Federal and state policy influence on woody biomass utilization

A considerable portion of public lands in the United States is at risk of uncharacteristically severe wildfires due to a history of fire suppression. Wildfires already have detrimental impacts on the landscape and on communities in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) due to unnatural and overstocked forests. Strategies to mitigate wildfire risk include mechanical thinning and prescribed burning in areas with high wildfire risk. The material removed is often of little or no economic value. Woody biomass utilization (WBU) could offset the costs of hazardous fuel treatments if removed material could be used for wood products, heat, or electricity production. However, barriers due to transportation costs, removal costs, and physical constraints (such as steep slopes) hinder woody biomass utilization. Various federal and state policies attempt to overcome these barriers. WBU has the potential to aid in wildfire mitigation and meet growing state mandates for renewable energy. This research utilizes interview data from individuals involved with on-the-ground woody biomass removal and utilization to determine how federal and state policies influence woody biomass utilization. Results suggest that there is not one over-arching policy that hinders or promotes woody biomass utilization, but rather woody biomass utilization is hindered by organizational constraints related to time, cost, and quality of land management agencies’ actions. However, the use of stewardship contracting (a hybrid timber sale and service contract) shows promise for increased WBU, especially in states with favorable tax policies and renewable energy mandates. Policy recommendations to promote WBU include renewal of stewardship contracting legislations and a re-evaluation of land cover types suited for WBU. Potential future policies to consider include the indirect role of carbon dioxide emission reduction activities to promote wood energy and future impacts of air quality regulations.

Self-help extension: Farmer-to-farmer extension

As staff and mobility cost have the lion share of the costs of extension work, there have been many alternatives to assign farmers the job of facilitators, trainers and advisors. The arguments behind are that they are geopraphically closer to the clients, but also mentally and culturally, because they are members of the client group themselves, speak their language and share their experience and daily life. The article starts with the origins of the larger movement in Latin-America, and then discusses potentials and limitations, and finally experience from elsewhere.

Learning for Sustainability - LforS: An extension approach in small scale farming

Description of LforS as a integrativ and learning oriented extension approach

Promoting local innovation - a tool for sustainable rural development

Change, be it socio-cultural, political, institutional, technological, economic or ecological motivates local communities and farming families to mobilise and increase their innovation potential in order to create ways of life and production that match their own visions and priorities. In spite of the growing recognition of the potential of local innovations, they are hardly being integrated into development plans and projects; as a consequence, their diffusion within and between communities is limited. therefore interactive and participatory methods for supporting and strengthening the innovative potential of local actors are valuable inputs for sustainable rural development. the article presents an approach to promote local innovations.

Household Hardships, Public Programs, and Their Associations with the Health and Development of Very Young Children: Insights from Children’s HealthWatch

America’s low-income families struggle to protect their children from multiple threats to their health and growth. Many research and advocacy groups explore the health and educational effects of food insecurity, but less is known about these effects on very young children. Children’s HealthWatch, a group of pediatric clinicians and public health researchers, has continuously collected data on the effects of food insecurity alone and in conjunction with other household hardships since 1998. The group’s peer reviewed research has shown that a number of economic risks at the household level, including food, housing and energy insecurity, tend to be correlated. These insecurities alone or in conjunction increase the risk that a young child will suffer various negative health consequences, including increases in lifetime hospitalizations, parental report of fair or poor health,1 or risk for developmental delays.2 Child food insecurity is an incremental risk indicator above and beyond the risk imposed by household-level food insecurity. The Children’sHealthwatch research also suggests public benefits programs modify some of these effects for families experiencing hardships. This empirical evidence is presented in a variety of public venues outside the usual scientific settings, such as congressional hearings, to support the needs of America’s most vulnerable population through policy change. Children’s HealthWatch research supports legislative solutions to food insecurity, including sustained funding for public programs and re-evaluation of the use of the Thrifty Food Plan as the basis of SNAP benefits calculations. Children’s HealthWatch is one of many models to support the American Academy of Pediatrics’ call to “stand up, speak up, and step up for children.”3 No isolated group or single intervention will solve child poverty or multiple hardships. However, working collaboratively each group has a role to play in supporting the health and well-being of young children and their families. 1. Cook JT, Frank DA, Berkowitz C, et al. Food insecurity is associated with adverse health outcomes among human infants and toddlers. J Nutr. 2004;134:1432-1438. 2. Rose-Jacobs R, Black MM, Casey PH, et al. Household food insecurity: associations with at-risk infant and toddler development. Pediatrics. 2008;121:65-72. 3. AAP leader says to stand up, speak up, and step up for child health [news release]. Boston, MA: American Academy of Pediatrics; October 11, 2008. http://www2.aap.org/pressroom/nce/nce08childhealth.htm. Accessed January 1, 2012.

