1989),andbuttressed
lands
and
those
on
lands
unscienest
owned
forest
byincreasing
privately
tific
Thecumulative
research
ondeclining
a widerange derprimarily
statejurisdiction.
forest
impacts
ecosystems,
ofscholarship
withharvesting
hasdocumented
theincreasing
of ofthesechangesweresignificant,
levels
attention
on
a
factor
of
five
federal
lands
environmental
the
and
the
(Table1) while
public falling
groups, media,
by
general
landdidnotundergo
towardforest
and theirimpacts forest
levelson private
practices,
harvesting
management
whereasforest
ownersand
on theforest-dependent
floraand faunain thisregion anysuchdecline.Moreover,
Pralle
Yaffee
continued
to
close
2000;
2006;
(Kamieniecki
1994).
relationships,
managers
enjoy
working
Thesedynamics
led to significant
atten- thenetwork
of groupsinfluencing
and affecting
forest
legislative
tionto forest
within
at
on
the
United
States
both
decisions
federal
forest
lands
practices
management
expanded
thefederal
andstatelevels(seeAppendix
ofenvironmental
interests.
A), andtothe toincludean array
Following
ofnewagencies
creation
andregulatory
boardstomon- thisearly1990s"punctuation"
on federal
lands,however,
itorand overseeforest
of
the
forest
specific
practices
(Hoberg
requirements
practices
management
management
forest
andstatelands,andthelevelofharvesting
however,
1993).Despitetheseefforts,
policysub- onbothfederal
intowhattheliterature
would
atbothlevelscontinued
whatcanbe on each,haveagainsettled
tomaintain
systems
as
an
"incremental"
That
described
as "clientelist"
describe
is,
pattern.
relationships
amongindustry, typically
forest
andregulatory
ormanagement
owners,
policy
forestry
agencies almostthreedecadesofPacificNorthwest
hasresulted
ina morecomplex
decisions
(Kohm1991).Forthemostpartspecific
puzzlethan
regard- development
the
existence
scholars:
examined
made
were
bycomparative
by typically
practices
harvesting
ing"on-the-ground"
of
and
levels
harvest
on priof
similar
in
close
consultation
with
forest
busipatterns
relatively
agencymanagers
landsuntil1993;anensuing
ofthepublicand environ- vateandfederal
nesseswhileothermembers
punctuation
landsbutnotonprivate
or consultative
roles on federal
mentalgroupsweregivenadvisory
lands;andthena simbutatdifferent
ilarpattern
ofpolicydevelopment,
levels,
1977;Hoberg2000;Koontz2002).
(Anderson
thesebusiness/governmental
However,
relationships, sincethistime.
of thissituation
wouldfoOrthodoxexplanations
cameunder
andthediscretionary
policiestheyafforded,
in
the
1980s
and
accelerated
increased
institutional
cus on specific
aspectsofthecase,suchas
scrutiny
beginning
natureoftheproperty
thedifferent
rightsregimesfound
in each jurisdiction,or on the role playedby different
patternsof theparexogenousfactors,such as different
It mightbe argued,
tisan compositionof governments.
forexample,thata publicproperty
rightsregimeis more
ofinterest
vulnerabletochangingcurrents
groupandpartisandynamicsand wouldbe expectedto be more"flexidevel- ble"thana privateproperty
"National
Forests"
whenaddressing
policy
4Weusetheterm
rightsregimewhichwouldbe
butalso
focusedon theNationalForestSystem,
opmentprimarily
expectedto resistsuch changes(DeCostner 1994; Lewis
lands"tocaptureotherfederally
owned
usetheterm"federal
forest
1995; Meltz 1994; Pearse 1990). However,the idea that
landsnotpartofthissystem.
regulationswill alwaysbe minimalon privateproperty
fromthisanalysis
state-owned
sWeareexcluding
policiesgoverning
andmanagedbyOregonandWashington versuspublic ownershipcannotexplainthe wide range
lands,whichareregulated
10percentofthelandbase.
of U.S. forestregulationsthathave emergedto address
State,andconstitute
roughly

throughthe 1990s followingthe "second wave" of environmentalism


(Paehlke1989).Timberharvesting
practicesinthisregioncameunderincreased,
and
widespread,
as scientific
evidenceabout forestscrutiny,
high-profile
dependentspecies,especiallythe spottedowl and later,
salmon,causedmuchconsternation
amongthemediaand

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

535

and
onPrivate
inUS Pacific
Northwest
TABLE
1 Timber
Harvest
FederalLands1965-2000
9000
8000
7000
6000
E 5000

Wi-

4000

-n-

3000

E 2000

Private

Federal

,=

1000
0

Year

themeansandendsofpolbetween
thatdistinguishing
andbetween
abstract
andconcrete
aspectsof
icymaking
into
new
provide insights processes
might
policyoutputs
Suchan approach,
and development.
ofpolicystability
orcomponents
elements
three
forHall,revealed
principal
ofa policywhich,he argued,couldchangeat different
foroverallpolicy
ratesandwithdifferent
consequences
whenthecaloccurred
"First
order"
changes
dynamics.
A Framework
forUnderstanding
the
such
as
of
ibrations policyinstruments,
increasing
PolicyDynamics
automobile
manufacor emissions
requirements
safety
within
institutional
must
turers
follow,
onpolicychange
existing
oftheexisting
literature
changed
A closereading
The
order"involved
"second
and
instrument
confines.
forest
in lightofthefactsofthePacificNorthwest
polan existing
within
toinstruments
policyregime,
withthefundamental changes
icycaserevealsseveralproblems
emission
stanan
administered
as
from
such
was
switching
orthodoxy
assumptions
uponwhichtheprevailing
tax."Thirdorder"policygoalsinin sev- dardto an emissions
we argue,haveresulted
built.Theseproblems,
froma focus
a shift
as in thepollution
example,
aboutthefactors
eralerroneous
conclusions
underlying volved,
to
ex
ex
regulation anteprevenbeingdrawnbymanypolicyscholars. upon postend-of-pipe
policydynamics
Hall
Moresignificantly,
design.
process
theseproblems
production
helpsresolvetheapparently tative
Remedying
linked
each
to
a
different
also
cause
forest
anomalousaspectsofthePacific
Northwest
process
specific
change
policy
enand second-order
twoofthebasicbuilding agent-firstchangesto activities
case,butrequires
reformulating
a
third-order
to
to
and
wasconstructed.
blocksuponwhichtheorthodoxy
change
dogenous policysubsystem
societal-based
events,
especially
policylearnexogenous
DisaggregatingDifferentElementsof Policy. The first ing,thataltered
institutional
and
arrangements
existing
theoperationalization
andmeasurement
issueconcerns
were
these
of
then
subsystem
goals.Finally, types changes
variablein studiesofpolicydynamics: linkedto
ofthedependent
with
specific
typesofoverallpolicydynamics,
inthisareawascrit- firstHall's(1993)effort
"policychange."
"incremental"
andsecond-order
changes
remaining
viewof and
ofthecurrent
orthodox
icalto thedevelopment
moresiglinkedto larger,
changes
onlythird-order
ex- nificant,
becauseitappropriately
challenged
policydynamics
overall"paradigmatic"
policychange.
alltheelements
thattendedtoconflate
scholarship
isting
in itslinking
ofdifHall'sworkwaspathbreaking
variable(Heclo 1976; ferent
ofa "policy"intoone dependent
to
the
actual
order
processes
policydevelopment
ondivergent
casesofeconomic
Rose1976).Drawing
pol- or levelof policyin flux.Still,his ownconceptual
efinGreatBritain
andFrance,
Hallargued forts,
icydevelopment
the
from
as wellas ourowninductive
theorizing
hisclassifiPacificNorthwest
case,leadus to recalibrate
ofthesedifferences,
seeSalazarandCubbage
6Fora detailedanalysis
toHall'sown
andcausalmodel.According
cationsystem
(1990),Hoberg(1993),Ellefson,
Cheng,andMoulton(1997,1995),
from
on
abstract
and CashoreandAuld(2003).
goals
specific
emphasis distinguishing
norwhy,in some
firmsgenerally,
privateland-owning
arevery
landregulations
suchas California,
states
private
similarto thosefoundon publiclands.6Thissuggests
isrequired,
onewhichprovides
thatanother
explanation
and
ofthefactors
a moresubtleinterpretation
promoting
policychange.
preventing

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHORE
ANDMICHAEL
HOWLETT
BENJAMIN

536

1 A Modified
ofPolicyMeasures
FIGURE
Following
Taxonomy
ofeachmeasure)
Hall(Cellscontainexamples
Ends

PolicyFocus

Means

Goals
WhatTypesof
IdeasGovern
Policy
Development?

PolicyContent
Objectives
Settings
WhatSpecific WhatArethe
On-theRequirements Specific
Aimsof
Are
ground
OperationalizedPolicy?
intoFormal
Policy?

habitat,
(environmental(saving
increasing
protection,
economic
harvesting
development) levels)

sizeof
(optimal
zones,
riparian
levelof
preferred
harvesting)

WhatNorms
WhatSpecific
GuideGeneral Typesof
Instruments
Are
Implementation
Preferences? Utilized?

WhatArethe
Specific
Waysin
Whichthe
Instrument
Is
Used?

levelsof
(useofcoercive (taxincentives, (higher
arm's
subsidies,
instruments, public
for
regulatory
preference
enterprises) length
moralsuasion)
commissions)

of thenumberand typeof
Our reconceptualizing
andinstruments
content,
(means)fromactualpolicyrefoundin Hall'sworkhasseriousconsethanthree,
six,rather
"lev- policyelements
(ends),wediscern
quirements
of
for
his
That
ofpolicy
thatcanundergo
els"or"orders"
is,
(andthecurrent
orthodoxy's)
linking
quences
change.
and
drivers
of
to specific
asFigure1details,
andaccording
toHall'sownlogic,there policyelements
policychange
of
of
overall
and
of
to
the
number
elements
abstract
existthree
content:
patterns
type possible
conceptual
policy
reIn
two
in
that
the
change. particular, implications
"goals,""objectives" operationalize goals gen- policyregime
and enthelinkbetween
or "calibrations"
and "settings"
thatspecify sult.First,
eralterms,
policycomponents
of
sources
in
and
what
is
to
policychangeare
dogenous exogenous
required operationalize
objectives
precisely
Hall
more
Hall
of
as
than
real-world
situations.
But
each
Second,it forcesus
these,
suggested.
specific
complex
and
of "paradigmatic"
classifications
use to revisit
between
their
canbefurther
alsonoted,
existing
distinguished
so thatwe canbetter
to describe
policydevelopment
policy"ends"and"means."Theimplication "incremental"
of changeprocesses
is that,as we revealbelow,every"pol- capturecomplexinterplays
ofthistaxonomy
among
to
Thatis,inaddition
ofendsandmeans-related thesixdifferent
policycomponents.
regime
icy"isinfacta complex
whichwecan
levelsofpolicy,
sixdifferent
andsettings.
Attention
to theseregime distinguishing
goals,objectives,
of
ofpatterns
morenuanceddescriptions
and howeachelementchangesor remains usetogenerate
differences,
that
it
is
in a muchmore historical
stableoverlongperiodsoftime,results
policydevelopment, equallynecessary
to assess
toolsrequired
ofpolicydynamics
thanis foundinthe wehavetheproperclassification
complex
picture
inany
found
of
on
the
and
overall
the
literature
type policychange
subject.'
degree
existing
suchdescription.
7Formodelsbased on a similarcritiqueof Hall, see Daugbjerg
are inspiredfrom
(1997) and Smith(2000). Thesesix categories
muchoftheworkon appliedpolicyanalysisthatteachesstudents
to breakpolicydownintotheir"goals,""operationalized"
objectives,and specificcriteriaand who likewisetakepainsto distinfrom"on-the-ground"
policyrequireguishpolicyinstruments
isalsoconsisments(WeimerandVining1999).Sucha distinction
and
tentwiththeworkofHowlett(2000),whohas hypothesized
causal
the
and
demonstrated
independent
important
empirically
Similarly,
impactsof process(means)based policyinstruments.
different
causalinfluences
on differSabatier's
ACF distinguishes
that"corevalues"orideasbehind
entmeasures
ofpolicy,
theorizing
changein theabsenceofsocietaltransformation,
policycan rarely

