A fundamental purpose of state-mandated growth management has been to infuse regional environmental concerns into local land use planning. Similarly, collaborative ecosystem planning efforts have attempted to encourage local communities to participate in regional planning efforts, and to adopt regional environmental goals and objectives into local land use plans. This paper presents results from a study of state-mandated local planning and collaborative regional planning, addressing in particular local ability to adopt and implement ecosystem planning initiatives for development management.
I found that a state mandate not only achieves plans from communities that would not otherwise plan, but also the plans produced are of higher quality than plans made voluntarily without a mandate. However, while these plans generally acknowledge the need for regional resource protection, local plans are rarely go beyond stating support for State minimum resource protection rules. Conversely, I found that participation in a regional ecosystem planning effort had little effect on local land use policy. Within this context, key factors yielding more environmentally focused planning and implementation included local commitment to ecosystem planning, development pressure, and recent natural hazard impacts. Key factors steering communities away from ecosystem management included poor economic conditions, a desire to maintain local autonomy, and consultant-driven planning processes. Challenges for all communities include the ability to adopt policies that address biodiversity and regionally significant landscapes.
","abstract_html":"<p>A fundamental purpose of state-mandated growth management has been to infuse regional environmental concerns into local land use planning. Similarly, collaborative ecosystem planning efforts have attempted to encourage local communities to participate in regional planning efforts, and to adopt regional environmental goals and objectives into local land use plans. This paper presents results from a study of state-mandated local planning and collaborative regional planning, addressing in particular local ability to adopt and implement ecosystem planning initiatives for development management.</p> <p>I found that a state mandate not only achieves plans from communities that would not otherwise plan, but also the plans produced are of higher quality than plans made voluntarily without a mandate. However, while these plans generally acknowledge the need for regional resource protection, local plans are rarely go beyond stating support for State minimum resource protection rules. Conversely, I found that participation in a regional ecosystem planning effort had little effect on local land use policy. Within this context, key factors yielding more environmentally focused planning and implementation included local commitment to ecosystem planning, development pressure, and recent natural hazard impacts. Key factors steering communities away from ecosystem management included poor economic conditions, a desire to maintain local autonomy, and consultant-driven planning processes. Challenges for all communities include the ability to adopt policies that address biodiversity and regionally significant landscapes.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Birch, Traci L."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Planning and Urban Studies","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Marla K. Nelson, Ph.D.","Renia Ehrenfeucht, Ph.D.","Shirley Laska, Ph.D."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-12-17T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2011-12-17T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:29:24Z","subjects":["North Carolina","ecosystem management","collaborative planning","growth management","plan quality","Environmental Policy","Urban Studies","Urban Studies and Planning"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1356","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Marla K. Nelson, Ph.D.","Renia Ehrenfeucht, Ph.D.","Shirley Laska, Ph.D."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Birch, Traci L."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Planning and Urban Studies"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["North Carolina","ecosystem management","collaborative planning","growth management","plan quality","Environmental Policy","Urban Studies","Urban Studies and Planning"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1356"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["A fundamental purpose of state-mandated growth management has been to infuse regional environmental concerns into local land use planning. Similarly, collaborative ecosystem planning efforts have attempted to encourage local communities to participate in regional planning efforts, and to adopt regional environmental goals and objectives into local land use plans. This paper presents results from a study of state-mandated local planning and collaborative regional planning, addressing in particular local ability to adopt and implement ecosystem planning initiatives for development management.
I found that a state mandate not only achieves plans from communities that would not otherwise plan, but also the plans produced are of higher quality than plans made voluntarily without a mandate. However, while these plans generally acknowledge the need for regional resource protection, local plans are rarely go beyond stating support for State minimum resource protection rules. Conversely, I found that participation in a regional ecosystem planning effort had little effect on local land use policy. Within this context, key factors yielding more environmentally focused planning and implementation included local commitment to ecosystem planning, development pressure, and recent natural hazard impacts. Key factors steering communities away from ecosystem management included poor economic conditions, a desire to maintain local autonomy, and consultant-driven planning processes. Challenges for all communities include the ability to adopt policies that address biodiversity and regionally significant landscapes.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Ecosystem Management and its Application at the Local Level: APNEP, CAMA and Local Land Use Planning in North Carolina"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Marla K. Nelson, Ph.D.","Renia Ehrenfeucht, Ph.D.","Shirley Laska, Ph.D."],"dc:creator":["Birch, Traci L."],"dc:description.abstract":["A fundamental purpose of state-mandated growth management has been to infuse regional environmental concerns into local land use planning. Similarly, collaborative ecosystem planning efforts have attempted to encourage local communities to participate in regional planning efforts, and to adopt regional environmental goals and objectives into local land use plans. This paper presents results from a study of state-mandated local planning and collaborative regional planning, addressing in particular local ability to adopt and implement ecosystem planning initiatives for development management.
I found that a state mandate not only achieves plans from communities that would not otherwise plan, but also the plans produced are of higher quality than plans made voluntarily without a mandate. However, while these plans generally acknowledge the need for regional resource protection, local plans are rarely go beyond stating support for State minimum resource protection rules. Conversely, I found that participation in a regional ecosystem planning effort had little effect on local land use policy. Within this context, key factors yielding more environmentally focused planning and implementation included local commitment to ecosystem planning, development pressure, and recent natural hazard impacts. Key factors steering communities away from ecosystem management included poor economic conditions, a desire to maintain local autonomy, and consultant-driven planning processes. Challenges for all communities include the ability to adopt policies that address biodiversity and regionally significant landscapes.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1356"],"dc:subject":["North Carolina","ecosystem management","collaborative planning","growth management","plan quality","Environmental Policy","Urban Studies","Urban Studies and Planning"],"dc:title":["Ecosystem Management and its Application at the Local Level: APNEP, CAMA and Local Land Use Planning in North Carolina"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Planning and Urban Studies"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:29:24Z"}