Advertisement

Public Organization Review

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 135–153 | Cite as

The U.S. Forest Service and Its Responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act: A Work Design Problem

  • Matthew Auer
  • Kenneth Richards
  • David Seesholtz
  • Burnell Fischer
  • Christian Freitag
  • Joshua Grice
Article

Abstract

The U.S. Forest Service’s responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act entail a wide range of activities including scoping, scientific analysis, social and economic analysis, managing public input and involvement, media relations, regulatory analysis, and litigation. These myriad duties raise several important organizational and management questions. First, is the U.S. Forest Service capable of discharging these widely varying tasks with high levels of effectiveness and efficiency? To what extent should these activities be outsourced to private contractors or other providers? For those responsibilities retained in-house, what organizational structure best supports their effective and efficient execution? To address these questions, this article draws on concepts from new institutional economics and insights from the privatization and strategic organizational design literatures.

Keywords

U.S. Forest Service National Environmental Policy Act Make or buy Competitive sourcing 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Jamie Barbour offered helpful comments on prior drafts of this article. Elizabeth Baldwin’s editorial efforts are gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Beaver, E., et al. (2000). Seeing the Forest Service for the trees: A survey of proposals for changing national forest policy. Boulder: Natural Resources Law Center.Google Scholar
  2. Boling, E., Carbone, J., Lee, B., Morrison, A., & Smith, R. (2002). Workshop summary: Business activity modeling of the CEQ’s NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1500 1500–1508). Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/pag/bus_mod/ceq/CEQ_Workshop_Final_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
  3. CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality). (2007a). Calendar year 2006 filed EISs. http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/Calendar_Year_2006_Filed_EISs.pdf.
  4. CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality). (2007b). Citizens guide to the National Environmental Policy Act: Having your voice heard. http://www.nepa.gov/ntf/CitizenComments/Citizens_Guide_Feb9_07_2.pdf.
  5. Clarke, J. N., & McCool, D. (1996). Staking out the terrain: Power and performance among natural resource agencies (2nd ed.). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  6. Code of Federal Regulations. (1983). Title 40: Protection of the environment. Chapter 5: Council on Environmental Quality. 1506: Limitations on actions during NEPA process. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr1506_main_02.tpl.
  7. Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1995). Specific and general knowledge and organizational structure. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 8(2), 4–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Keel, D., Malmsheimer, R., Floyd, D., & Perex, J. (2006). Forest service land management litigation 1989–2002. Journal of Forestry, 104(4), 196–202.Google Scholar
  9. Kettl, D. (1995). Building lasting reform: Enduring questions, missing answers. In D. Kettl & J. Dilulio Jr. (Eds.), Inside the reinvention machine (pp. 9–83). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  10. Murchie, A., & King, R. T. (2002). The free life of a ranger: A Forest Service memoir. Reno: University of Nevada Oral History Program.Google Scholar
  11. NAPA (National Academy of Public Administration). (1999). Restoring managerial accountability to the United States Forest Service. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  12. NAPA (National Academy of Public Administration). (2006). First year assessment: USDA Forest Service Information Solutions Organization. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  13. Nelson, R. H. (2000). A burning issue: A case for abolishing the U.S. Forest Service. In MD Lanham (Ed.), Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  14. NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act). (1969). U.S. Code. Vol. 8, secs. 4321 et seq.Google Scholar
  15. OMB (Office of Management and Budget). (1983). Circular No. A-76 (Revised 1999 & 2003). Washington, DC: OMB.Google Scholar
  16. OMB (Office of Management and Budget). (1996). Circular No. A-76 revised supplemental handbook (Revised 2000). Washington, DC: OMB.Google Scholar
  17. OMB (Office of Management and Budget). (1999). Implementing the FAIR Act: Transmittal memorandum #20. Washington, DC: OMB.Google Scholar
  18. PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility). (2006). Forest Service eyes outsourcing two-thirds of workforce. http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=651).
  19. Richards, K., Seesholtz, D., Freitag, C., Auer, M., Barbour, J., Fischer, B., & McCardle, G. (2009). Contrasts in NEPA: Approaches by U.S. Forest Service region 1 and region 6—a pilot study. Report to the United States Forest Service, Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar
  20. Sinha, K., & Vande Ven, A. (2005). Designing work within and between organizations. Organization Science, 16(4), 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tzoumis, K. (2007). Comparing the quality of draft environmental impact statements by agencies in the United States since 1998 to 2004. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). (1997). Forest Service decision-making: A framework of improving performance. GAO/RCED-97-71. Washington, DC: GAO.Google Scholar
  23. U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). (2008). Better planning, guidance, and date are needed to improve management of the competitive sourcing program. Washington, DC: GAO. http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d08195high.pdf.Google Scholar
  24. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2002a). The process predicament: How statutory, regulatory, and administrative factors affect national forest management. Washington, DC: USDA.Google Scholar
  25. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2002b). Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for the National Environmental Policy Act (10/21/2002). http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/pag/bus_mod/ceq/index.htm
  26. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2005). Recreation quick facts. http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/facts/facts_sheet.shtml
  27. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2007a). Forest Service planning, appeal, and litigation system (PALS) database. Internal agency database of the USDA Forest Service. Used by permission by the authors.Google Scholar
  28. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2007b). NEPA feasibility. Study memo sent to regional foresters and others from Hank Kashdan, Deputy Chief for Business Operations. Washington, DC: USDA.Google Scholar
  29. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2007c). Past NEPA contracting experiences. Internal document on USDA Region 1 Intranet. Accessed 2007 and on file with authors with permission.Google Scholar
  30. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. (2008). Forest Service handbook 1909.15. Chapter 20-environmental impact statements and related documents, ¶ 1909.15.20.1. http://www.fs.fed.us/cgi-bin/Directives/get_dirs/fsh?1909.15 Forest Service Handbook 1909.15
  31. Windsperger, J. (2002). Organization of knowledge in franchising firms. Presented at DRUID summer conference on industrial dynamics of the new and old economy—who is embracing whom? Copenhagen/Elsinore, June 6–8, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Auer
    • 1
  • Kenneth Richards
    • 1
  • David Seesholtz
    • 2
  • Burnell Fischer
    • 1
  • Christian Freitag
    • 1
  • Joshua Grice
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest ServicePacific Northwest Research StationBoiseUSA

Personalised recommendations