These methods, instrumentation and/or protocols apply to all data in this dataset:Methods and protocols used in the collection of this data package |
---|
Description: |
1. Event_Description
I conducted a media content analysis and began with a list gleaned from Amodeo et al. (2022) of notable events and organizations involving Adirondack Common Pool Resource (CPR) governance since recognized European presence in 1626. I used the Google search engine and regional to national media coverage until reaching saturation where no additional organizations or policy events were discovered.
I compiled an events database containing examples of self-governance or state-centered CPR control decisions for each decade since New York became a state in the 1770s and for each event I gathered a list of organizations actively involved in CPR policymaking.
To minimize potential for bias in messaging about park policy (Burlando 2012:80), I included information from organizations widely considered either pro-environment, pro-private land rights or pro-economic development (some organizations are a combination). The unit of measure for analysis was therefore either an organization or an event.
For groups active in Forest Preserve (FP) policy, activity in Catskill Park and mid-Hudson Valley counties was not included, although both Adirondack and Catskill governance is important to FP-focused organizations.
Data Sources: web sites, newspaper articles, annual reports, books, maps, museum document collections and other online or paper/analog reference material.
********************
References:
Amodeo, M., Bond, H., George, C., Klein, J. D., & Tucker, R. E. (2022). An Adirondack Chronology No. 81 (p. 549). Union College.
Burlando, C. (2012). Land use planning policy in the Far North Region of Ontario: Conservation targets, politics of scale, and the role of civil society organizations in Aboriginal–state relations. University of Manitoba.
| Instrument(s): | n/a |
| Description: |
2. Public, Private, Both or Transfer
I classified each event based on its description to one of six choices:
1) public good;
2) private good;
3) transfer of public good from Public to Private (e.g., monetizing a resource on public land);
4) transfer of public good from Private to Public (e.g., a conservation easement);
5) both (involves public and private goods)
6) n/a
|
| Description: |
3. I classified each organization’s focus area based on its mission statement, vision and objectives as defined by its website and media/press releases. Organizational variables included geographic focus area (the spatial scale at which each operated, from town to global) and focus area/institutional affiliation of organization (e.g., legislative, agency, environmental protection, education) similar to the Core Interest identified by Levesque et al. (2016).
Reference
Levesque, V. R., A. J. K. Calhoun, K. P. Bell, and T. R. Johnson. 2016. Turning Contention into Collaboration: Engaging Power, Trust, and Learning in Collaborative Networks. Society & Natural Resources 30:245–260.
|
| Description: |
4. WHO
Organization(s) or entities involved in event. Typically only filled in for groups appearing multiple times, and is not a complete listing of organizations. Acronyms often in Event_Description column; acronyms are also in Amodeo (2022) source material.
Reference: Amodeo, M., Bond, H., George, C., Klein, J. D., & Tucker, R. E. (2022). An Adirondack Chronology No. 81 (p. 549). Union College.
The following is related but not included in this dataset; details can be found in Appendix 1 of McNulty (2023)https://experts.esf.edu/esploro/outputs/99917370604826.
For analysis I assigned each organization to one of the following types based on the public mission statement or written articles about the organization:
Table. Types of organizations by focus area in the Adirondack policy network, 1760-2020.
*****************************************************************************************************************
Organizational Type Description and Example Organizations
****************************************************************************************************************
Education - College Colleges and universities, public or private
Education - K-12 K-12 or 7-12 schools, public or private, including programs for K-12 students
Education - Public Museums, education centers, nature centers
Federal Agency Officials (not elected) representing national public good^4 management
Federal Legislature Congressional staff and elected officials
Local Government - County County officials, elected or appointed
Local Government - Regional Regional (parkwide or supra-county) officials, elected or appointed
Local Government - Town Town or village officials, elected or appointed
Media Newspapers, magazines, radio, websites, journalists
NGO - Community^1,2 Non-profit group focused on housing, health, education, other local issues
NGO - Economic^2 Non-profit group focused on jobs, workforce training, and similar issues
NGO - Environmental^2 Non-profit group focused on environmental issues
NGO - Recreation^2 Non-profit group focused on motorized OR non-motorized recreation
Private Industry Business or firm
Private Land Rights^3 Group focused on citizens' property rights, home rule
State Agency Officials (not elected) representing state public good management
State Agency Advisor Non-binding group designated to assist state in public good management
State Legislature Governor, state Assembly or Senate staff and elected officials
State Public Benefit Corp. Group with regulatory and management capacity, differentiated from an agency
State Partnership Alignment of two or more state organizations to carry out policy
******************************************************************************************************************
^1 Non-governmental organizations. US Internal Revenue Service tax code lists NGOs as 501(c)3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 depending on their focus area.
^2 NGO label is based on the first key word of its mission: economic, community health, environmental, or recreation. Some NGOs have overlapping focus areas that would fit multiple categories; the primary term was the deciding factor.