DistinguishingPatternsof Policy Development.The

of policydevelopeffort
to betterdistinguish
patterns
reviselements
tooursixregime
mentsensitive
requires
studies
withinpolicy
itingwidelyacceptedassumptions
inSimon's(1957)andLindblom's
thatoriginated
(1959)
The
the
on
works
subject. generalideas
path-breaking
can lead to changesin what
beliefsystems"
but that"secondary
as "means-oriented"
we are defining
policyobjectivesand policy
as advocacycoalitionsundergo"learning"about causal
settings,
withinthepolicyprocess(Sabatier1988).
mechanisms

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

537

thatemergedfromthesearticles,whichhaveinfluenced
generationsof scholarsincludingHall, is thatincrementalchangesareassociatedwithmarginalchangesin policy
meansand aretreatedas beingsynonymous
withpatterns
of relatively
long-lastingpolicystability(Bendor 1995;
Hayes1992);whileparadigmatic
changehas beentreated
as an abnormal,atypical,relatively
unstable,and usuassociated
short-lived
with
process
ally
changesin policy
ends (Baumgartner
and Jones1991;Lustick1980). These
two notionswerebroughttogetherin the 1990sby authorssuchas Baumgartner
and Jones(2002) who argued
thatin a typicalpatternof policydevelopmentrelatively
long periodsof incremental
policystabilityare punctuatedbyburstsofparadigmatic
change.Their"punctuated
equilibrium"modelunderlinedtheimportanceofunderorparadigmatic
standingnotjustincremental
policyprocesses,per se, but ratherthemannerin whichthesetwo
typesof changeare linkedtogetherand the propensity
of different
to
sectors,issuesareas,or policysubsystems
pointsin time.
undergotheseprocessesat different
such
an
appreciationof policydynamics,
Applying
a
clear
however,
requires
taxonomyofthedifferent
types
ofchangeprocesseswhichcan occurwithina policyarea,
so thatthedominantmode presentat a particularpoint
in time,and thevariouspossibilitiesforchange,can be
discerned.Most existingtaxonomiesinfluencedby the

debate in the policysciences


incremental-paradigmatic
have conceivedof policy change as comprisedof two
versusparadigmatic)and
elements-mode(incremental
or
of
speed tempo change(rapidversusslow;Durrantand
Diehl 1989; Hayes 1992)-and thisis what,in fact,Hall
envisionedin linkingpatternsof changein policycomponentsto overallpolicychangeprocesses.
Whatis significant
aboutpolicychangein theBaumhowever-in addigartnerand Jones reformulation,
tion to linkingincrementaland paradigmaticmodes
of change-is theiremphasison the directionality
of
changes.This is thoughtof not in termsof the "size"
of moves awayfromthe statusquo, but whetherthese
i.e.,leadingawayfroman existing
changesarecumulative,
a
equilibriumtowardanother,or whethertheyrepresent
fluctuation
consistent
withan existing
policyequilibrium
see Nisbet 1972). Reconceptualizing
(on directionality,
oftempoand
policychangeas theresultof theinterplay
cumulativedirectionality
a
provides superiormodel of
policydynamicsto thatfoundin earlierworkfocusing
on mode and tempo,sinceit directly
addresseswhether
a statusquo is beingmaintained(in equilibrium)or not
(in punctuation)in a changeprocess.See Figure2 below.
This reconceptualization
identifiestwo commonly
or incorrectly
ignored,misclassified,
juxtaposedoverall change processesthat exist alongside the familiar

2 A BasicTaxonomy
ofPolicyChangebyTempoand
FIGURE
DirectionofChange
(cellscontaintypical'modes'ofchange)
TempoofChange
of
Directionality

Fast

Slow

Change
Cumulative

"Classic"Paradigmatic

Incremental
Progressive

"Faux"Paradigmatic

"Classic"Incremental

In Equilibrium

Source:AdaptedfromRobertF. Durrant
and Paul F. Diehl,"Agendas,Alternatives
and
PublicPolicy:LessonsfromtheU.S. ForeignPolicyArena,"JournalofPublicPolicy9
(1989),179-205.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

538

3 KeyFeaturesofPolicyComponentsin PNW Forestry,


FIGURE
1975-2005

PolicyContent
Ends

Goals
between
Struggle
Environment
vs

Objectives
Trade-off
between

Spheres

Preservation
vs

Settings
Substantial
Public: Post-1993
inHarvesting
Rates
Reduction

in
HabitatvsPrivate:
DominationSpecies
Continuity
Industry
LevelsofProduction
inPrivate
andPublic and

PolicyFocus

Industrial
in
Continuity
BothPrivate
andPublic
Spheres

between
Means Tension

CoerciveRegulation
vs Property
Rightsin
Private
andPublic
Spheres

Useof

Public:

EnvironmentalDevelopment
of"Top-down"
and
Assessments Stringent
"Command
Environmental
andHabitat
Control"
Policy
PlansinBoth Requirements
and
Private
Private:
toForestPractices
PublicSpheres Discretion
BoardstoDevelopRegulatory
andGreater
PolicySpecifications
Flexible
Use ofRelatively
Plans
HabitatConservation

paradigmaticand incrementaltypes.One such typical


pattern,in whichrapidchangeoccursbut is noncumulative,has oftenbeen misdiagnosedas paradigmatic-in
whichsignificant
departuresfromthe statusquo occur
but thenshiftback just as quicklyto theirregularposition.These "fauxparadigmatic"or "oscillatingequilibrium"changesare quite common in politicallife,as
swiftchangesin policycan occurin manypolicyarenas
withdevelopmentssuch as thearrivalof a new political
In suchcasespunditsand thepubpartyin government.
licoftencometo believethata permanentand significant
changehas occurred,onlyto see thesepoliciesreversed,
or sentback to theiroriginalposition,upon theelection
of anotherpoliticalpartyfouror fiveyearslater.Such
rapidchangesin policythatend up comingbackto their
from
originalpositionmustbe treatedquite differently
otherkindsofrapidchangesthatareactuallyheadingtowarda new equilibrium(the "classic"paradigmatictype
twodifferent
ofchange).Figure2 also distinguishes
prolabeled
bothbeen incorrectly
cessesthathavepreviously
as incremental-slowchangesgoingin one directionand
headingtoleadingovertimetoa bigchange(cumulative,
wardsa newequilibrium),and slowstepsthatgo in both
directionsbut nevervaryfarfromthestatusquo, a kind
"randomwalk."
ofnoncumulative
the
studyof policy dynamicsthrough
Advancing
thesereconceptualizations
requiresthe developmentof

cases of long-term
policychangethatallowus to empirfour
overallpatternsof policychanges
match
the
ically
set out in Figure2 withthe six componentsof a policy
asset out in Figure1. This will allow us to empirically
sesswhetherit is actuallythecase,as Hall has suggested,
that a changein goals is associatedwith paradigmatic
change,whilechangesin settingare indicativeof incrementalchanges,or if more complexpatternsof policy
changeand developmentare at work(Mortensen2005).
We conductthisassessmentthrougha historicalapplicationofthetaxonomiessetoutinFigures1 and 2 tothecase
overthe
ofPacificNorthwest
forestry
policydevelopment
of
which
this
The
lastquartercentury. implications
effort,
uncoversa morecomplexpatternofpolicydevelopment
literunaccountedforbyexisting
empiricalor theoretical
ature,are thendiscussed.

ApplyingtheClassification
Frameworkto ForestPolicy
Developmentin theU.S. Pacific
1980-2005
Northwest:
PolicyRegimeDevelopmenton Federally
Owned ForestLands
Goals. The goals of forestpolicygoverning
federally
thebulkof
owned forestlands in thePacificNorthwest,

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

539

havevaried a decisionnotbe givenconsideration.8


Forest
whichcomeundertheNational
A secondproviSystem,
interests
established
and
between
sion
is
found
in
the
1976
National
Forest
Act
industry
considerably
Management
of an emerging
environmental (NFMA),championed
thoseheldbymembers
inCongress
as an effort
toreduce
The
coalition
coalition.
environmental
has
the
role
of
the
courts
in
National
Forest
The
long
advocacy
Planning.
"ends"
of
increased
the
to represervation NFMA,whoseoriginscan be tracedto an effort
championed policy
ofNational
lands(where
shouldoccur) alignindustrial
Forests
andagency
visionsofforest
harvesting
management
andincreased
offorest
thatoutlawed
on
courtdecisions
(howharvest- following
practices
regulation
clear-cutting
should
Their
norms
have
need
the
NationalForestLands,9is a complexpieceoflegislation
occur).
ing
emphasized
to maintain
andenhanceforest
known
forthediscretion
itgrants
totheNational
ecosystems
biodiversity. generally
Theirideasaboutthebestmeansto achievetheseends Forest
a
Service
However,
(Hoberg1997).
keyoperationalhavebeensteadyand untilrecently,
a pref- izedpolicymeanswasinserted
inthislegislation
emphasized
directing
erencefortraditional,
and control theForest
Service
toproducelandandresource
coercive,
command,
manageto industrial
thatsomeindustry mentplans(LRMPs)thatwould"providefordiversity
approaches
regulation
as discouraging
innovative
efforts ofplantand animalcommunities."
actorshavecriticized
The resulting
regutoachieveecological
thatLRMPsmainlationsissuedundertheactrequired
objectives.
Thepolicyideaspromoted
on theother tain"viablepopulations
of existing
nativeand desired
byindustry,
from
environmentalistsnon-native
"whereappropriate"
and
hand,havediverged
vertebrate
significantly
species,"
and havedominated
these
government
agendas.Historically "tothedegreepracticable."
Buttressing objectives
theirgoalshavefocusedon the"end"ofmaintaining
a
wastheNational
Environmental
Act'srequirement
Policy
timber
in or- thatkeygovernmental
strong
supplyfromthePacificNorthwest
projects
undergoenvironmental
dertopreserve
and
economic
assessments.
promote
jobs
development,
witha desiretoseelong-term
haveremaineddurable
Theseprogramobjectives
plansdeveloped
harvesting
whichmaximize
available
timber
fromNational sincetheywereenacted.
ofadditional
However,
supplies
layering
Forests.
Otheraspectsoftheirpreferred
means
foinstrument
occurred
when
theForpolicy
preferences
policy
cusedon theretention
offlexible
andinformal
a newecosystem
arrange- estServicedeveloped
management
apmentswithlandmanagement
and a desireto proachintheearly1990s.Thenewlyintroduced
agencies,
ecosyslimitinfluence
from
other
andagencies
that temgoaladdeda newlayeroflandscape
andsubregional
organizations
inforest
wanttobeinvolved
Thesegoals interagency
traditional
Forest
Service
might
regulation.
processes
alongside
wereto be achievedbyencouraging
a policyregimein planning
as
the
means
to
achieve
them.10
processes
whichthecourtsandgeneral
totheU.S.
publicdeferred
ForestService
tomanageNationalForest
lands.
thesolidification
oftheinstitutional
Settings.Following
features
Pacific
Northwest
onNational
governing
forestry
Forest
landsin 1978,policysettings
didnotundergo
any
indifferent
statutes
andmostoftheresponsibilpro- significant
Objectives.Twokeyprovisions
transformations,
inthe1970screated
a verystablesetofcoreob- ityformaking
suchchoicesaboutthecontent
ofspecific
mulgated
for
The
first
is
restedwithforjectives government
provision
managers.
plansand on-the-ground
requirements
foundinthe1973Endangered
Act(ESA)require- estofficials
inthefield.Theseofficials,
forthemostpart,
Species
mentthatoperationalized
thepolicy"end"thatpublic
caveatto thisreviewis thattheESA providesfor
landmanagement
threatened
andendan- 8Theimportant
protect
agencies
theestablishment
ofan "Endangered
or"God
SpeciesCommittee,"
ownedforestland
as we Squad" (Davis 1992).This
(which,
geredspeciesonpublicly
committee
has theauthority
to decide

