Who Litigates and Who Collaborates? Evidence from State and Local Environmental Groups Influencing National Forest Policy in the American West

This dissertation combines interest group theory and current knowledge about collaboration to understand what organizational characteristics are related to groups' use of litigation or collaboration to influence National Forest management. The research addresses the question: what are the attitudes and behaviors of state and local environmental organizations toward collaboration for National Forest management, and what factors are influencing their response? This study contributes to current knowledge about subnational environmental groups, creates a foundational understanding of collaboration as a political tactic, and tests theories about the drivers of interest group behavior. The results have practical implications in terms of environmental groups' influence under a model of collaborative governance, representation and inclusion in collaborative decision-making, and the potential for the US Forest Service to improve National Forest management through collaborative processes.;A mixed methods design was employed to test hypotheses about the dominantly theorized drivers of interest group behavior -- resources, interest, political opportunities, and experience -- to understand how they relate to organizations' choice of strategy. A survey was conducted of state and local forest-related environmental groups operating in the West to test relationships between organizational characteristics and strategy choice. Four organizations were chosen for case study research based on their use of different strategies, to examine in greater depth the correlations between organizational characteristics and the choice of litigation or collaboration.;The results indicate that resource-based theories of interest group behavior help explain environmental organizations' use of collaboration to influence National Forest management. Organizations with larger budgets, a higher level of professionalization, or that receive government funding were associated with a collaborating strategy. These findings suggest that resources are important for shaping environmental groups' ability to participate in collaboration. Interest-based theories help explain environmental organizations' use of both collaboration and litigation. Organizations with multiple values and a pragmatist orientation were associated with a collaborating strategy, while organizations with a single, environmental value and a purist orientation were associated with a confronting strategy. These findings suggest that interest is important for shaping environmental groups' willingness to participate in collaboration.;This dissertation provides empirical evidence that smaller, less professionalized environmental groups, and more ideological environmental groups are not represented in collaboration. Given that collaboration is increasingly being considered to address environmental conflicts, this has three important implications. First, exclusion of smaller and more ideological environmental groups from collaboration could affect their survival and influence on policymaking, and could change the composition and influence of the environmental movement. Second, the fact that certain environmental interests are marginalized in collaboration raises questions about its legitimacy and what can be expected in terms of collaborative outcomes. Finally, considering unequal environmental representation, the US Forest Service must carefully consider the challenges and potential for collaboration to improve natural resource decision-making before using it.;The findings suggest that building organizational capacity, networking between collaborators and litigators, and encouraging alternative forms of participation in collaboration could help limit organizations' marginalization under collaborative governance. Further, encouraging appropriate and legitimate collaboration, and upholding the legal foundation of environmental decision-making could improve collaborative decision-making, promote balanced public forest policy, and ensure that environmental organizations can participate in policymaking through whatever strategy they choose.