Studies of alternative dispute resolution demonstrate how interest-based tradeoffs contribute to joint gains, yet facilitators do more than just broker deals between adversaries. This paper explores how facilitation supported the development of a regional wastewater plan on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Coded video records unearth the judgments stakeholders and facilitators made as they accounted for spatial scale mismatches between towns and watersheds. The findings demonstrate how facilitators supported the conceptual work of nonexpert stakeholders highlighting several tactics they used to support cross-scale reasoning. The findings allude to a new set of conversational techniques for planners and facilitators in practice.
AllenT. F. H.StarrThomas B.1982. Hierarchy: Perspectives for Ecological Complexity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
BrysonJohn M.QuickKathryn S.SlotterbackCarissa SchivelyCrosbyBarbara C.2013. “Designing Public Participation Processes.” Public Administration Review73(1):23–34.
3.
Cape Cod Commission. 2013. Area-Wide 208 Water Quality Management Plan Update: Program Work Plan. Barnstable, MA: Barnstable County Government.
4.
CashDavid W.AdgerW. NeilBerkesFikretGardenPoLebelLouisOlssonPerPritchardLowellYoungOran. 2006. “Scale and Cross-Scale Dynamics: Governance and Information in a Multilevel World.” Ecology and Society11(2):8.
5.
CohenAliceMcCarthyJames. 2015. “Reviewing Rescaling: Strengthening the Case for Environmental Considerations.” Progress in Human Geography39(1):3–25.
6.
CouclelisHelen. 1991. “Requirements for Planning-Relevant GIS: A Spatial Perspective.” Papers in Regional Science70(1):9–19.
7.
CumblerJohn T.2014. Cape Cod: An Environmental History of a Fragile Ecosystem. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
8.
CummingGraeme S.2011. Spatial Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. New York: Springer.
9.
CummingGraeme S.CummingDavid H. M.RedmanCharles L.2006. “Scale Mismatches in Social-Ecological Systems: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions.” Ecology and Society11(1):14.
10.
van EsElizabeth A.2009. “Participants’ Roles in the Context of a Video Club.” Journal of the Learning Sciences18(1):100–37.
11.
FisherRogerUryWilliam. 1981. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
12.
ForesterJohn. 1999. The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
ForesterJohn. 2009. Dealing with Differences: Dramas of Mediating Public Disputes. New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
ForesterJohn. 2013. “On the Theory and Practice of Critical Pragmatism: Deliberative Practice and Creative Negotiations.” Planning Theory12(1):5–22.
15.
GibsonClark C.OstromElinorAhnT. K.2000. “The Concept of Scale and the Human Dimensions of Global Change: A Survey.” Ecological Economics32(2):217–39.
16.
GolledgeReginaldMarshMeredithBattersbySarah. 2008. “A Conceptual Framework for Facilitating Geospatial Thinking.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers98(2):285–308.
17.
GrayBarbara. 2004. “Strong Opposition: Frame-Based Resistance to Collaboration.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology14(3):166–76.
18.
HardinGarrett. 1968. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science162(3859):1243–48.
19.
HochCharles J.ZellnerMoiraMilzDanRadinskyJosh R.LyonsLeilah. 2015. “Seeing Is Not Believing: Cognitive Bias and Modelling in Collaborative Planning.” Planning Theory & Practice16(3):319–35.
20.
HutchinsEdwin. 1995. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21.
InnesJudith EleanorBooherDavid E.2010. Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York: Routledge.
22.
JohnsonTeresa R.WilsonJames A.CleaverCaitlinVadasRobert L.2012. “Social-Ecological Scale Mismatches and the Collapse of the Sea Urchin Fishery in Maine, USA.” Ecology and Society17(2):15.
23.
KanerSam. 2014. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
24.
KimmellKen. 2013. “208 Water Quality Management Plan Update Directive” [Letter to Paul Niedzwiecki]. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality.
25.
LakoffGeorge. 2008. The Political Mind: Why You Can’t Understand 21st-Century Politics with an 18th-Century Brain. New York: Viking.
26.
LakoffGeorge. 2010. “Why It Matters How We Frame the Environment.” Environmental Communication4(1):70–81.
27.
LeeKai N.1993. “Greed, Scale Mismatch, and Learning.” Ecological Applications3(4):560–64.
28.
LeonardKellyYortonTom. 2015. Yes, and: How Improvisation Reverses “No, but” Thinking and Improves Creativity and Collaboration—Lessons from The Second City. New York: Harper Collins.
29.
LevinSimon A.1992. “The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology.” Ecology73(6):1943–67.
30.
van LieshoutMaartjeDewulfArtAartsNoelleTermeerCatrien. 2011. “Do Scale Frames Matter? Scale Frame Mismatches in the Decision Making Process of a ‘Mega Farm’ in a Small Dutch Village.” Ecology and Society16(1):38.