^3 Most private property rights groups do not have official tax status thus are not labeled as NGOs.
^4 Public goods are shared natural resources such as clean air or water, recreation access.
|
| Description: |
5. WHAT
I assigned each Adirondack CPR event to one of seventeen categories based on the type of policy action.
*********************************************************************************************************************
Event Type Definition Regarding Public Good/Common Pool Resource (CPR)
*********************************************************************************************************************
1. Community sustainability/quality Action promoting social good (includes non-market economic action)
2. Economic development Action promoting or affecting CPRs via tourism, industry and housing
3. Energy/water supply Action affecting CPRs involving facilities for electricity, fossil fuel, or renewable energy or dams for flooding control or power generation
4. Environmental protection Protecting land, water, wildlife or air CPR (can include NGO or private land acquisition but not state land acquisition)
5. Housing Large (>20 lot or >1,000 acre) housing developments on private land (not used in McNulty (2023))
6. Invasive species Introduction or control of invasive aquatic or terrestrial species
7. Land acquisition Protective action by state agency or NGO to purchase private land or add public land rights via easement
8. State admin Agency action affecting organizational capacity for CPR management
9. N/A Item not fitting other categories (e.g., status reports at certain times)
10. Natural event Flood, drought, fire, windstorm, ice/snowstorm or other natural event affecting public good, system resilience or policy
11. Private land conservation Action protecting CPRs via private action
12. Private land use/development Utilization affecting CPRs, including land sale from state to private ownership or development of real property such as housing, industrial use, or forest products
13. Public land use/development Non-recreation forest product utilization or development affecting CPRs, including reclassification of state lands by APA
14. Recreation Promoting recreation CPR – may be motorized or unmotorized activity
15. Research/education Acquisition or reporting of information, usually not policy-driven
16. Telecommunications Action involving cell towers, broadband internet and related items
17. Transportation Action impacting public roads, railways or rivers for commerce or travel
*********************************************************************************************************************
|
| Description: |
6. HOW
I assigned each event to one of the following twelve types of interaction categories which variously restricted or enabled CPR management actions.
Table. Type of policy events about public natural resources (Common Pool Resources or CPRs) by Adirondack organizations.
********************************************************************
Interaction Category Definition Regarding CPR
*********************************************************************
Admin Administrative decision to create an entity or organization (state, NGO, other)
Conflict Groups differ in how a public good should be used; public written, verbal or physical altercation or CPR damage resulted
Court Judicial decision or proceeding resulting in policy
Economic use/advocacy Proposal for CPR consumption, extraction or modification
Environmental advocacy Protective CPR recommendation by agency, non-profit or citizens' group
Information transfer Data reporting with no advocacy or agenda
Law Decision by legislative branch including constitutional amendments
Law - failed Bill or item not approved by legislative branch
Management Implementation of a policy in response to a rule, law or court decision
Partnership Two organizations agree to work together on CPR management
Rule Decision of executive branch or democratic citizen participation (vote)
Rule - failed Decision to not approve an action via vote
********************************************************************
|
| Description: |
7. SCALE_WHERE and Watershed
Each event was classified based on the spatial extent of the CPR policy action.
Table. Geographic scale of operation of Adirondack organizations.
**********************************************************************
Organizational Scale Geographic Extent
**********************************************************************
1. Municipality Town, Village or Hamlet
2. Multiple County Occurs across two or more counties or watersheds
3. Park Adirondack Park Blue Line, or in most of 12 park counties in northern NY
4. Forest Preserve Adirondack public lands in Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Fulton, Hamilton, Herkimer, Lewis, Oneida, Saratoga, St. Lawrence, Warren, Washington Counties
5. North Country Forest Preserve counties plus Jefferson and Oswego Counties
6. State Most or all of New York State
7. Northeast Northern parts of two or more states: New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine
8. Federal United States
9. World Involving two or more countries; Global
**********************************************************************
Five watersheds originate in the Adirondack Mountains:
1. Hudson (Sacandaga, Indian Lake, Schroon Lake, Saratoga Lake);
2. Mohawk (West Canada Creek, Hinkley Reservoir);
3. Lake Champlain (Au Sable/Bouquet Rivers, Saranac/Chazy Rivers, Lake George/Lake Champlain; Saranac Lakes, Lake Placid);
4. Oswegatchie/Black (Moose, Beaver, Independence Rivers; Fulton Chain of Lakes; Big Moose Lake; Lake Lila);
5. St. Lawrence River (Raquette, Grass, St. Regis, Salmon and Trout Rivers, Tupper Lake, Stillwater Reservoir, Indian River).
See https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/26561.html for description of water bodies belonging to each
|
| Description: |
8. WHAT_Subject
Some events received further categorization to refine the WHAT category.
