Land Use Planning Implementation: A ‘Best Practices’ Assessment

1. Land Use Planning Implementation:A ‘Best Practices’ Assessment K.S. Calbick, Dr. J.C. Day, and Dr. Thomas I. GuntonPrepared for Land Summit ConferenceMay 14, 2004

2. Key Points • Methodology • Case Studies • Study Results • Conclusions

3. Methodology • Research Methods • Agency document review • Program theory application • Check-rank-evaluate questionnaire • Follow-up interviews • Limitations • Analytical statistical techniques could not be used • Telephone interviews lack nonverbal cues • Only executive-level respondents included • Only an organizational perspective was obtained • Target population perspectives might differ

4. Case Studies • The Bay Conservation & Development Commission • for the San Francisco/San Pablo Bay area • The Fraser Basin Council • for the Fraser River drainage basin in British Columbia • The Land Conservation & Development Commission • for the state of Oregon • The Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team • for the Puget Sound drainage basin in the state of Washington • The U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service • responsible for managing national forests and grasslands in the United States

5. First Priority Third Priority Distinguishing Among Practices Second Priority

6. First Priority Implementation Practices 1. Legislated Mandate Legislation should not be confusing, conflicting or tangled Legislation should clearly define these overlapping interests’ roles and responsibilities 2. Administrative Rules Specific subpopulations can be identified and targeted with prescriptive rules Such rules should be designed through an open, collaborative process

7. First Priority Implementation Practices 3. Development of Guidelines Guidelines should also be developed in conjunction with an open, collaborative process Consideration should be given to employing technical advisory committees 4. Collaborative Planning Process Agencies should be provided with an ongoing cooperative, collaborative planning capability However, the decision rule may need to be tailored to individual situations

8. First Priority Implementation Practices 5. Adequate Funding Consideration should be given to alternate funding sources An agency should cultivate and maintain close associations with decision makers 6. Enforcement Penalties Consideration must be given to where to situate an agency along the enforcement continuum Care should be taken not to introduce perverse incentives

9. First Priority Implementation Practices 7. Multijurisdictional Cooperation This practice should be linked to the collaborative planning process Other agencies may be enticed by communicating the benefits that accrue 8. Providing Project Financing This practice may allow an agency to leverage other peoples’ efforts and, in some cases, financial resources Granting programs should first clearly identify the agency’s critical objectives

10. Conclusions • Engaging stakeholders in an ongoing collaborative planning process • Designing new implementation regimes • Evaluating existing implementation efforts • Allocating scarce resources strategically

11. Questions