Dealing with bad guys: actor- and process-level determinants of the “devil shift” in policy making

Policy actors tend to misinterpret and distrust opponents in policy processes. This phenomenon, known as the “devil shift”, consists of the following two dimensions: actors perceive opponents as more powerful and as more evil than they really are. Analysing nine policy processes in Switzerland, this article highlights the drivers of the devil shift at two levels. On the actor level, interest groups, political parties and powerful actors suffer more from the devil shift than state actors and powerless actors. On the process level, the devil shift is stronger in policy processes dealing with socio-economic issues as compared with other issues. Finally, and in line with previous studies, there is less empirical evidence of the power dimension of the devil shift phenomenon than of its evilness dimension.

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) is one of the most frequently applied theories of the policy process. Most applications have been in Western Europe and North America. This article provides an overview of the ACF, summarizes existing applications outside of Western Europe and North America, and introduces the special issue that features applications of the ACF in the Philippines, China, India, and Kenya. This article concludes with an argument for the continued application of the ACF outside of Western Europe and North America and a research agenda for overcoming challenges in using the ACF in comparative public policy research.

Institutions and coalitions in policy processes: a cross-sectoral comparison

Actors with joint beliefs in a decision-making process form coalitions in order to translate their goals into policy. Yet, coalitions are not formed in an institutional void, but rather institutions confer opportunities and constraints to actors. This paper studies the institutional conditions under which either coalition structures with a dominant coalition or with competing coalitions emerge. It takes into account three conditions, i.e. the degree of federalism of a project, its degree of Europeanisation and the openness of the pre-parliamentary phase of the decision-making process. The cross-sectoral comparison includes the 11 most important decision-making processes in Switzerland between 2001 and 2006 with a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Results suggest that Europeanisation or an open pre-parliamentary phase lead to a dominant coalition, whereas only a specific combination of all three conditions is able to explain a structure with competing coalitions.

The direct-democratic challenge to evidence-based policy making: Questioning the governmental PISA narrative in Swiss school policy

The democratic deficit of evidence-based policymaking and the little attention the approach pays to values and norms have repeatedly been criticized. This article argues that direct-democratic campaigns may provide an arena for citizens and stakeholders to debate the belief systems inherent to evidence. The study is based on a narrative analysis of Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) reports, as well as of newspaper coverage and governmental information referring to PISA in Swiss direct-democratic campaigns on a variety of school policy issues. The findings show that PISA reports are discursive instruments rather than ‘objective evidence’. The reports promote a narrative of economic progress through educational evidence that is adopted without scrutiny by governmental coalitions in direct-democratic campaigns to justify school policy reforms. Yet, the dominant PISA narrative is contested in two counter-narratives, one endorsed by numerous citizens, the other by a group of experts. These counter-narratives question how PISA is used by an ‘expertocracy’ to prescribe reforms, as well as the performance ideology inherent to. Overall, these findings suggest that direct-democratic campaigns may make more transparent how evidence is produced and used according to existing belief systems. Evidence, on the other hand, may be a stimulus for democratic discourse by feeding the debate with potential policy problems and solution. Thus, direct-democratic debates may reconcile normative positions of citizens with the desire to base decisions on empirical evidence.

Does a reference to evaluations contribute to discourse quality? The case of Swiss direct-democratic campaigns on school policy: a conceptual framework

This article examines how references to evaluations in school policy debates contribute to discourse quality. The article consists of two parts: First, it presents a descriptive overview of the references to evidence in direct-democratic campaigns. These results are based on a quantitative content analysis of the newspaper coverage and governmental information documents of 103 direct-democratic Swiss school policy votes. In a second step, it discusses these findings in view of the question of whether the incorporation of evaluation results in policy debates contributes to discourse quality. It presents a conceptual framework, including hypotheses and a research design to answer this question.