Conflict and Collaboration in Wildfire Management: The Role of Mission Alignment

• Author: Casey J. Fleming,Emily B. McCartha,Toddi A. Steelman
• Date: 01 May 2015
• Published date: 01 May 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12353

Casey J. Fleming is a doctoral student

in the Department of Public Administration

at North Carolina State University. His

research interests include areas of human

resource management and organizational

behavior, particularly bureaucratic rules and

rule bending. During 2012 and 2013, he

worked as research assistant on the Fire

Chasers project at North Carolina State

University.

E-mail: cf‌l emin2@ncsu.edu

Emily B. McCartha is a doctoral

student in the Department of Public

Administration at North Carolina State

University. Her research focuses on examin-

ing relational and structural components

of collaborative arrangements, particularly

those related to shared public land. During

2012 and 2013, she worked as research

assistant on the Fire Chasers project at

North Carolina State University.

E-mail: ebmccart@ncsu.edu

Toddi A. Steelman is executive director

and professor in the School of Environment

and Sustainability at the University of

Saskatchewan. Her research focuses on

improving the governance of environmental

and natural resources, emphasizing science,

policy, and decision-making interactions.

She places special emphasis on the role of

the public and community in decision mak-

ing. She is codirector, with Branda Nowell,

of the Fire Chasers project at North Carolina

State University (http://research.cnr.ncsu.

edu/blogs/f‌i rechasers/).

E-mail: toddi.steelman@usask.ca

Conf‌l ict and Collaboration in Wildf‌i re Management: The Role of Mission Alignment 445

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 75, Iss. 3, pp. 445–454. © 2015 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12353.

Casey J. Fleming

Emily B. McCartha

North Carolina State University

Toddi A. Steelman

University of Saskatchewan, Canada

Abstract: Responding to large wildf‌i res requires actors from multiple jurisdictions and multiple levels of government to

work collaboratively.  e missions and objectives of federal agencies often dif‌f er from those of state land management

agencies as well as local wildf‌i re response agencies regarding land use and wildf‌i re management. As wildf‌i re size and

intensity increase over time and associated annual suppression costs range between $2 billion and $3 billion, learning

more about the existence and management of perceived agency dif‌f erences becomes imperative within the academic

and practitioner communities.  is article examines the extent to which perceived mission misalignment exists among

federal, state, and local actors and how well those dif‌f erences are managed. Findings provide quantitative evidence

that mission misalignment is greater within intergovernmental relationships than within intragovernmental relation-

ships. Additionally, f‌i ndings speak to the larger conversation around intergovernmental relationships within the federal

structure and perceptions of the presence and management of potential interagency conf‌l ict.

Practitioner Points

• Potential conf‌l ict between the missions of federal and state land agencies presents a challenge for disaster

management, and dif‌f ering governmental levels and land-use mandates may highlight relationships where

tensions are likely greater.

• Wildf‌i re managers may need to more proactively address relationships among federal agencies and state and

local partners rather than relationships among multiple federal agencies.

• Wildf‌i re management may benef‌i t from increased awareness of—and discussion around—partner agencies’

stated land management philosophies and legal mandates, as structural frameworks, such as the Incident

Command Structure, may not alone lead to conf‌l ict-free collaboration.

intergovernmental blends of local, state, and federal

participants that respond to disasters (Choi and

Brower 2006; Comfort and Kapucu 2006; Kapucu

2005, 2006; Moynihan 2010). However, understand-

ing the conditions under which conf‌l ict can arise and

how it can be managed is essential to understanding

the opportunities and limitations of collaboration.

Greater insight into these dynamics presents oppor-

tunities for improved disaster management and has

important theoretical implications.

One area that is ripe for investigation is how the

mission alignment of dif‌f erent agencies and organiza-

tions responding to a disaster inf‌l uences the capacity

for collaboration and conf‌l ict.

Mission misalignment may

ref‌l ect the strategic decisions of

agencies to serve divergent yet

meaningful purposes.  erefore,

misalignment is not inher-

ently harmful or undesirable;

however, it may create tensions

Conf‌l ict and Collaboration in Wildf‌i re Management:

 e Role of Mission Alignment

Large-scale wildf‌i res do not respect jurisdictional

boundaries. Wildf‌i res, like most disasters,

require the collaboration of multiple agencies

and organizations in a networked response (Drabek

and McEntire 2002, 2003; Kapucu, Arslan, and

Collins 2010; Steelman et al. 2014; Waugh and Streib

2006). While working toward a commonly identi-

f‌i ed goal—successfully managing a disaster—this

interdependent collaboration can lead to conf‌l ict

(O’Leary and Bingham 2009).  e potential for con-

f‌l ict arises when dif‌f erent agencies and organizations

work together under conditions that create tensions

between the need to serve an individual organization’s

interests and the desire to serve the collective whole.

A critical task of managing

complex collaborative struc-

tures is to identify and manage

conf‌l ict (Milward and Provan

2000). Scholarship on disasters

largely focuses on the ef‌f‌i cacy

of interactions among diverse

Misalignment is not inherently

harmful or undesirable; how-

ever, it may create tensions in

interagency relationships that

require ef‌f ective management.