showbelow,containedverydifferent
provisionsforprivateland). The ESA also establishedthemeansbywhich
thisobjectiveis to be achieved.The ESA is administered
not by land managementagencies,but by the U.S. Fish
and WildlifeService(USFWS) or the NationalMarine
FisheriesService(NMFS) and requires
thattheseagencies
listthreatened
and endangeredspeciesand their"critical
habitat"and ensurethata plan is developedthatwillresultin speciesrecovery.
The determination
ofthreatened
or endangeredmustbe based "solelyon thebest scientificand commercialdata available"(section4(b)(1)(A))
withexplicitdirectionthattheeconomiceffects
of such

thatthe "economicand socialbenefitsof the proposedactivity


outweighcoststo thelistedspecies"and can therefore
exempta
actionfromtherequirements
oftheESA (Smith,Moote,
particular
and Schwalbe1993,1039).Thiscommittee
canonlybe established
whenno "feasiblealternatives"
existandwherethereis "considerable"economicor socialimportance
(1038).

9Thecourts
intheMonongahela
ruledthatclear-cutting
National

wascontrary
Forest
toan obscure
inthe1876Organic
provision

Act.

themid-1990s,
theForest
to drawon the
Service
tended
"1Until
1960s'Multiple-Use
Sustained
a
YieldActtojustify
andpromote
whichindustry
andother
interests
cited
mandate,
"multiple-use"
in theirefforts
to strike
a balancebetween
economic
goalsand
initiatives
andRadosevich
Adams,
(Fletcher,
2001).
preservation

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANDMICHAEL
CASHORE
HOWLETT
BENJAMIN

540

FIGURE
4

Overall Patternof ForestPolicyDevelopment on PNW


Lands, 1975-2005
PolicyContent
Ends

PolicyFocus

Means

Goals
Public/Private:

Settings
Objectives
Public/Private:Public:Classic
shift
Paradigmatic
FauxParadigmatic Progressive toreduced
levels
between Incremental harvesting
fluctuations
movestowards
goals
competing
Classic
and
Private:
habitat
Incremental
species
protection
changein
rates
harvesting
Public/Private:Public:Classic
shift
Paradigmatic
ClassicIncremental Progressive inharvesting
of
Incremental guidelines
development
regulations
implementation
Classic
ofassessments Private:
Incremental
andhabitat
changesin
plans
harvesting
plans

Public/Private:

Stateoverthistimeperiodweresimilarto
withtheir Washington
toenjoycloseworking
continued
relationships
U.S.NationalForestlands,withclashes
those
drathe
clientele.
forest
However,
governing
by early1990s,
industry
and the
interests
betweenestablished
siz- existing
inpolicysettings,
occurred
maticchanges
industry
including
The maindifference
coalition.
environmental
for emerging
available
intheamountofforestland
ablereductions
limited
accessafforded
to
much
more
is
and
of
in
the
size
clearcuts
reductions
that,
largely
owing
permitted,
logging,
State's
and
"ri- byexisting
"noharvest"
streamside
of300-foot
theintroduction
institutions,
Oregon's Washington
smallcomisrelatively
coalition
forbothfishand environmental
advocacy
parianzones,"whichwereestablished
forest
those
on
federal
to
far
lands,
despite
focusing
regula- pared
nonfish-bearing
streams-by overshadowing
thesamelandarea.
in bothcovering
and indeedelsewhere
tionsin Oregon,Washington,
roughly
coalitionsin bothstateshavelong
Environmental
NorthAmerica(Cashore1997;CashoreandAuld2003;
on prienvironmental
increased
Moulton
and
1995,1997;Hoberg1993). championed
Ellefson,
protection
Cheng,
attention
for
ofharvesting
wasthelowering
effect
Thecumulative
including
calling greater
pol- vateforestlands,
And untilreand
to
harvest
annual
with
the
we
documented
above,
preservation.
biodiversity
species
icysettings
theirbroadideasaboutthemeansof achieving
from1980slevelsofover5billionboardfeet cently,
ratedeclining
command
traditional
thesepolicygoalshaveemphasized
to 1.2billionboardfeetby1995.
Thegoalspromoted
hadagainreverted andcontrol
byindusHowever,
approaches."
by1995policysettings
from
thoseheldbythe
modebutthistimefrom try,
backto a classicincremental
however,
significantly
diverged
coalition.
environmental
and
both
a verydifferent
Fluctuations, up
Historically
theyhaveemphaequilibrium.
anda "healthy"
a strong
timber
datare- sizedmaintaining
down,havetakenplacesincethistime.Current
supply
environmental
Asa result,
forest
sector.
wentdownas faras
thatharvesting
(readprofitable)
veals,forexample,
in
tandem
as
undertaken
was
usseen
400 millionboardfeet,butthisled Congress
with,
(often
being
protection
ofa profitable
thepromotion
ofU.S. budgetary
appropriations as opposedtosuppressing,
ing"rider"provisions
to
then
contribute
that
would
"reforest
to
to
and
the
Bush
administration
industry
products
attempt
processes)
The
of
the
economic
the
to the1.2billionboardfeetlevel
store"theequilibrium
population.
general
well-being
forofnoncoercive
meanswasthefacilitation
2004).
(Blumenthal
preferred
interests
to
owners'
forest
thatwouldpermit
estpractices

PolicyRegimeDevelopmenton Privately
Owned ForestLand

forest
thegoalspermeating
Goals. Notsurprisingly,
polin
lands
forest
on
Oregonand
icydevelopment private

"
atthepublicpolicylevelhasledmanygroupstoignore
Frustration
formsof governance
creatingalternative
altogether,
government
forpracticing
whichrelyonmarket
responsible
forestry
recognition
Adams,and Radosevich2001).
(Fletcher,

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

decisions
andtowork
roleinforest
practices
playa greater
in concert
withregulatory
agencies.
on NationalForestlands,
Objectives.Likethesituation
in the1970s,thepolicyobjectives
onceformalized
govforest
provedveryresilient.
management
erningprivate
stemsfrom
The oldestand mosthighly
feature
durably
commonlawprivate
whose
rules
require
property
rights,
ifany
tolandlords
thatthegovernment
givecompensation
amount
to
a
of
their
restrictions
propregulatory
"taking"
a strong
forest
The"ends"objective
ofdeveloping
erty.12
"means"thatgive
isaccompanied
industry
byformalized
and sue
theability
to use thecourtsystem
landowners
if
for
regulatory
agencies compensationanytakingoctheuseofpublicmeasures
to
curs,effectively
restricting
on
lands.
control
behaviour
private
industry
is found
Thesecondsourceofformalized
objectives
in "forest
in
acts"
statutes
that
were
developed
practices
theearly1970sin Oregonand Washington.
Unlikethe
U.S.federal
thestatestatutes
werepromoted
experience,
interests
and
were
as
a strategy
to
justified
byindustry
federal
intrusion
into
forestland
private
preempt
regulaactswereaimedatfacilitatTheseforest
tion.13
practices
boards
extraction
andcreated
forest
practices
ingtimber
atfirst
interests
thatweredominated
(withinbyindustry
cremental
toboardmembership
overtime).14
tinkering
landis managed
AttheOregonstatelevel,private
bythe
anditsrule-making
stateDepartment
ofForestry
body,
inWashington
theBoardofForestry.
State,the
Similarly,
aretheDepartment
ofNatural
Resources'
Dikeyagencies
visionofForestry,
andtheForest
For
Practices
Board. the
mostpart,thesestatutory
havereduced
theability
regimes
ofstatelegislatures
andadministrative
agenciesto initiof
the
boards.'"
The statutes
atechangesindependently
at oddswiththe
arewordedto avoidlitigation
(directly

541

lawstend
thatU.S. environmental
commonassumption
ofnonreduce
the
and
topromote
ability
litigation), they
influence
in
the
forest
to
have
resource
regulatory
agencies
process.16
sourceofformal
andenduring
Thethird
objecpolicy
tivescomesfromthefederal
arena,whereenvironmental
forest
havebeencrafted
statutes
thataffect
management
in a waythatlargely
overprivate
state
respects authority
inThetworelevant
federal
statutes
forest
management.
cludedprovisions
undertheCleanWater
ActandtheEnAct.UndertheCleanWater
Act,forestry
dangered
Species
is treated
as a "non-point
sourceofpollution,"
a classifitotheEPAinregulating
cationthatgiveslessteeth
forestry
as
on waterthanifforestry
hadbeendesignated
impacts
in a
Actis written
a "pointsource.""17
The CleanWater
that
it
and
so
requires
cooperation voluntary
regulaway
thancoercive
andcontrol
tionrather
command
methods,
withfederal
andencouraging
usually
agencies
supporting
state-level
leadership.
topopularbeliefandmany
andincontrast
Similarly,
theapproach
oftheESAtoprivate
assessments,
scholarly
forest
is
different
fromrequirements
managementvery
offederal
landowners
andfederal
Unliketheir
agencies.
federal
nonfederal
landowners
areunderno
counterparts,
to"recover"
threatened
orendangered
species.
obligation
In fact,Section10(a)(2) oftheESApermits
nonfederal
thatwouldallowthemto
landowners
to seeka permit
thatis deemedto
undertake
a forest
practices
operation
practicesto "leavetheareaconducivefortimberproharvesting
ductionand encouragewildlife"(1980,468). These approaches
haveremainedrelatively
constant
overthelastthreedecades.

