Many public and private stakeholders have discovered the value of collaboration to address resource management at the landscape level or to resolve resource management conflicts between multiple landowners (Wigley and Sweeney 1992). Because there are more landscape-scale collaborative management efforts today, there is a critical need to summarize information about such efforts to grasp a better understanding of the process. Therefore, the overall goal of this project was to summarize and evaluate information about selected landscape-scale collaborative management efforts and to provide the appropriate context in which this information can be placed for use by the forest products industry.

A survey addressing participants' perceptions of the collaborative process on a landscape scale was mailed during fall 1998 to 1,263 people participating in 12 projects in 10 states. The response rate for this survey was 28%, with the adjusted response rate being 33%. A Lickert-type scale (1-5, with 5 being most agreeable/important) was used in the questionnaire to determine the amount of agreement with/importance of various elements of the collaborative process. Analysis of Variance and Bonferroni Multiple Comparison Procedure (with confidence levels set at a=0.05) were used to compare among/between partners within each project and between projects to detect differences in perceptions about meeting objectives and the importance of collaborative management. Spearman Rank Correlation (with confidence levels set at a=0.05) was used to determine if there were any significant correlations between the orders of importance in which groups viewed the questions. The sample of respondents was divided into three groups: those people who participated in projects that had no industrial private landowner (IPL) involvement, those people who participated in projects that had a moderate amount of IPL involvement, and those people who participated in projects with a high amount of IPL involvement.

Time was the greatest contribution (56-78%) to collaborative projects, and public recognition was most often cited incentive (32-77%) for joining such efforts. When asked why they or their organizations got involved, the top-ranked answer was that it was the responsible action to take. Respondents indicated that being kept abreast of the progress of the project (4.4) was the most important part of the collaborative process, and they were most satisfied (3.9) that this was being accomplished. The greatest change of perceptions of partners that occurred was a more favorable attitude (>3.6) towards industrial private landowners in those projects that had high industrial private landowner involvement. Participants agreed more strongly (>3.7) with those collaborative management concepts that involved achieving ecological goals. Participants were interested in joining collaborative management efforts (3.9), but they would be interested in observing partnerships (3.6) before deciding to participate in such efforts. Free technical assistance to landowners (4.4) was the highest ranked method to protect ecosystems and product resources. Lack of funding for landowner incentives (3.6) was perceived by project participants as the top-ranked barrier to landscape-scale collaboration. Although there are costs associated with participating in collaborative landscape-scale management efforts, the forest products industry apparently does reap benefits.