31.
van LieshoutMaartjeDewulfArtAartsNoelleTermeerCatrien. 2012. “Doing Scalar Politics: Interactive Scale Framing for Managing Accountability in Complex Policy Processes.” Critical Policy Studies6(2):163–81.
32.
LynchKevin. 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press.
33.
MargerumRichard D.2011. Beyond Consensus: Improving Collaborative Planning and Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34.
MilzDan. 2015. “Mismatched Scales, Mismatched Intentions: Regional Wastewater Planning on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA.” Ph.D., Chicago: University of Illinois at Chicago.
35.
MilzDanZellnerMoiraHochCharles J.RadinskyJoshua R.PudlockKelseyLyonsLeilah. 2018. “Reconsidering Scale: Using Geographic Information Systems to Support Spatial Planning Conversations.” Planning Practice & Research33(3):291–308.
36.
OstromElinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
OstromElinor. 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
PelosiCélineGoulardMichelBalentGérard. 2010. “The Spatial Scale Mismatch between Ecological Processes and Agricultural Management: Do Difficulties Come from Underlying Theoretical Frameworks?” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment139(4):455–62.
39.
PoteeteAmyJanssenMarcoOstromElinor. 2010. Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40.
QuickKathryn S.SandfortJodi. 2014. “Learning to Facilitate Deliberation: Practicing the Art of Hosting.” Critical Policy Studies8(3):300–22.
41.
RadinskyJoshua R.MilzDanZellnerMoiraPudlockKelseyWitekCurtisHochCharles J.LyonsLeilah. 2017. “How Planners and Stakeholders Learn with Visualization Tools: Using Learning Sciences Methods to Examine Planning Processes.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management60(7):1296–323.
42.
SacksHarveySchegloffEmanuel A.JeffersonGail. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language50(4):696–735.
43.
SagerTore Øivin. 2013. Reviving Critical Planning Theory: Dealing with Pressure, Neo-Liberalism, and Responsibility in Communicative Planning. 1 edition. New York: Routledge.
44.
ShmueliDeborah F.KaufmanSandaOzawaConnie. 2008. “Mining Negotiation Theory for Planning Insights.” Journal of Planning Education and Research27(3):359–64.
45.
SlatteryBrianDasguptaChandanShelleyTiaLyonsLeilahMinorEmilyZellnerMoira. 2012. “Understanding How Learners Grapple with Wicked Problems in Environmental Science.” In Proceedings of Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS’12). Rhode, Greece: ICLS.
46.
SuchmanLucy. 1987. Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
SusskindLawrenceCruikshankJeffrey L.1987. Breaking the Impasse: Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public Disputes. New York: Basic Books.
48.
SusskindLawrenceHuletCarri. 2007. “The Practice of Public Dispute Resolution: Measuring the Dollar Value of the Field.” Negotiation Journal23(3):355–64.
49.
SusskindLawrenceThomas-LamarJennifer. 1999. “Conducting a Conflict Assessment.” In The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement, in edited by SusskindLawrenceMcKearnanSarahThomas-LarmerJennifer, 99–136. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50.
SusskindLawrencevan der WansemMiekeCiccareliArmand. 2003. “Mediating Land Use Disputes in the United States: Pros and Cons.” Environments31(2):39–58.
51.
ValielaIvan. 2013. “Increased Nitrogen Loads: A Global-Scale Problem with Local Impacts on Estuaries.” Science Chronicles.
52.
VervoortJoost M.RuttingLucasKokKasperHermansFrans L. P.VeldkampTomBregtArnold K.van LammerenRon. 2012. “Exploring Dimensions, Scales, and Cross-Scale Dynamics from the Perspectives of Change Agents in Social-Ecological Systems.” Ecology and Society17(4):24.
53.
WakabayashiYoshikiIshikawaToru. 2011. “Spatial Thinking in Geographic Information Science: A Review of Past Studies and Prospects for the Future.” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences21:304–13.
54.
WalkerBrianGundersonLanceKinzigAnnFolkeCarlCarpenterSteveSchultzLisen. 2006. “A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems.” Ecology and Society11(1):13.
55.
WardropperChloe B.ChangChaoyiRissmanAdena R.2015. “Fragmented Water Quality Governance: Constraints to Spatial Targeting for Nutrient Reduction in a Midwestern USA Watershed.” Landscape and Urban Planning137:64–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.011.
56.
WiensJ. A.1989. “Spatial Scaling in Ecology.” Functional Ecology3(4):385–97.
57.
ZellnerMoiraCampbellScott D.2015. “Planning for Deep-Rooted Problems: What Can We Learn from Aligning Complex Systems and Wicked Problems?” Planning Theory & Practice16(4):457–78.