theDepartment
ofForestry
16Slight
changesmadein 1987required
to collectinventories
of threatened
and endangered
speciesand
sites.If,afterconductand scientifically
"ecologically
significant"
theForestPractices
Boarddecidesthatforest
haringthisanalysis,
trend
is thatanyforest
owneris sub- vesting
12Aslightly
withtheseresource
countervailing
sites,theBoardmustthen
mayconflict
lawwhereby
to damage "considertheconsequencesoftheconflicting
jectto common
usesand determine
theyarenotpermitted
other
actsof"nuisance,
waste
ortaking" appropriate
people's
property
through
levelsofprotection"
(ORS 527.710(3)(b)).Ruleshave
andMoulton
1995,30-37).
(Ellefson,
Cheng,
tendedto focuson limitingharvesting
seaduringreproductive
sonsorspecifying
areasaroundparticular
sitesinwhichno logging
of
is
its
1971
13The
keypiece forestry
legislation
governing
Oregon
anyforestpracticeson criticalhabiForest
Act.Theprecise
ofthe1971Actcanbetraced can occur.In Washington,
Practices
timing
assessment
underWashington's
totheU.S.Congress'
andeventual
ofthe tatlandsrequirean environmental
deliberations
enactment
SEPA
The
1987
Wildlife
Code
a processwhereby
creates
legislation.
CleanWater
Actof 1972.
theDirectorof theDepartment
of Fishand Wildlifecan ask the
mostofOregon's
in- WildlifeCommissionto lista speciesifit is "seriously
boardwasmadeupofindustry
threatened
14Originally
in thelisting
terests
tothecharge
"that
thetimber
is,ineffect, withextinction"
process.
industry,
thoughthereis no timeline
leading
allowed
itself"
TheForestPractices
Boardhasthepowertodesignate
critical
habitoregulate
1977).
(Anderson
tatareasforindividual
species.
inthatcourt
Stateis
different
from

'5Washington slightly
Oregon
tribal
anda State
Environmental
Polrulings
regarding
fishing
rights
inOregon.
oflegalism
TheseformalicyActgiveita degree
lacking
izedobjectives
atthestate
levelwere
species
preservation
regarding
written
ina waytoavoidoutside
conditions
thesameimpact
having
asunder
federal
Forexample,
rulessimply
reregulation.
Oregon's
be giventowildlife
habitat
quiredthat"consideration"
(Cubbage
andEllefson
statutes
calledfor
1980).In Washington,
originally

Protection
17TheEnvironmental
Agencylosta largebattlein 2001
froma nonpointsourceto a pointsourceof
to changeforestry
pollution(Jacobs2000; ForestResourcesAssociation1999). The
failure
ofthisinitiative,
whichwouldhavehadseriousimplications
fortheexisting
hardinstitution's
logicofappropriateness
governon private
illustrates
thedurability
and
ingregulations
forestlands,
hardinstitutional
features.
poweroftheexisting
explanatory

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

542

ina "taking,"
result
inthelossofa threat- inexchange
forbringing
6.5million
acresofprivate
forest
i.e.,thatresults
the
The
to
which
adenedoran endangered
lands
under
HCPs
processes. degree
species.18
as
are
ditional
such riparian
zoneregulation
requirements
in
Since
the
forest
environmental
offset
Settings.
early1970s,
policysettings
impacts
theypermit
bythenegative
havedevelopedincrementally,iscontested
environmental
and
interests.
OregonandWashington
industry
among
on
National
Forest
and in shorter
than
occurred
Whilea review
ofthemyriad
ofpolicycommitments
consteps,
man- tainedintheseHCPsisbeyondthescopeofthisanalysis,
ofprivate
lands(Hoberg1993).The"end"settings
a pattern
best detailedanalyses
rulemakinggenerally
followed
ofthemrevealthattheyarefollowing
agement
and themeanswith a classicincremental
described
as "classicincremental,"
what
approach,
especially
vis-a-vis
this occurred
whichtoaccomplish
theseefforts
havealsofollowed
on U.S.federal
lands.Thoughcallingformore
Thereremainno policyrequirements
havedocumented
scientific
studies
pattern.
regarding research,
gaps
existing
re- in theuseofscientific
annualharvest
ratesand no efforts
to permanently
in determining
policy
knowledge
fromtheextractive
landbase. settings
moveprivateforestland
2005),
(Kareivaetal. 2000;McClureandStiffler
to
Therehavebeenincremental
in
in
the
utilized
estabwhich
stands
contrast
to
approaches endangered
approach
deand
most
rule
effects
on federal
lands.The cumulative
speciespreservation,
notably,
ongoing
lishingsettings
in riparian
zones.Such ofthesedifferences
inthe
in policysettings
arereflected
velopment
governing
harvesting
road
include
that
in
and
rates
dramatic
differences
building
changes
guidelines regulate
harvesting during after
oforiginal
shade thistime(Figure1).
andencourage
a percentage
nearstreams
the
to be maintained
and,in themid-1970s,
regulated
near
number
oftreesthatshouldbe leftafter
harvesting
limited
toNaa stream,
andcreated
(compared
relatively
thePuzzle: Explaining
Revisiting
zones.
tionalForest
lands)no-or"specialharvest"
PatternsofChange
Differing
the use of identified
"nestingsites"of
Similarly,
and Stabilityin PacificNorthwest
or endangered
threatened
species(The ForestPractices
thatlandown1994)emphasized
requirements
Program
Forestry
an
site
when
near
identified
ersnotify
agencies
harvesting
inthesehabi- Application
whenharvesting
andobtainpriorapproval
ofa morenuancedclassification
framework
weredeveloped thanis typically
tats.Thesemeans-oriented
policysettings
reveals
usedtoevaluate
policydynamics
ina waythatcritics
haveasserted
focusedmoreon min- a morecomplexpattern
ofpolicychangein thePacific
rather
thanon what Northwest
theirimpacton harvesting,
imizing
casethanis usuallyviewedin longiforestry
forspeciesrecovery
wouldbe required
(Giaari1994).
The pattern
reveals
tudinalstudiesofpolicyevolution.
Likewise
policieshaveincreas- a similar
speciespreservation
overallcontestation
ofideasandgoalscirculatconservation ingamongmembers
"habitat
reliedonthemeansobjectives
in both
of thepolicycommunity
ingly
processes regions
plans"(HCPs) thatrelyon complexplanning
conserandlandownership
(reflecting
categories
to
commitments
whichdeveloppolicysettings,
including
vationversusdevelopment
agenda),and one in which
forthe policyobjectives,
notedabove,inexchange
theriparian
zonesettings
over
despiteongoingsocietalconflict
that goals,remained
ofprivate
forest
owners
toundertake
practices
in
stable
both
right
policyregimes.
remarkably
ingoalsandobjectives
species.By1999suchregula- Thesesimilar
ofstability
may"take"an endangered
patterns
land standinsharpcontrast
forest
20 millionacresofprivate
covered
inpolicysettings,
tothedivergence
toryrelief
fedthe
1990s
punctuation
affecting
by early
highlighted
forsucha permit,
thelandowner
mustpreparea Habi8"Inreturn
the
Plan ("HCP") thatis supposedto mitigate
tatConservation
and flexible
impactsfromthepermitted
taking.The discretionary
interests
bydifferent
approachafforded
byHCPs ishotlycontested
LandsAlliance
withintheforest
policycommunity
(e.g.,American
create
is thattheESA/HCPprovisions
1998).Whatis undisputed
forprivateforest
fardifferent,
and lessonerous,policyobjectives
owners.Forinstance,
forest
thanis thecaseforfederal
landowners
in
toscientific
limited
role
for
a
much
more
responding
provide
they
dataregarding
specieslossthatso drivesthepolicyregimeaffecting
Kareivaetal. (2000) found,wasthat
lands.The result,
U.S. federal
and
84% ofthetime,HCPs failedto providebasic"conservation
informato
scientific
use
and/or
measures,
important
mitigation
Section4(d) oftheEndangered
tionandanalyses."
SpeciesActalso
approvalof
providesfortheabilityofa takingto occurfollowing
statewide
plans.

eral forestlands and the apparentlyclassicincremental


patternfollowedon privatelands.
efforts
to explainpolWhilemostpoliticalscientists'
Hall'slead,wouldlook forevidence
icychange,following
suchas changesinpolitofexogenoussocietalturbulence,
icalpartiesorchangesinsocietalvaluesinordertoexplain
an apparentlyparadigmaticshiftin PacificNorthwest
forestpolicyoverthis30-yearperiod,our above review
poses challengesto thoseexplanationsbecause the patternof changeis consistentneitheracrosspolicylevels
nor jurisdictions.Althoughgoals fluctuatedin the federalcase,theobjectivesofpolicy-ones we wouldexpect
to changein responseto societalpressureor changesin

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

543

theamountofchangepossibleinpolicysettings.
control
or
willprevent
Whether
suchinstitutionalized
objectives
interon
their
in
depends
require
changes policysettings
different
thattwovery
andwehypothesize
nallogics,
types
lands
forest
federal
and
ofpolicyregimes
private
governed
in
caseconformed,
Thatis,neither
policydevelopment.
to thehomeostatic
terms,
changesprocesses
cybernetic
Thermostatic
federal
landspolicy
The
Hall
and
others.
identified
PolicyDynamics:
by
the
of
were
"thermothat
had
features
instead
defining
Advancing Study PolicyChange regime
static"(Buckley
1968;Gell-Mann
1992).Thatis,theobforest
lands
of
federal
to
make
two
of
these
two
cases
leads
us
Our review
policyactedmuchin the
jectives
as
a
thermostat
same
ofpolicy
onthestudy
andtheorization
broadobservations
changesin internal
regulates
way
inoutsideconditions
inresponse
tochanges
we needto separate
outwhatmightbe temperature
First,
dynamics.
createdan
Durable
in
which
1995).19
ofpolicydevelopment
(Wlezien
policyobjectives
fairly
typicalprocesses
of
institutionalized
(Marchand
levelsof
factors
do prevailthrough
"logic appropriateness"
multiple
exogenous
werelikelyto folforest Olson2004)in whichpolicysettings
likethePacific
Northwest
fromsituations,
change,
until
of
incremental
low
a
classic
or"uneven."
ismorecomplex
pattern development
policycase,inwhichchange
that
forestwouldreveal
evidence
whichex- suchtimeas scientific
thespecific
factors
Second,weneedtoidentify
were
under
of
these
different
peril-i.e.,thata species'
species
dependent
patterns change.
plain
very
Thecombinawas
threatened.
own
Inwhatfollows
aneffort,
withrebelowweundertake
"equilibrium" being
and interest
evidence,
notedabove, tionof scientific
groupnotificaspecttoourstory
ofjurisdictional
divergence
thermostatic
caused
a
built-in
then
tion
of
these
trends,
esthe
to advancethestudyofpolicydynamics
beyond
in
classic
to
be
mechanism
theroleof
Wedo so byemphasizing
tablished
paradig"tripped,"
resulting
orthodoxy.
inthe
durable
in
Likewise
matic
within
the
federal
a thermostatic
mechanism"
policy
settings.
change
"triggering
a
such
lands
lacked
on
forest
landspolicyregimethatallowedverysignificant stitutionalized
objectives private
that
a
contained
feature
thermostatic
and,indeed,
inresponse
toouttobe madetopolicysettings
logic
changes
on
in
not
did
aboutspeciesdecline-afeature
sideinformation
settings
policy
change
permit
paradigmatic
missing
in
the
lack
of
or
lands,
intheprivate
forest
landscase.
anypunctuation
explain
private
thissphere.20

durable.Yetdurablepolicy
politicalparties-remained
intodurablesettingstranslate
also
did
not
objectives
fashionon
in a classicincremental
thelatterproceeded
a keypunctulandsfeatured
lands,butonfederal
private
intheearly1990s.
shift
ationorparadigmatic