Categories of subject of event include (e.g., ATV, blue line [Adirondack Park acreage/info], book, conference, EPF [Environmental Protection Fund], [human] health, housing, major windstorm, military flight, mill, mining, municipal [town-level actions], newspaper [origin of publication], major windstorm, n/a, ngo admin, railroad, report, road, science, tax sale, technology, water, wildlife, windstorm. Some events received more than one of these descriptors.
Not used in analysis in McNulty (2023) https://experts.esf.edu/esploro/outputs/99917370604826.
|
| Description: |
9. Key Event Assignment
For analysis, I assigned a relatively small number of Events essential to policy trajectory of Adirondack system = Yes. This list was checked by an external Adirondack policy expert. See McNulty (2023). https://experts.esf.edu/esploro/outputs/99917370604826
|
| Description: |
10. I assigned rule types that influence action situations define roles of actors, what they may, may not or must do, describe sanctions and outcomes of CPR decisions, and influence information sharing. To the Cole et al. (2017) types below I added another seven rules indicating when a rule failed – for example, when a law that would have altered motorized access to Forest Preserve failed to pass.
Table. Types of rules in policy event interaction between Adirondack organizations and stage of rule-setting where it occurs.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
Type of Rule^a Definition and Verb Stage of Rule Setting
*****************************************************************************************************************************
1. Boundary Define who can hold a position, leave a position, and process for assigning positions. Entry/exit, conditional pre-action
2. Position Create a role (e.g., voter, judge, elected representative). "Be." pre-action
3. Choice Prescribe actions an actor must, must not, or may take. Shapes incentives. "Do." pre- or mid-action
4. Information Authorize channel of information flow, including who can communicate and how. Policy evaluation focus. middle, action situation
5. Aggregation Determine how many and which actors must participate in a decision/choice. Affects other rules. middle, action situation
6. Payoff Assign reward or sanction to an action or based on outcomes. "Should/shouldn't." late action
7. Scope Define possible outcomes of a choice arena late action
8-14 (All Rule Type) - Failed Policy to create any of the other seven rules is not acted upon or is unsuccessful. all rule types/action situations
*****************************************************************************************************************************
a Modified from Cole (2017), Lien et al. (2018) and Cole et al. (2019).
References:
Cole, D. H. (2017). Laws, norms, and the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Journal of Institutional Economics 13:829–847.
Cole, D., Epstein, G. & McGinnis, M. (2019). The Utility of Combining the IAD and SES Frameworks. International Journal of the Commons 13:244–275.
Lien, A. M., Schlager, E. & Lona, A. (2018). Using institutional grammar to improve understanding of the form and function of payment for ecosystem services programs. Ecosystem Services 31:21–31.
|
| Description: |
11. WHAT_IAD
I assigned rule types that influence action situations define roles of actors, what they may, may not or must do, describe sanctions and outcomes of CPR decisions, and influence information sharing. To the Cole et al. (2017) types below I added another seven rules indicating when a rule failed – for example, when a law that would have altered motorized access to Forest Preserve failed to pass.
Table. Types of rules in policy event interaction between Adirondack organizations and stage of rule-setting where it occurs.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
Type of Rule^a Definition and Verb Stage of Rule Setting
*****************************************************************************************************************************
1. Boundary Define who can hold a position, leave a position, and process for assigning positions. Entry/exit, conditional pre-action
2. Position Create a role (e.g., voter, judge, elected representative). "Be." pre-action
3. Choice Prescribe actions an actor must, must not, or may take. Shapes incentives. "Do." pre- or mid-action
4. Information Authorize channel of information flow, including who can communicate and how. Policy evaluation focus. middle, action situation
5. Aggregation Determine how many and which actors must participate in a decision/choice. Affects other rules. middle, action situation
6. Payoff Assign reward or sanction to an action or based on outcomes. "Should/shouldn't." late action
7. Scope Define possible outcomes of a choice arena late action
8-14 (All Rule Type) - Failed Policy to create any of the other seven rules is not acted upon or is unsuccessful. all rule types/action situations
*****************************************************************************************************************************
a Modified from Cole (2017), Lien et al. (2018) and Cole et al. (2019).
References:
Cole, D. H. (2017). Laws, norms, and the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Journal of Institutional Economics 13:829–847.
Cole, D., Epstein, G. & McGinnis, M. (2019). The Utility of Combining the IAD and SES Frameworks. International Journal of the Commons 13:244–275.
Lien, A. M., Schlager, E. & Lona, A. (2018). Using institutional grammar to improve understanding of the form and function of payment for ecosystem services programs. Ecosystem Services 31:21–31.
|
| Description: |
0. Note that these steps are in relatively logical order, but data compilation took years and was not as sequential as suggested by the list. Sometimes multiple sources needed to be consulted to determine the assignment of an action category or other category.
For details on analysis and results, see McNulty (2023) https://experts.esf.edu/esploro/outputs/99917370604826.
|
|
|
|