Search

This paper presents the first nationwide analysis detailing the scope and scale of labor-intensive forestry contracts performed on National Forest System lands and examines the businesses contracted, location and types of work performed, and distance traveled by businesses between 2001 and 2020. During the study period, 61,698 contracts were awarded to 7,896 businesses, totaling $12.9 billion, to perform labor-intensive forestry work, with most work being contracted for wildfire-related activities. Businesses were typically located in western states and non-minority owned businesses received the majority of contracts. Of minority-owned businesses, Hispanic American–owned businesses received the most contracts. The median distance that businesses traveled to accomplish work increased significantly through time but differed by business type. Understanding the scope and work of businesses awarded contracts provides insight into the workforce and its relationship to marginalized populations. Strategic investment in this workforce may have widespread impacts on federal, state, and local economies and the livelihoods of forest workers. Study Implications: Between 2001–2020, the USDA Forest Service spent billions of dollars on contracts with thousands of businesses to conduct labor-intensive forestry projects; however, project locations and awarded businesses were not evenly distributed through space and time. Emerging and minority businesses represented a small proportion of contracts awarded. Advancing understanding of the businesses conducting labor-intensive forestry work lays the foundation for inquiry into the working conditions forest workers experience as well as disparities in contract capture. Some regions may have benefitted more from contract capture than others. Understanding factors enabling places and businesses to capture these contract dollars may help identify others that may benefit from investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Latino/a/x workers perform labor-intensive forestry and fire stewardship work in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, but are not well recognized in research and practice about wildfire governance. This industry has pervasive issues of unsafe working conditions, inequitable wage practices, violations of worker rights, limited opportunity for advancement, and a lack of recognition and inclusion of workers in decision making. We draw on a literature review and practice-based knowledge to make this workforce's history more visible, from its origins in lumber production and reforestation to expansion into forest and fire stewardship. We suggest a new conceptual framing of "multiple marginalities" that situates this workforce as simultaneously crucial to our future with wildfire and subject to structural, distributional, recognitional, and procedural inequities. We recommend new approaches to research and practice that can better examine and address these inequities, while also acknowledging the persistent and systemic nature of these challenges. These include participatory action research, lessons learned from research and advocacy related to farmworkers and incarcerated workers, and Cooperative Extension and education programs that are learner-centered and culturally appropriate. Multiple interventions of offering education and outreach, enforcing or reforming law, and changing policy and practice must all occur at multiple scales given the many drivers of these marginalities. Study and practice can contribute new knowledge to inform this and expand current conceptions of equity and environmental justice in the wildfire governance literature to become more inclusive of the forest and fire stewardship workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined how wildfire risk is framed by different entities and actors within a common region, during and after experiencing several large wildfire events. Using a social constructionist lens, we viewed wildfire risk as a fluid and variable concept that is socially constructed and framed through public discourse. Inconsistent social constructions of wildfire risk may pose challenges for effective wildfire risk governance and management, which requires the coordination of diverse entities including government, land managers, homeowners, and community groups. We sought to understand differing social constructions of wildfire risk within one region, the Northern Colorado Front Range, across four domains of social discourse: mainstream media coverage, governmental planning documents, a community collaborative group's meeting notes, and Community Wildfire Protection Plans. Through multiple rounds of qualitative coding, we compared how values at risk, causes of risk, and solutions to mitigate risk are framed across discourse domains. We also identified which agencies, organizations, or other actors' voices were most prominent within each domain. Our results show inconsistent framings of wildfire risk definition across the data, building upon past literature that has identified divides between fire suppression and mitigation work, as well as disconnects between media representations of fire and perspectives of resource managers and scientists. Lastly, we highlight two examples of cross-cutting discourses - public drinking water and smoke – as concepts that span boundaries and may have the power to generate broader coordination and support for wildfire policy solutions and action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The USDA Forest Service (USFS) is increasingly turning to partnership tools such as stewardship agreements (SAs) to accomplish land management objectives. In these arrangements, nonagency partners (partners) often bring resources, capabilities, and preferences that can influence management processes and activities. We explored the nature of partner influence in SAs through interviews with USFS and partner staff in four SA case studies in Arizona, California, and New Mexico. Interviewees perceived that partners influenced project prioritization; implementation pace, scope, and approach; and SA participants' ways of working. Influence was linked to partners' involvement in SA project selection; contribution of resources, expertise, and capabilities; and assumption of some project implementation responsibilities. USFS-partner relationships also appeared to encourage partnership-oriented approaches beyond the original project. Our research suggests SA partners are uniquely influential in the implementation of USFS management activities and recommends additional exploration of SAs in the context of collaborative implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rangeland Fire Protection Associations (RFPAs) are volunteer‐based groups of trained private landowners who are authorised to respond to events in partnership with governmental agencies. This study analysed the functioning and structure of RFPAs in Idaho and Oregon in the western United States to characterise this under‐researched model of disaster response. RFPAs represent an expanding type of disaster response organisation that interfaces with established fire suppression entities, yet 'emergent behaviour' manifested in some RFPA response actions. This appeared to lessen and mediate with time, as well as due to recognition of the issues, increased experience of fires, and training that fostered new mutual understandings. There is a need for continued examination of the effect of repeat experience in developing the characteristics of disaster response organisations. In addition, it is crucial to know how the interface between established and other types of organisations may be enhanced to make cooperative disaster response more effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through contracting and timber sales, the private sector is engaged in management of national forest lands and local community economies in the United States. But there is little recent research about current relationships between these lands and timber purchasers that could better inform future timber and biomass sale and business assistance policies and programs. We conducted a survey of timberpurchasing businesses active in six USDA Forest Service regions where ecosystem restoration and wildfire risk reduction policies have been prevalent to examine their characteristics, reliance on federal lands, challenges, and needs for assistance. We found that a majority of respondents in all Forest Service regions purchase small diameter timber (8 inches dbh or less) and had sought business assistance, most commonly from accountants and lending institutions. Those with the greatest dependence on federal timber--76 percent or more of their supply from federal sources--were less likely to have sought assistance of any kind. We also found several differences between businesses located in different Forest Service regions that could indicate a need for region-specific pilots, programs, or resources that focus on the particular characteristics of businesses in those areas; or flexibility in implementation of national-level programs to allow regional adaptation. Results suggest that more attention to the timing, quantity, and types of supply that federal lands offer and how this may affect business success is needed, particularly to understand how design of timber sales, service contracts, and stewardship contracts and sales may better serve businesses and allow them to produce community economic outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Payments for ecosystem or ecological services (PES) are voluntary, often market-based approaches to protecting environmental values. In the rural United States, some landowners receive PES through government led conservation programs, but little is known about their involvement in market based arrangements. We analyzed three examples of market based PES arrangements in northwestern Montana: watershed restoration and craft brewing, niche meat production, and certified timber supplies. We find that intermediaries were working between buyers and sellers in each case to set conditions for transactions and undertake the mechanics of implementation. These findings align with existing conceptualizations of intermediaries as crucial links in PES arrangements, but also suggest that intermediaries for market based PES arrangements are not always facilitators or neutral nongovernmental actors; they may actually be from the private sector and drive the process by serving as buyers. This research contributes to stronger understanding of the possibilities for local market based conservation in the rural West. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]