Thermostatic
versusHomeostaticModels

ofPolicyChange

19Wemakethisclaim,drawingon Clemensand Cook's (1999)


formaland incan be seenas involving
work,that"institutions"
in his path- formalrules,policies,andstandardoperating
The policyregimes
thatHall examined
thatbind
procedures
becausenot
workfeatured
breaking
fluctuating
goalswhichledto andguidebehavior.The"binding"aspectisimportant
fromconstitutional
eventhoseemanating
sources,
themselvesall institutions,
inobjectives
andwhich
andsettings
changes
rather"soft"institutions
areenduring.
Therecanbe,forinstance,
tendedtoundergo
alteration
inso- (Abbottand Snidal2000;Giuliani1999;Pollock,Lilie,and Vittes
as a result
ofchanges
ifany,exandhavelittle,
ofgovernment. 1993)thatquicklyadapttooutsidepressure
cietalvaluesorthepartisan
composition
atsomepoint
power.Ofcourseevendurableinstitutions
is planatory
Thisis a changeprocesswhich,in cybernetic
terms,
crumbleand arereplaced,or evolve(Thelen2003),butourinterThatis,itinvolves
a system
"homeostatic."
which, esthereis on understanding
roughly
whenparticular
policydevelopment
but formsofpolicybecomeso durablethattheycontainindependent
likea spinning
top,isconstantly
change,
undergoing
power.
remains
inoneplace(equilibrium)
untilan outsideforce explanatory

(a foot,forexample)movesit to a newlocationwhere,
isestablished
after
this"punctuation,"
a newequilibrium
(Steinbruner
1974).
nonhomeOurcasestudies,
reveal
a second,
however,
orifthey
ostatic
stable,
pattern-inwhichgoalsareeither
do change,havelimitedcausal powerin termsof affect-

Northwest
InthePacific
andsettings.
ingpolicyobjectives
werevery
forest
policycase,formalized
policyobjectives
durable
andsurvived
or
policy
goals.
changing fluctuating
inwhich
Thistypeofchange
involves
a system
polprocess
or
obtain"institutional
status"
andprevent
icyobjectives

20Whether,
how,andwhenpolicyregimes(or otherformsforthat
statushasbeenwelldiscussedand
matter)mightgaininstitutional
twowaysinwhich
whichhasemphasized
debatedintheliterature,
becomedurablewhenitisinitiated
a policymight
thisoccurs.First,
inwhicha uniqueandtempoduringa "windowofopportunity,"
raryconjunctionof eventsproducesa specificpolicythat,once
thewindowwasclosed,becomesdurable-ofteneveninthefaceof
This
towards
thatpolicy.
societalorlegislative
considerable
hostility
literature
is,existing
posits,morelikely
"uniquewindow"feature
in whichlog
to occurin a U.S.-style
system
separation-of-powers
the
or
and
Rockman
1993,
18),
(Weaver
conjuncunlikely
rolling
on thepartofpublic,HouseofRepresentatives,
tionofagreement
to replicate
can produceuniqueor difficult
Senate,and Executive
A secondwaypoliciesmight
become
andinitiatives.
policycontents

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

544

theThermostatic
Elementin the
Identifying
FederalLandsPolicyRegime
The empiricalevidencein the PacificNorthwest
forest policycase justifiesour attention
to the role of
in shapingpolicydevelopinstitutions"
"thermostatic
inthiscasewasplayed
ment.Thekeythermostatic
trigger
the
Owland
scientific
evidence
that
Northern
Spotted
by
sincethe
Datacollected
associated
specieswereindecline.
Owl
late1970sshowedtheNorthern
Spotted depended
on old growth
or "latesuccessional"
forests
foritssurthe
vival,andthedeclineoftheseforest
typesthreatened
survival
ofthespecies(Gutierrez
andCarey1985).Land
marked
partofa policysubsystem
management
agencies,
clientelist
withindustry
interests
bystrong
relationships
andprofessional
either
associations,
forestry
questioned
thescienceand failedto respond,
or undertook
increAs a result,
mentalresponses.
theSeattleand Portland
intended
to force
AudubonSocieties
launchedlitigation
todramatically
landmanagement
adjustupward
agencies
over
Northern
OwlhabiSpotted
implementation
targets
research
scientific
tat.Theydrewon theaccumulating
thattheowl'sdeclinewasowingto a lackofprotection
ofitshabitat
andscientific
evidence
thattheowlwasan
of
declineas a whole.
"indicator
forest
ecosystem
species"
toforcetheFish
Thislitigation
first
beganas an attempt
andWildlife
ServicetolisttheNorthern
SpottedOwlas
ofthe
on thedurablerequirements
threatened,
drawing
SpeciesAct,theNationalEnvironmental
Policy
Endangered
Act,andtheNationalForestManagementAct
(Hungerford

1994;Sher1993;SherandStahl1990).
The litigation
forcedthelistingof the
eventually
andledtoa number
Owl
as
Northern
endangered,
Spotted
to
ofagencyandinteragency
attempts devisea recovery
Whenitwasclearthatany
plan(Thomasetal. 1990).21
in a
to
save
the
Northern
SpottedOwlwouldresult
plan

lossoftimber
considerable
supplyin thePacificNorthwest(Levine1989;Kriz1990),members
ofCongress
atand
in
the
to
override
some
cases
dismantle
existtempted
1994).However,
(Yaffee
ingpolicyapparatus
illustrating
institutional
such
efforts
failed
to
changethe
durability,
in
this
sector.
operationalized
objectives
a highly
theWhiteHouseinitiated
pubUltimately
in
licized"ForestSummit"in Portland,
Oregon, April
labor,andother
1993,atwhichenvironmental,
industry,
their
solutions
presented
nongovernmental
organizations
before
thepresident
andmembers
ofhiscabinet(Begley
intheestablishment
etal. 1993).Thesummit
resulted
of
Team
theForest
com(FEMAT),
Ecosystem
Management
which
wascharged
ofgovernment
scientists,
prisedmostly
withdifferent
theClinton
administration
withpresenting
for
the
Northern
Owl.
options saving
Spotted In theend,
theClinton
administration
chose"Option9,"whichthey
believedwouldentailtheleasteconomicimpactwhile
withinthelaw,therefore
allowingforplausible
staying
of
interview
U.S.Department
speciesrecovery
(personal
thepunctuated
Justice).
changesat
Option9 contained
leveldetailed
above.22
thepolicyspecifications
Most accountsof thisstorypointto thebrilliant
groups'litigation
employed
byenvironmental
strategies
efforts
tonationalor
environmental
groups'
campaigns,
and
izetheissues(Hoberg1997;Koontz2002),orClinton
that
orevidence
totheenvironment,
Gore'scommitment
itsmanagement
waschanging
theForest
Service
philosofail
theseaccounts
phy(DavisandDavis1988).However,
the
for
the
owl
was
to notethattheultimate
plan saving
to occurwithinthe
one thatallowed themostharvesting

feathehardinstitutional
ofthelaw.23Without
confines
tohypothesize
itis reasonable
inthesector,
turespresent
thatthemorelimited
bygovernmental
policyresponses
thesummit,
onesthatwereruledtimeand
before
agencies
withkeyproagainbythecourtstobe outofconformity
U.S.
forest
of
visionsoftheformalized
policy,
objectives
a
different
would
have
scholars
institutions
hasbeenhighlighted
policyresponse.
bypath-dependency (see
produced
Hacker
2000;Pierson
1993,2000)whohave
2001,2004;Mahoney
to mostof thesesinglecase studies,our
Contrary
returns
demonstrated
that,oftenowingto increasing
processes,
ideason the
reveals
thatit was not changing
so much analysis
canbecomeincreasingly
entrenched
overtime,
policies

orverycostly partof thepublicor agencies(Twight1983; Twightand


become
so thateventually
impossible
they
virtually
In thesecasespolicies
themselves
cangainsignificant Lyden1989) or of Congress(Davis 1995) thatwas the
tochange.
whatfuture
policychoices
power,
explanatory
strongly
affecting
ofclassic
willper- keycausalmechanismshapingthedevelopment
arepossible.
In bothcasesexisting
institutional
designs
societal
concerns
ornotpermit,
tochanging
mit,
specific
responses
weremadeinadsuchas theclear-cutting
22Some
rules,
(Pierson
1993).
changes,
to implement
vanceof Option9, butas partof initialefforts
first
wastodevelop
aninteragency
committee
includeffort
21The
oflitigathecommencement
following
ecosystem
management
andIndian tionovertheNorthern
Forest
Service,
ingtheBureauofLandManagement,
Owl(seeHaddock
1995;Robertson
Spotted
theFishandWildlife
Service
andtheU.S.
Lands,andinvolved
PanelonLate- 1992).
MarineFisheries
Itsreport,
Scientific
Department.
of
fortheU.S.Department
seniorattorney
toasthe"gang- 23Personal
referred
Forest
Successional
interview,
commonly
Ecosystems,
wasfacilitated
anddocumenting Justice,
wasimportant
forestablishing
of-four"
June1994.Sucha decision
bytheClinton
report,
that
astotheScientific
ofthespotted
owl administration's
aboutthedecline
credible
scientific
information
Team,
they
Analysis
charge
with
wouldbeconsistent
sesswhich
to
offederal
thefailure
andassociated
requirements
legislative
option
agencies
species.
Following
howmuchharvesting
andtoexplicitly
decided
toconduct forowlprotection,
Service
theForest
predict
adoptitsrecommendations,
under
eachscenario.
Team(SAT). wouldbepossible
referred
toastheScientific
itsownassessment,
Analysis

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

Rather,itwas the
paradigmaticchangein policysettings.
and
of
the
features
institutionalized
specific
enduring
that
land
policyregime
required
managementagencies
to addressspeciespreservation
by alteringthosesettings
enoughto bringbackowl populations.24
On privatelands, this institutionalized
triggerwas
missing.At a time when courts were requiringclassic paradigmaticchangeson National Forestlands in
responseto concernsabout the NorthernSpottedOwl
and associatedspecies,theinstitutional
features
ofpolicy
at
the
state
level
directed
objectives
responsesbynarrowthe
available
to
and directing
policyoptions
regulators,
ing policydevelopmentto forestpracticesboardsmandatedtoensuretheeconomichealthofthetimberindustry
(Hoberg2000; Koontz2002).25

Conclusions
Applyingour analyticalapproachto forestpolicyin the
U.S. PacificNorthwest
uncovereda muchmorecomplex
patternof policydevelopmentthanis usuallypresented
in theliterature
on policydynamicsthatrelyon an orthodoxpunctuatedequilibriumframework
(Hall 1993;
Howlett2002). Our identification
of six levels of policy,and fourpatternsof historicalpolicydevelopment,
and historhelpeduncovertwo muchmoreempirically
icallyaccuratepatternsof policydevelopmenton federaland privateforestlandsin theU.S. PacificNorthwest
thanwouldtypically
havebeenidentified
usingorthodox
models of policydynamics.Our explanationforthese
whichwe derivedinductively
fromthecases,
differences,
has profoundimplicationsforpolicystudiesgenerally.
alsochallenges
conclusions
thatanactivist
240uraccount
judiciary

explainstheseoutcomes-sinceitwasthespecific
operationalized
thatjudgeswerecompelledtoruleon andnottheirown
objectives
senseofenvironmental
justiceor concern(Wood2006).
25TheWashington
StateForestPractices
boardhad,foryearsfolevidenceofthedeclineof theNorthern
lowingscientific
Spotted
owl,failedto evendefinecriticalhabitatfortheNorthern
Spotted
insteadon emergency
rulesthatbothindustry
and
Owl, relying
environment
organizations
agreedwerenot adequate(Rowland
toowlprotection
inOregonweredeemedequally
1994).Responses
limitedbyenvironmental
mostresponses
groups,and ultimately
wereeffected
thecompany-initiated
HabitatConservation
through
Plans(HCPs) thatmanyscientists,
criticized
directly
byindustry
interests
ForestResources
CouncilandCounties1991;
(Northwest
Northwest
Association1994),deemedinadequateto adForestry
dressspeciesdecline(AssociatedPress2000;Giaari1994;Pollack
1999).The PortlandAudubon'sanalysisof theBoard'sdeliberationsoverprotection
oftheSpottedOwl,forexample,arguedthat
didadoptsomerulestoprotect
thespotted
"...[Board ofForestry]
owlhabitat-enoughtoprotect
thebirditself-inordertoprevent
a 'take'fromoccurring.
Butitis sucha minimalamountofhabitat
it is tantamount
to saying,We'llkeepfromkillingthe
protection
birdbutwe willmakeitso uninhabitable
thatthebirdwon'tstay
there"(personalinterview).

