title: Environmental Values and Popular Conflict over Environmental Management: A Comparative Analysis of Public Comments on the Clinton Forest Plan
abstract: / Public participation in environmental management decisions has frequently led to conflict. This paper examines the role of environmental values in fueling these conflicts, based on a data base and sample content analysis of written public comments solicited in 1994 regarding the highly contentious Clinton Forest Plan (also known as Option 9) proposed for management of federal forests in the US Pacific Northwest. The analysis considered whether those respondents favoring more versus less environmental protection than was offered in Option 9 held entirely different values, identifying which antagonistic values appeared to be most fundamental and where (if at all) values consensus occurred. It also compared values emanating from respondents within and outside the affected region, although few major differences were detected in this regard. Results suggest that strong values differences did exist among those preferring greater versus less environmental protection, in particular as concerned the extent, form, and spatial and temporal scope of justification of their positions, their ideas of forests, and the appropriate role of people in forest management. Disagreement concerned far more than purely environmental values: a major point of difference involved human benefits and harms of the proposed forest plan. Indeed, both sides' positions were overridingly anthropocentric and consequentialist-a values orientation that almost inevitably spells conflict in light of the commonly differentiated social impacts of environmental management decisions. Although public involvement in environmental management thus cannot be expected to lead to a clear and consensual social directive, the Pacific Northwest case suggests that viable environmental management solutions that take this range of values into account can still be crafted.KEY WORDS: Environmental values; Public participation; Clinton Forest Plan; Pacific Northwest
authors.affiliation: Department of Geography University of California Santa Barbara, California 93106-4060, USA
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Proctor