Article ID: | iaor1996722 |
Country: | United States |
Volume: | 7 |
Issue: | 3 |
Start Page Number: | 417 |
End Page Number: | 439 |
Publication Date: | Jul 1995 |
Journal: | Public Budgeting and Financial Management |
Authors: | Nelson Lisa |
Keywords: | management, planning, politics, government, statistics: empirical, ecology |
This article examines the mandate reputation of the Endagered Species Act in its implementation context. United States Federal wildlife funding programs and laws are treated as messages to state wildlife agencies, and variety among state environmental conditions and agency management decisions shape the interpretation of federal messages. Innovations in planning for habitat protection in state, coastal zone, and county land use are treated as adaptations to the difficulties of conventional implementation. The Endangered Species Act’s significance as a federal mandate is found to be questionable. The federal role as a regulator of endangered species protection is argued to be legitimate, but flexibility and collaboration with state and local interests in wildlife planning are also called for.