545

We argue thattwo distinct"logics of appropriateness"


as to the typeand rangeof policychangethatcan occur in the faceof similarexternalconditionsappear to
hold strongexplanatory
institutionpower.Specifically,
alizedthermostatic
mechanismscontainedin federalforest policyobjectivesbut not privateones led to the two
different
outcomesobservedin thesetwo cases.On NationalForestlands,massivechangesin policyspecificationsweretheresultof a thermostatic
equilibriumprocessattheprogramobjectiveslevelin whichindicatorsof
outsideproblemsweredesignedto resultin cumulative,
In Oregonand Washingrapidchangein policysettings.
ton State,the institutional
featuresof policyobjectives
weredesignedto limitresponsesto outsideenvironmentalindicators,
as thedominantroleofeconomicobjectives
was an enduringinstitutionalized
featureof policymakThe
result
was
limited
(classic incremening.
relatively
in
to
environmental
tal) responses policysettings
policy
problems.
Three criticalfindingsemergefromour approach.
The firstis thatbroad-basedtheoriesofinstitutional
and
need
to
better
policychange
incorporate
explanationsof
consistent
with
the
policydevelopment
logicofan existing
institutional
order.Path-breaking
workby Hall linking
theroleof exogenoussocietallearningto typesof policy
changeneedsto be modifiedto takeintoaccounttheway
different
institutional
structures
permitchangeto occur
2003; Daugbjerg1997, 2003).
(Braun and Benninghoff
Our analysiscorrectsa tendencyamong manyexisting
theoriesof policychangeto assume thatparadigmatic
institutions
crumble
changecan onlyoccurwhenexisting
or are replaced(Genschel1997).
Second,whiletheoriesof "punctuatedequilibrium"
attemptto explainrapid policychangeovershortperiods of time,we arguethatscholarsmustbe carefulto
betweenthelevels,orders,or componentsof
distinguish
policiestheyare measuringand describing(Mortensen
betweendifferent
ordersof
1995). Failingto distinguish
policiescan improperly
juxtaposeseveraldistincttypesof
and
policydevelopment presenta misleadingpictureof
theactualpatternofchangepresentin an empiricalcase.
ofpolicychangeand
Third,and related,assessments
dynamicsmusttake the "direction"of changeinto account. That is, theymust distinguishpolicy developin different
mentsthatmoveslightly
directions
overtime
but neverdeviatemuchfromthestatusquo (policiesin
equilibrium),fromthosethatmove in the same direction over time (cumulativechange;Deeg 2001; Goldstone 1998; Pierson2000). Policyscholarsmust assess
whetherchangesare consistentwitha "homeostatic"or
logicofpolicysystemdynamicsorwith
self-equilibrating
othermodels,suchas thethermostatic
one presentin the
case of PacificNorthwest
forestpolicy.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIXA

Policy
Clearcutting

SelectReviewofPolicyDevelopmentGoverningFederallyOwned and PrivatelyOwned Forestsin theUS PacificNorthwest,1975-200


US Federal
Lands
1975

Oregon
Private
1975

None

NFMA limitsclear None


cuttingto when
"silviculturally
essential."
Maximum
clearcutsize of
60 acres.

RiparianZones No detrimental
& Wetlands
management
practices
permitted
within 100 ft.
from
water,
Viable
populations of
existingspecies
must be

Washington
Private
1975

Road and trail


construction
discouraged
near streams.
It is
recommended
that75% of
originalshade
be leftafter
harvesting.

Certainforest
practicesare to
be avoided near
streams.Use of
logging
equipment
limitedin
Streamside
Management
Zones.

maintained,

Consideration
FederalESA
Harvesting
Endangered
should be
practicesshould
Species/
prohibits
leave area
Biodiversity "taking"of
givento
criticalhabitat
conduciveto
species
on all lands,
timber
includingwet
areas and
productionand
Requires listing
wildlifeescape
of endangered
encourage
cover,
species,and
wildlife,
federalagency
plans aimed
at species
recovery.NFMA
requires
maintenanceof

US Federal
Lands
1995

Oregon
Private
1995

Washington
Private
1995

US Federal
Lands
2001

Oregon
Private
2001

Washington
Private
2001

US Fede
Lands
2004

No change
No chang
Maximum clearcut Michael Dombeck, No change
chiefof the
set at 240 acres.
ForestService,
directsan end to
clearcuttingin
national forests
of old growth
areas.
No change
Writtenplans are Both fishhabitat No chang
No harvesting
Harvestingpermitted. Riparian
and nonfish
1987 rule changes
within300 feet
requiredprior to
Management
habitatstreams
of fish-bearing
any operation
requirewrittenplans Zones (RMZ)
have a core zone
within50 and
createdafter
streams,150 feet beforeharvesting
which is a
100 feetof
of permanently near fish-bearing
TFW accord in
50-foot
1987. A
streams.1994 rules
fish-bearing
flowing
streamsand no
no-harvestarea.
nonfish-bearing requireleavinga
percentageof
treesrequired
streams,100 feet percentageof trees
Beyond this
harvestingis
allowed within
leftstanding,the
of seasonally
area, rules are
standingwhen
20 feetof a
harvestednear
prescribedfor
percentageof
flowing
which varies
intermittent
fish-bearing
harvestingand
riparianzones.
retentionof tree
streamor
streams.
accordingto the
domestic water
snags.
type of RMZ.
use stream.
No change
After1987 resources Wildlife
Management plan Beginningin 1997, No chang
Interagency
Commission
forbiodiversity
sitesof threatened
pilot landowners
ecosystem
were selectedto
includes
and endangeredfish
createdin 1980
management
and planning
and wildlifespecies
can listspecies
develop
developingand
are to be established, seriously
landscape
ensuringa
instituted,
numberof
threatenedwith
Where forest
planning
Interagency
different
extinction.Once
conservation
systemson their
practicesare deemed
habitatsin a
to conflictwith
listed,
privatelands.
agreements
functionalpatch
theseareas, rules
required.
Departmentof
and the Oregon
Fish and
maybe established
Wildlifemust
plan was
limitingharvesting
in theseareas,
specifically
preparea
initiatedforthe
recoveryplan.
recoveryof
salmon.
Clearcuttingonly Maximum clearcut
size set at 240 acres
permittedwhen
deemed essential (only permittedto
to meetingforest exceed 120 acres
withapproval of
plan objectives,
StateForester).

species viability
and diversityof
plantsand
animals.
Reforestationof No change
Reforestation NFMA directs
Restocking
300 seedlings
ForestServiceto
requiredwhen
allow timber
per acre
harvesting
extractiononly
reduces
requiredfor
cuts removing
wheresuch
acceptable
more than 50
lands can be
species below
25 percentof
percentof trees.
adequately
Must be
restockedwithin originallevels.
fiveyearsof
Between 100
replanted
harvest.
and 150
withinthree
seedlingsmust
yearsor
be plantedper
naturally
acre.
regenerated
withinfive

Statewiderules
established

No change

No change

regarding
of
reforestation
clearcutareas.

years.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

No change

No change

No chang

APPENDIX
A Continued
Policy

US Federal
Lands
1975

Oregon
Private
1975

Washington
Private
1975

US Federal
Lands
1995

Oregon
Private
1995

Road Building NFMA regulations Number of roads Rules requirethat Option 9 further No change
issued by Board
use of roads be
road
restricts
requirethatroad
of Forestrythat
minimizedin
design take into
buildingin
account its
should be
canyons,
riparianzones
effectson land
followed.These
on Northern
riparian,and
and resources.
include
wetlandsareas
SpottedOwl
All
lands.Watershed
minimizingrisk and not located
of material
on steepor
non-permanent
analysispriorto
roads mustbe
unstableslopes, road
enteringwaters
and avoiding
Roads
construction
designed to
reestablish
unstable or
prohibitedin
required.
sensitive
areas where
vegetativecover
withintenyears. terrain.Road
wildlifeshould
suffer
building in
substantialloss
riparianareas
must have prior or damage.
approval of
State Forester.
Annual
NFMA requires
No change
No Rules
No Rules
Option 9
Allowable
thatthe annual
withdrawsmost
Cut
cut resultsin a
ofthe Northern
nondeclining
SpottedOwl
low in
land from
extractiveland
perpetuity.
base,
significantly
reducingthe
annual cut.
Forest
Protection

1964 Wilderness
Act begins
strategicforest
protection,

Limited

Limited

protectionon
small amount
of State-owned
lands.

protectionon
small amount
of State-owned
lands.

About80 percent
ofland under
rangeof
Northern
SpottedOwl
protected.

No change

Washington
Private
1995

US Federal
Lands
2001

TFW process
agreesthatthe
departmentof
of Natural
Resources
addressesroad

Oregon
Private
2001

Severelimitations No change
to road building
withthe
Roadless Area
Conservation
rule that
management,
prohibitsnew
road
particularly
construction,
orphaned roads,
timbercutting,
sale and removal
in areas
surveyedwithin
the National
ForestSystem.

In 1992 DNR

Washington
Private
2001

US Fede
Lands
2004

The Forestand
No chang
FishAgreement
addressesroads
to be maintained
to a higher
standardto
allow easier fish
passage,prevent
landslidesand
property
maintainedwith
an approved
maintenance
plan.

