Collective Action and Invasive Species Governance in Southern Arizona
Introduction
Invasion of non-native plants is an emergent environmental problem whose complex characteristics make it difficult for policy makers and land managers to develop durable and effective management solutions (Beever et al. 2019). Invasive plants can have significant negative effects on human and ecological communities, including reduced productivity and increased fire risk (Lyons et al., 2013). However, there is often uncertainty regarding the timing and extent of these impacts, potentially slowing or preventing the emergence of public support in favor of preventive action and of new management regimes to address the impacts of invasive plants (Brenner & Franklin 2017). Under these circumstances, traditional policy instruments and approaches—such as command and control, market-based, or community-based natural resource governance—may fail to achieve lasting, substantively effective results (Bagavathiannan et al. 2019). While there has been significant research to develop targeted mitigation techniques to slow or halt the spread of specific invasive plants, there has been relatively little complementary work to develop knowledge about the implementation of these management techniques through effective governance systems (Graham et al. 2019). In this paper, we use an in-depth case study approach to understand the collective action challenges presented by invasive species management. We interview land managers involved in the mitigation of buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare, syn: Cenchrus ciliarus) invasion in southern Arizona to investigate how existing and emerging governance arrangements encourage or undermine individual and collective action to manage invasive plants.
Collective action dilemmas occur in situations where individual interests run counter to the common interests of a group of individuals (Olson 1965; Poteete et al. 2010; Baldwin et al. 2018). Where such situations arise, there are potential gains a group can realize if collective action is taken, but individual actors may face insufficient incentives to undertake these actions (Ostrom 1990). Under such circumstances, few private actors will have incentives to provide a good, regardless of the potential gains that could be realized from doing so (Ostrom 2003). Invasive species management is an example of a collective action problem (Graham et al. 2019). Impacts tend to span jurisdictions, sectors, and levels of governance. Effective mitigation of invasive species often requires action by heterogeneous actors who have divergent interests in prevention and mitigation, as well as different resources and capabilities to bring to bear on the problem (Albers et al. 2010; Decker et al. 2012). For example, some invasive grasses provide a valuable forage resource while simultaneously changing fire regimes and reducing biodiversity (Marshall et al. 2011). The actors who are most affected by these changes—recreation users, for example—may not have the resources needed to mitigate the impacts. Meanwhile, actors who are well-positioned to prevent or mitigate harms (e.g., livestock grazers) may see few negative impacts and therefore have little reason to join with others in mitigation efforts. Moreover, emergent problems that are new to a given jurisdiction may require cooperation between and among actors who have limited experience with each other, or there may be institutional and organizational barriers to effective cooperation.
Collective action dilemmas are challenging but not insurmountable. Indeed, a large and growing body of empirical evidence has examined one type of collective action problem—management of common pool resource (CPR) systems—and found that local communities can often manage such problems, provided that appropriate governance arrangements exist to bring resource users together to agree upon appropriate rules for sustainable resource use (Ostrom 1990; Cox et al. 2010; Cox et al. 2016). Recent scholarship on collective action suggests that fundamentally, the resolution of collective action dilemmas requires that relevant actors come together to devise and implement solutions that align individual incentives with those of the group (Baldwin et al. 2018). Presuming that there are gains that the group can realize from effective invasive species management, it should theoretically be possible to devise some sort of governance arrangement—a policy instrument, an informal set of rules, a funding mechanism, a coordinating body—that changes individuals’ incentives enough to prompt the actions needed to address invasions. The particular governance arrangements needed, however, will depend on the context at hand, including the nature of the collective action dilemma itself, the characteristics of the actors involved, and the information available about the problem. Scholars have begun to theorize about whether and how Ostrom's work on collective action might be applied to the problem of invasive species management (Bagavathiannan et al. 2019; Graham et al. 2019), but to date there has been limited empirical investigation of invasive species as a collective action problem.
To understand the dynamics of collective action dilemmas in the context of invasive plant management, we focus our attention on a particular case—buffelgrass in the Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona. Invasive buffelgrass poses an imminent and significant threat to the region: if left unaddressed, it can outcompete native species, eventually causing an ecological state change that will fundamentally alter the character and function of the region's ecosystems, increase fire risk, undermine the tourism and outdoor recreation sectors of the southern Arizona economy, and reduce quality of life for residents in the region (Evans et al. 2001; Friedel et al. 2007; Lyons et al., 2013; Jarnevich et al. 2015; Castellanos et al. 2016). While ecologists and conservation biologists have long warned of the consequences of buffelgrass invasion, and conservationists have developed forums for information sharing and coordination, the diverse public and private land managers on the front lines of buffelgrass management have yet to undertake sufficient individual and collective action to keep the buffelgrass population in check. Specifically, this research shows how existing and emerging institutions for invasive species management promote or undermine collective action between government agencies in the study region. We draw on interview and archival data to explain why past efforts at collective action have failed and to suggest governance mechanisms that might prompt effective individual and collective action by land managers in the region.