No change
The new Roadless No change
beginspreparing Conservation
annual reports
Rule further
limitsthe
on privateland
harvestingrates, availabilityof
timberto be cut
Harvestingmust
occur on
in National
state-owned
Forests.
lands on an even
flowcontinuing
basis.
In 1998, idea of
No change
Clinton issues
No change
policydirective
greatest
to protect40
permanentvalue
million acres of
adopted.
roadless areas in
1999 just before
leavingoffice,

No chan

No chan

withgovernment
as wellas personalinterviews
and policydirectives
thataffectfor
ofkeylegislation,
Sources:Basedon qualitative
reviewofprimaryand secondary
literature,
officials,
regulations,

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

548

References
Abbott,KennethW.,and Duncan Snidal.2000. "Hard and Soft
Law in International
Governance."International
Organization54(3):421-56.
AmericanLandsAlliance.1998."ExamplesofFishand Wildlife
Conservation
Needson Non-federal
Forestlands
and Species
HarmedbyHCPs." Portland,OR: AmericanLandsAlliance.
Anderson, Gordon B. 1977. "Oregon's Forest Conservation Laws-Part I." AmericanForests83(3):16-19; 5256.
AssociatedPress.2000. "Owl Disappears:SpottedOwl Declines
at FourTimesExpectedRate."ABCNEWS.com,July10.
Frank,andBryanJones.1991."AgendaDynamics
Baumgartner,
and PolicySubsystems."TheJournalofPolitics53(4):104474.
Frank,and BryanJones.1993. Agendasand InBaumgartner,
ofChicago
inAmericanPolitics.Chicago:University
stability
Press.

Daugbjerg,Carsten.2003."PolicyFeedbackand ParadigmShift
in EU Agricultural
oftheMacSharryRePolicy:The Effects
formon FutureReform."JournalofEuropeanPublicPolicy
10(3):421-37.
Davis, Charles. 1995. "Public Lands Policy Change: Does
(June):8-11.
CongressSupportIt?"JournalofForestry
and
Davis.
Sandra
1988.
Davis, Charles,
"AnalyzingChange
in Public Lands Policymaking:From Subsystemsto Advocacy Coalitions." Policy Studies Journal 17(Fall):324.
Davis, PhillipA. 1992. "CriticsSay Too Few Jobs,Owls Saved
Under 'God Squad' Plan." Congressional
QuarterlyWeekly
Report50(June1):1438-39.
DeCostner,LesterA. 1994."PrivateProperty
Rightsand Other
92(5):28-29.
Myths."JournalofForestry
Change and the Uses and
Deeg, Richard.2001. "Institutional
Limits of Path Dependency: The Case of German Finance." Max Planck Institutefur Gesellschaftsforschung
MPIfG.

FrankR., and BryanD. Jones,eds. 2002. Policy Durrant,RobertF, and Paul E Diehl. 1989."Agendas,AlternaBaumgartner,
tivesand PublicPolicy:LessonsfromtheU.S. ForeignPolicy
ofChicagoPress.
Dynamics.Chicago:University
Arena."JournalofPublicPolicy9(2):179-205.
Begley,Sharon,PatriciaKing,MaryHager,and RobertService.
Ellefson,Paul,AnthonyCheng,and R. J.Moulton. 1995. Reg1993."The Birdsand theTrees:ClintonConvenesa Summit
Practicesby State Governments.
ulationof PrivateForestry
53-54.
on theSpottedOwl." Newsweek,
April5,
ofMinnesota,StationBulletin605-1995
St.Paul: University
Bendor,Jonathan.1995. "A Model of MuddlingThrough."
MinnesotaAgricultural
ExperimentStation.
AmericanPoliticalScienceReview89(4):819-40.
A.
R. J.Moulton.1997."Regulatory
P.
S.
and
Ellefson, V.,
Cheng,
ForestPlan Stilla Sourceof
Les. 2004. "Northwest
Blumenthal,
and
Private
Forestry:StateGovernmentActions
Programs
Conflict;Old Growth:DistrustMakesTimber,Owls Hardto
to Directthe Use and Managementof ForestEcosystems."
Reconcile."TheNewsTribune,
A01.
Society& NaturalResources10(2):195-209.
EfLisa
L.
and
Martin.
2001. "Institutional
Botcheva,Liliana,
Fletcher,
Rick,PaulAdams,and SteveRadosevich.2001. "Comfectson StateBehaviour:Convergenceand Divergence."InofTwoForestCertification
Systemsand OregonLeparison
ternational
StudiesQuarterly
45(1):1-26.
Final Research
OregonStateUniversity.
gal Requirements."
2003. "PolicyLearnBraun,Dietmar,and MartinBenninghoff.
State
of
University,
College Forestry.CorReport.Oregon
ingin SwissResearchPolicy:The Case oftheNationalCenvallis,OR December14,2001. 90 pages.
tresof Competencein Research."ResearchPolicy32: 1849ForestResourcesAssociation,Inc. 1999. EPA Holding TMDL
63.
"ListeningSessions."Washington:ForestResourcesAssociBuckley,Walter.1968. "Societyas a Complex AdaptiveSysation,Inc.
tem."In ModernSystem
Research
fortheBehaviouralScientist,
1994."A ConceptualBasisforFEMAT:EcologFranklin,
Jerry.
ed. W. Buckley.Chicago: AldinePublishingCompany,pp.
ical Science."JournalofForestry
92(4):21-23.
490-513.
and Complex Adap1992.
Gell-Mann,
"Complexity
Murray.
Environmental
Cashore,Benjamin.1997."GoverningForestry:
tive Systems."In The EvolutionofHuman Languages,ed.
Pacific
and
the
U.S.
Influence
in
British
Columbia
Group
J. A. Hawkins and M. Gell-Mann. Redwood City,CA:
of Toronto,
Northwest."PhD, PoliticalScience,University
pp. 3-18.
Addison-Wesley,
Toronto.
1997.
"TheDynamicsofInertia:Institutional
Cashore, Benjamin,and Graeme Auld. 2003. "The British Genschel,Philipp.
and Health
and
Persistence Changein Telecommunications
Columbia EnvironmentalForestPolicy Record in ComCare."
Governance
10(1):43-66.
parative Perspective." Journal of Forestry101(8):4247.
Giaari, Albert. 1994. "The EndangeredSpecies Act: Impact
Law
of Section 9 on PrivateLandowners."Environmental
Clemens,ElisabethS., and JamesM. Cook. 1999. "Politicsand
(April):419-500.
Institutionalism:
ExplainingDurabilityand Change." AnnualReviewofSociology25: 441-66.
Giuliani,Mark. 1999. "'Soft' InstitutionsforHard Problems:
AirPollutionPoliciesin ThreeItalianRegions."
Instituting
Cubbage, Frederick,and Paul V. Ellefson.1980. "State ForIn ThePoliticsoflImproving
UrbanAirQuality,ed. W. Grant,
est PracticeLaws: A Major Policy Force Unique to the
UK: EdwardElgar,pp.
A. Perl,and P.Knoepfel.Cheltenham,
NaturalResourcesCommunity."NaturalResourcesLawyer
31-51.
13(2):421-68.
Daugbjerg,Carsten.1997. "PolicyNetworksand Agricultural Goldstone, Jack A. 1998. "Initial Conditions, General
Laws, Path Dependence, and Explanation in Historiin Swedenand
Deregulation
Explaining
PolicyReforms:
cal Sociology."AmericanJournalof Sociology104(3):829in
Governance
the
EuropeanCommunity."
Re-regulation
45.
10(2):123-42.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WHICHEQUILIBRIUM?
PUNCTUATING

549

B. Carey,eds. 1985.Ecology Jones,


andHeather
A.Larsen.
2003."PolSulkin,
D.,Tracy
Gutierrez,
Bryan
RalphJ.,and Andrew
Political
Institutions."
inAmerican
AmerandManagement
inthePacific
Northwest.
DC:
icyPunctuations
Washington,
ican
Political
Science
NorthwestReview
USDA ForestServiceTechnical
Pacific
97(1):151-69.
Report
185,5-9.
Sheldon.2000."Testing
Alternative
Theoriesof
Kamieniecki,
2001.TheDividedWelfare
State.NewYork:CamForest
Columbia."
Hacker,
Jacob.
Agenda-Setting:
PolicyChangeinBritish
Press.
Studies
Journal
28(1):176-89.
Policy
bridgeUniversity
2004.
Risk
et
al.
2000.
without
the
Hacker,
Kareiva,
Peter,
Jacob.
"Privatizing
Privatizing
"UsingScienceinHabitatConservaWelfare
State:TheHiddenPolitics
ofSocialPolicyRetrenchtionPlans."SantaBarbara,
CA:National
Center
forEcologmentintheUnited
States."
ofCalifornia,
American
Political
Science
Review
icalAnalysis
and Synthesis,
Santa
University
ofBiological
American
Institute
SciencesNCEAS
Barbara,
98(2):243-60.
HCP working
group.
on theLine: Comparing
the
Haddock,Mark.1995. Forests
Rules
in
British
Columbia
and
State.
on theBrinkofExtinction:
A. 1991.Balancing
Kohm,Kathryn
forLogging
Washington
Vancouver
andNewYork:SierraLegalDefenceFund& the
TheEndangered
Act
and
Lessons
WashSpecies
fortheFuture.
Natural
Resources
DefenseCouncil.
DC: IslandPress.
ington,
PowerofEconomic
Ideas: Kohm,Kathryn
a
1997.Creating
Hall,Peter,ed. 1989.ThePolitical
A., and Jerry
E Franklin.
acrossNations.Princeton:
Princeton
Univerthe
21st
The
ManScience
Keynesianism
Forestry
Century:
ofEcosystem
for
DC: IslandPress.
sityPress.
Washington,
agement.
SocialLearning,
andthe Koontz,Tomas.2002.Federalism
Hall,Peter.1993."PolicyParadigms,
in theForest:
Nationalversus
State:TheCaseofEconomic
inBritain."
ComStateNatural
Resource
DC: Georgetown
Policymaking
Policy.
Washington,
Politics
Press.
25(3):275.
parative
University
1992.Incrementalism
Michael.
andPublicPolicy.
New Kriz,Margaret.
1990."Owls1,Timber
0."National
Hayes,
Journal
(May
York:Longman.
4):1956-59.
In TheDy- Lazaroff,
Heclo,Hugh.1976."Conclusion:
Policy
Dynamics."
Cat.2001SalmonFeedForests;
Forests
Shelter
Salmon
namics
Public
A
ed.
of
Policy: Comparative
Analysis, R.Rose.
Environment
NewsService[citedSeptember
[WebArticle].
London:Sage,pp.237-66.
21. Available
fromhttp://ens-ews.com/ens/sep2001/2001L1993.
A
09-21-07.html.
Hoberg,
Regulating
George.
Forestry:Comparison
ofInstitutions
andPolicies
inBritish
Columbia
and theU.S.PaLeach,WilliamD., and Paul A. Sabatier.2005."To Trustan
Northwest:
Forest
Economics
andPolicy
Research
cific
Analysis
Rationaland Psychological
Models
Adversary:
Integrating
TheUniversity
ofBritish
Unit.Vancover:
Columbia.
of Collaborative
American
Political
Science
Policymaking."
toLegalism:
TheTransReview
Hoberg,
George.1997."FromLocalism
99(4):491-503.
formation
ofFederalForest
In Western
PublicLands Levine,
Policy."
B. 1989."TheSpottedOwl CouldWipeUs
Jonathon
and Environmental
ed. C. Davis. Boulder,CO:
Politics,
Out."Business
Week
18):94.
(September
Westview
Press,
pp.55-86.
TheConflict
1995."Private
and
Lewis,George.
Property
Rights:
2000."HowWeMakePolicy
Governs
thePolicy
Hoberg,
George.
theMovement."
Journal
(June):25-26.
ofForestry
WeMake."In Sustaining
theForest
Coast,ed.
ofthePacific
Lindblom,CharlesE. 1959. "The Science of Muddling
D. J.SalazarandD. K.Alper.Vancouver:
UBC Press,
pp.26PublicAdministration
Review19(2):79-88.
Through."
53.
2003.
"Institutional
andChange:
Johannes.
Stability
2003.Science,
andU.S.Forest
Law:The Lindner,
Politics,
Hoberg,
George.
Same
Public
Two
Sides
of
the
Coin."
Journal
ofEuropean
Battle
overtheForest
Service
Rule.Washington,
DC:
Planning
10(6):912-35.
Policy
Resources
fortheFuture.
and Berthold
2003."TheCreJohannes,
Rittberger.
Michael.2000."Managing
the"HollowState":Proce- Lindner,
Howlett,
and
of
InstitutionsContestation
ation,
Interpretation
duralPolicyInstruments
andModernGovernance."
CanaHistorical
Institutionalism."
Journal
Revisiting
ofCommon
dianPublicAdministration
43(4):412-31.
Market
Studies
41(3):445-73.
Michael.2002."Do Networks
Matter?
Howlett,
Linking
Policy
theVariability
of DisIan. 1980."Explaining
Utility
Network
Structure
toPolicyOutcomes:
Evidence
fromFour Lustick,
FourPropositions."
American
PojointedIncrementalism:
CanadianPolicySectors1990-2000."CanadianJournal
of
litical
Science
Review
74(2):342-53.
Political
Science
35(2):235-67.
1994."Where
theWildThingsAre:TheEndanHowlett,
Michael,and M. Ramesh.2002."ThePolicyEffects Meltz,Robert.
Act
and
Private
Environmental
Law
gered
Species
Property."
of Internationalization:
A Subsystem
Adjustment
Analysis
(April):369-417.
of PolicyChange."Journal
ofComparative
PolicyAnalysis
inHistorical
James.
2000."PathDependence
Sociol4(3):31-50.
Mahoney,
and
29(4):507-48.
Theory
Society
ogy."
AndreaL. 1994."Changing
of
theManagement
Hungerford,
PublicLandForests:
The RoleoftheSpottedOwlInjunc- March,James
G.,and JohanP. Olsen.2004.TheLogicofAptions."Environmental
Law24: 1395-1434.
ofOsloCentre
Oslo:University
forEuropean
propriateness.
Studies.
Paul.
2000.
"International
on
Accord
Puts
Jacobs,
Labeling SpotandLisaStiffler.
2005."Scientists
FaultState
Robert,
Modified
lighton Genetically
Crops."SeattleTimes(Night McClure,
HabitatPlan."TheSeattle
Al.
FinalEdition),
1,A3.
Post-Intelligencer,
February
R.Baumgartner,
andJames
L.True.1998. Mortensen,
PeterB. 2005. "PolicyPunctuations
in DanJones,
D.,Frank
Bryan
U.S. BudgetAuthority,
ish Local Budgeting."
PublicAdministration
1947-1995."
83(4):931"PolicyPunctuations:
50.
Journal
60(1):1-33.
ofPolitics