Section snippets
Research design, methods, and data
We use the Tucson basin of Pima County, Arizona as a case study (Yin 2018). This region includes a wide range of public and private landowners who have struggled to consistently undertake individual and joint actions that would contribute to the mitigation of buffelgrass impacts. Efforts to promote collective action on buffelgrass occurred as early as 2008, using a range of institutional approaches, and new efforts are continually emerging.1
Results
We present our results in three sections. First, we use findings from interviews to examine how individual organizations are affected by buffelgrass, their internal resources and capabilities to address the problem, each actor's contribution to buffelgrass mitigation, and how institutional factors within each organization shape these factors. Together, these sections provide data on the attributes, resources, and institutional arrangements influencing the actions of individual actors, which in
Collective Action on Buffelgrass in Southern Arizona
The results of our interviews with SNP, the USFS, and Pima County provide data on both contemporary actions by these organizations to mitigate buffelgrass and their impressions of regional collective action to manage buffelgrass over time. Here, we synthesize the interview results to identify areas of effective and ineffective coordination and offer explanation for why collective action formed around certain activities but not others. In summary, we find evidence that successful collective
Management Implications
Effective management of buffelgrass and invasive species generally requires collective action across heterogeneous organizations (Albers et al. 2010; Jarnevich et al. 2015). In the case of buffelgrass invasion in southern Arizona, many actors are interested in mitigating the impacts of buffelgrass on native Sonoran Desert scrub plant communities. Some of these actors have been able to produce information about buffelgrass mitigation techniques, and actors have engaged in extensive collective
Declaration of Competing Interest
None.
Acknowledgments
Trang Weitemier provided assistance with interviews, and Mauricio Nunez-Regueiro and Max Yue Li aided in conceptualization of the research.
References (46)
- et al.
Invasive species management in a spatially heterogeneous world: effects of uniform policies
Resource and Energy Economics, The Economics of Invasive Species Control and Management
(2010) - et al.
Design principles in commons science: a response to “Ostrom, Hardin and the commons” (Araral)
Environmental Science & Policy
(2016) A new perspective on the trust power nexus from rural Australia
Journal of Rural Studies
(2014)- et al.
Key attributes influence the performance of local weed management programs in the southwest United States
Rangeland Ecology & Management
(2007) - et al.
Considering the social dimension of invasive species: the case of buffelgrass
Environmental Science & Policy
(2011) - et al.
Fire behavior characteristics of buffelgrass-fueled fires and native plant community composition in invaded patches
Journal of Arid Environments
(2011) - et al.
Constancy of local spread rates for buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare L.) in the Arizona Upland of the Sonoran Desert
Journal of Arid Environments
(2012) Grass roots collective action: agricultural opportunities
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
(1997)- Arizona State Land Department. 2019. Arizona State Land Department History. Available at:...
- et al.
Considering weed management as a social dilemma bridges individual and collective interests
Nature Plants
(2019)
Collective action in a polycentric water governance system
Environmental Policy and Governance
Social–ecological mismatches create conservation challenges in introduced species management
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
Living on the edge: emerging environmental hazards on the peri-urban fringe
Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development
Ecohydrological changes in semiarid ecosystems transformed from shrubland to buffelgrass savanna
Ecohydrology
A review of design principles for community-based natural resource management
Ecology and Society
Land use, landscapes, and biological invasions
Invasive Plant Science and Management
Community-based approaches to herbicide-resistant weed management: lessons from science and practice
Weed Science
Exotic plant invasion alters nitrogen dynamics in an arid grassland
Ecological Applications
Developing a research agenda for the distribution and rate of spread of buffel grass (Cenehrus ciliaris) and identification of landscapes and biodiversity assets at most risk from invasion
Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management
Conservation Biology
The SAGE handbook of interview research: the complexity of the craft
Simulating long-term effectiveness and efficiency of management scenarios for an invasive grass
AIMS Environmental Science
Designing local institutions for cooperative pest management to underpin market access: the case of industry-driven fruit fly area-wide management
International Journal of the Commons
Cited by (8)
Governance of emerging pests and pathogens in production landscapes: pesticide resistance and collaborative governance
2022, Current Opinion in Environmental SustainabilityMeasuring the success of cross-tenure collaborative weed management: insights codeveloped with practitioners
2022, Invasive Plant Science and ManagementUnravelling how collaboration impacts success of invasive species management
2023, People and NatureA network perspective of human–nature interactions in dynamic and fast-changing landscapes
2023, National Science ReviewWhy Partner with a Zoo or Garden? Selected Lessons from Seventy Years of Regional Conservation Partnerships at the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
2022, Journal of Zoological and Botanical GardensGrassification and Fast-Evolving Fire Connectivity and Risk in the Sonoran Desert, United States
2021, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Support for this study was provided by the Office of Research, Discovery, and Innovation and the Bridging Biodiversity and Conservation Science initiative at the University of Arizona and by NSF grant 1924016.