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CASHOREAND MICHAELHOWLETT
BENJAMIN

550

NationalMarineFisheriesService.2000. "A Citizen'sGuide to


the4(d) Rule forThreatenedSalmon and Steelheadon the
WestCoast." NationalMarineFisheriesService.Northwest
and SouthwestRegions.
Nisbet,Robert. 1972. "Introduction:The Problemof Social
Change."In SocialChange,ed. R. Nisbet.New York:Harper
and Row,pp. 1-45.
NorthwestForestryAssociation.1994. In Search of Balance:
Northwest
Association.Portland,OR.
Forestry

Northwest
ForestResourcesCouncil,and Associationof O&C
Counties. 1991. "A Facade of Science:An Analysisof the
JackWard Thomas ReportBased on SwornTestimonyof
MembersoftheThomasCommittee."Portland,OR: Preston
ThorgrimsonShidlerGates& Ellis.
Noss, Reed F. 1993. "Sustainable Forestryor Sustainable
ed. G. Aplet,N.
Forests?"In DefiningSustainableForestry,
Johnson,J.T. Olson, and V. A. Sample. Washington,DC:
IslandPress.
PacificFisheryManagementCouncil.2000.AmendedSectionsof
thePacificCoastSalmonPlan. Portland,OR: PacificFishery
ManagementCouncil.
and theFutureof
Paehlke,RobertC. 1989. Environmentalism
New
Yale
Press.
Politics.
Haven:
University
Progressive
In
and
Tenure
Peter
H.
1990.
Pearse,
"Property
Systems."
Rights
Introduction
toForestEconomics,
ed. P.H. Pearse.Vancouver:
UBC Press,pp. 173-92.
BecomesCause: PolicyFeedPierson,Paul. 1993."WhenEffect
back and PoliticalChange."WorldPolitics45(4):595-628.
Pierson,Paul. 2000. "IncreasingReturns,Path Dependence,
and theStudyofPolitics."AmericanPoliticalScienceReview
94(2):251-68.
Pollack,Michael M. 1999. An Assessment
oftheRiparianProtectionProvidedin theForestsand FishReport,and a Comin OtherPacificNorthwest
parisonwithRiparianProtection
SalmonoidHabitatProtection
Plans.BainbridgeIsland,WA:
PacificRiversCounciland 10000YearsInstitute.
Pollock, Philip H., III, StuartA. Lilie, and M. Elliot Vittes.
The
1993."HardIssues,CoreValuesandVerticalConstraint:
Case of NuclearPower."BritishJournalofPoliticalScience
23(1):29-50.
Out,DiggingIn: Environmental
Pralle,SarahB. 2006. Branching
DC: Georgetown
and
Advocacy AgendaSetting.
Washington,
Press.
University
Robertson,F. Dale. 1992."PolicyDirectiveon EcosystemManagementoftheNationalForestsand Grasslands."WashingForestService.
ton,DC: U.S. DepartmentofAgriculture,
Rose,Richard.1976. "Models of Change."In TheDynamicsof
PublicPolicy:A Comparative
Analysis,ed. R. Rose. London:
Sage,pp. 7-23.
Rowland,Melanie. 1994. "Bias UnderminesForestPractices
Board." SeattleTimes,July15,B5.
Sabatier,Paul. 1988. "An AdvocacyCoalition Frameworkof
Learning
Policy Change and the Role of Policy-oriented
Therein."PolicySciences21(2):129-68.
eds. 1993.PolicyLearnSabatier,Paul,and HankJenkins-Smith,
BoulCoalitionApproach.
ingandPolicyChange:AnAdvocacy
der,CO: WestviewPress.
Salazar,Debra J.,and FrederickW. Cubbage. 1990. "Regulating PrivateForestryin theWestand the South."Journalof
88(1):14-19.
Forestry

Sher,VictorM. 1993. "TravelswithStrix:The SpottedOwl's


Journey
throughtheFederalCourts."ThePublicLand Law
Review14: 41-79.
Sher,VictorM., and AndyStahl.1990."SpottedOwls,Ancient
Forests,Courtsand Congress:An Overviewof Citizens'Effortsto ProtectOld-GrowthForestsand the Species That
LawJournal
6:261LiveinThem."Northwest
Environmental
364.
Behavior:A Studyof
Simon, HerbertA. 1957. Administrative
Organization.
Decision-MakingProcessesin Administrative
New York:MacMillan.
Smith,Adrian.2000. "PolicyNetworksand AdvocacyCoalitions:ExplainingPolicyChangeand Stabilityin UK Indusand PlanningC: GoverntrialPollutionPolicy."Environment
mentand Policy18(1):95-114.
Smith,AndrewA., MargaretA. Moote,and Cecil R. Schwalbe.
An Analytical
1993."The EndangeredSpeciesActat Twenty:
Surveyof FederalEndangeredSpeciesProtection."Natural
Resources
Journal33(4):1027-76.
Steinbruner,
JohnD. 1974 The Cybernetic
TheoryofDecision:
New DimensionsofPoliticalAnalysis.Princeton:Princeton
Press.
University
Politics:
Steinmo,S., K. Thelen,et al., eds. 1992. Structuring
in ComparativeAnalysis.CamHistoricalInstitutionalism
bridgeStudiesin ComparativePolitics.Cambridge:CamPress,pp. 257.
bridgeUniversity
The ForestPracticesProgram.1994. "ForestPracticeNotes:
SpottedOwl." Ed. O. D. O. Forestry.Salem, OR: Oregon
DepartmentofForestry.
Evolve:Insightsfrom
Thelen,Kathleen.2003."How Institutions
ComparativeHistoricalAnalysis."In ComparativeHistorical Analysisin theSocial Sciences,ed. J.Mahoney and D.
Press,pp.
Rueschemeyer.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
208-40.

Thomas,JackWard,E. D. Forsman,J.B. Lint,E. C. Meslow,B.


R. Noon, and J.Verner.1990.A Conservation
Strategy
forthe
Scientific
Northern
SpottedOwl. Portland,OR: Interagency
Committee.
True,JamesL., BryanD. Jones,and FrankR. Baumgartner.
1999."Punctuated-Equilibrium
Theory:ExplainingStability
In Theoriesofthe
and Changein AmericanPolicymaking."
ed. P.A. Sabatier.Boulder,CO: WestviewPress,
PolicyProcess,
pp. 97-116.
Valuesand PoliticalPower.
Twight,BenW. 1983.Organizational
Press.
Park:
State
University
University
Pennsylvania
1989.
Ben
and
Fremont
J.Lyden.
"MeasuringForest
Twight, W.,
ServiceBias."JournalofForestry
87(5):35.
Council. 1999. WashingtonEnviWashingtonEnvironmental
ronmentalCouncil'sDecisionNot to Returnto Timber,Fish
and Wildlife(TFW) Forumat This Time. Seattle,July19.
WashingtonEnvironmentalCouncil, and WashingtonState
Field Officeof the National Audubon Society.1998. The
SalmonRecovery
forProtecting
Proposal:A LowRiskStrategy
ForestedWaSalmonHabitatin Washington's
and Restoring
Council
tersheds.
Washington:WashingtonEnvironmental
and WashingtonStateFieldOfficeoftheNationalAudubon
Society.
StateDepartmentofNaturalResources.2000. ForWashington
Rule to Protect
estPracticesBoardAdoptsa New Emergency
ListedBull Trout--NewRulesGo intoEffectToday,Nov. 18

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUNCTUATINGWHICHEQUILIBRIUM?

551

ofNat- Wlezien,Christopher.
1995."ThePublicas Thermostat:
State,Department
[Internet/Website].
DyWashington
American
ural Resources,
9
namicsof Preferences
forSpending."
November18, 1998 [citedSeptember
Journal
of
Political
Science
39(4):981-1000.
2000].
R.Kent,
andBertA.Rockman,
eds.1993.Do Institutions Wood,Robert
ofIncrementalism:
SubWeaver,
S. 2006."TheDynamics
DC:
The
Matter?
Institution.
and
Public
Studies
Lands."
Politics,
Journal
Washington,
systems,
Brookings
Policy
34(1):1-16.
David L., and AidanR. Vining.1999.PolicyAnalWeimer,
and Practice,
2nd ed. Englewood
Steven
Lewis.1994.TheWisdom
Owl:Policy
Cliffs,
NJ: Yaffee,
ysis:Concepts
oftheSpotted
Prentice-Hall.
Lessons
a
New
Island
Press.
CA:
Covelo,
for
Century.

This content downloaded from 181.112.216.98 on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:44:40 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions