Hill Country Conservation: A Network and Narrative for Large-scale Collaborative Conservation A Report to the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation Research and Report by: R. Patrick Bixler, PhD Ashley Noel Lovell, PhD 1 Executive Summary From April 2015-May 2016, we have been involved in a joint research and practitioner-based effort to understand the network and the narrative that shapes Hill Country conservation opportunities and outcomes. We have collected and analyzed over 40 hours of interview data and developed an extensive database of information on the organizations and agencies that work to make the Hill Country a socially and ecologically thriving landscape. Through these efforts, we believe that opportunities exist to improve coordination of activities, leverage and pool resources, increase and use social capital, enhance conflict management (prevention, reduction, resolution), and im- prove knowledge management (including generation, trans- lation, and diffusion). The report that follows summarizes these efforts and offers insights and recommendations based on our analysis. The following are some key take-aways: 1. The organizations and agencies working in the Hill Coun- try are many and diverse. The Hill Country is a special place to many people, it may come as no suprise that there is an abundace of organizations working on conservation issues in the region. Our survey identified 160 organizations and agen- cies (which is not exhaustive) that represent ten different or- ganizational categories, examples include community-based organizations (23% of the network), state non-governmental organizations (15% of the network), and land trusts (5% of the network). Some organizations are focused on specific places, others are focused on connecting with specific constituencies, while still others work on regional or state policy. More important than the sheer number is the diversity of functions and roles, that, considered at the scale of the network, fit particular niches and contribute to the overall function. We identified extensitve collaboration within organization types (for examples, land trusts collaborate with each other) but also between organizational types (for example, regional NGOs collaborate with universities). Without an understanding of the structure and function of the entire network, the abundance appears overwhelming. Understanding the larger system, however, we can be strategic about leveraging resources and expertise of the whole network. 2. We found that collaboration in the Hill Country is already extensive. Of all the connections between organizations in the Hill Country, approximately 80% of survey respondents reported they were “work- ing collaboratively on a project” with other organizations. The interviews identified formal and informal communication infrastructure that facilitates this ongoing collaboration. For example, regional meetings, annual summit’s, workshops, and newsletters provide mechanisms that organizations feel “connected” and “up to date”. More formal and informal communication infrastructure can facilitate more collabora- tion. Our analysis highlights that network core organizations could have a broader influence through more exposure, communication, and interaction with the broader network of organizations. We suggest initiating a forum for communication as a means to build trust and implementable projects. A Hill Coun- try Conservation Network Summit would vastly increase the ability to proactively set priorities and lever- age opportunities to deliver outcomes. 2 Executive Summary - Continued 3. The majority of conservation organizations working in the Hill Country report that they focus on “educa- tion and outreach” as their primary activity. This finding points to the rather unique context and enormous opportunities inherent in a large landscape conservation initiative in a private-lands landscape. The “net- work” of organizations should focus on improving capacities to communicate with landowners and move toward action-oriented and project-based education and outreach efforts. When these initiatives show success, it builds trust and capacity between organizations and with landowners to work toward larger and more ambitious projects. We suggest identifying projects that promote action-based collaboration between landowners and conservation organizations. 4. There is a strong desire for a large-scale collaborative approach. Both the interviews and the survey high- lighted an interest in a large-scale network approach. A key to “scaling up” conservation efforts in the Hill Country is to make sure there is “a table” for interested parties to sit. Without the table, there is no place for groups to communicate and identify where and how they can best work together. To improve the ability to think and work proactively to address future problems or operate at larger scales, network governance struc- ture needs to be discussed and agreed upon. These points and others emerged from the research and analysis. In the following, we summarize our ap- proach and focus on key findings through illustrations in the data. The Key Findings section includes a series of figures along with an explanation of the key finding, interpretation, and recommendation that follows from the insight. 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Background 5 Hill Country Conservation Network 6 The time is right. 5 Reasons to focus on the Hill Country: 6 Our Approach 6 Research Questions and Methods 7 Qualitative Methods 7 Social Network Analysis 7 Key Findings 9 Current Organizational Landscape 9 Figure 1. Number of Nodes Identified in Analysis 9 Figure 2. Types of Organizations in the Network 10 Figure 3. What Organizations and Agencies Report Working On 11 Figure 4a. Number of staff reported 12 4b. Budget Reported 12 Barriers and Benefits to Collaboration 13 Table 5. Benefits of Collaboration 13 Table 6. Barriers to Collaboration 14 How Are We Collaborating? 15 Figure 7. Social Network Analysis of the Hill Country Conservation Network 15 Figure 8. Centrality Analysis in the Hill Country Conservation Network 16 Figure 9. The Hill Country Conservation Network Across Geographical Space 18 A Hill Country Conservation Netowrk Narrative 19 Table 10. Common Conservation Narrative Elements 20 Hill Country Narrative and Network: Summary and Conclusions 21 Limitations 22 Case Study: Network Governance in the Crown of the Continent 23 Acknowledgements 26 Appendix A 26 Appendix B 27 Appendix C 28 Appendix D 39 4 Background The Texas Hill Country spans a 17 county area that encompasses approximately 11.3 million acres (17,760 square miles) and is recognized around the world for its stunning beauty and its unique natural, cultural, and economic resources. The Edwards Plateau and the Llano Uplift are the defining geologic features that serve as the foundation for the immense diversity of peaks, valleys, plants, animals, streams, and vistas. Many of the rivers and streams in the Hill Country begin along the eastern margins of the Edwards Plateau, including the Medina, Pedernales, Guadalupe, and Blanco rivers. These hydro-geological features have created elab- orate karst aquifer systems, some of the most biologically diverse subterranean ecosystems in the world. Below and above the surface, 88 listed endangered species call these ecosystems home. The vast open spaces and dark night skies of the Hill Country’s north and west contrast sharply to the rap- idly urbanizing metropolitan corridor of Austin and San Antonio. These cities are two of America’s fastest growing municipalities, and they constitute the eastern border of the Hill Country. Low-density, unplanned subdivisions, strip malls, and office parks are now spreading out from these cities westward and northward into the Hill Country, putting the region’s surface and groundwater resources, scenery, and wildlife at risk. Nearly 90 percent of the Hill Country lies in private, unincorporated areas (where little land use regulation exists) and only 3.6 percent of the land lies in permanent protection. These protected lands include 15 state parks and natural areas and numerous private-land conservation easements. There are countless individual efforts and organizations working to protect the water, wildlife, and the qual- ity of life upon which both urban and rural residents depend. However, the scale of the challenges necessi- tates a more comprehensive and collaborative effort between organizations and agencies working across the rural-urban gradient. Many governmental and non-governmental organizations, state and federal agencies, universities, and land- owner associations are working to make the Hill Country a thriving landscape and to preserve the ecological and cultural characteristics that make the landscape special. To coordinate these efforts at a larger-scale, it is crucial to have a thorough understanding of the organizational landscape without being overwhelmed by its complexity. By researching who is doing what, we can identify stakeholders and their functions in the overall Hill Country Conservation Network. 5 The time is right. 5 Reasons to focus on the Hill Country: • There is a strong heritage and stewardship ethic in the Hill Country • The region is an epicenter of conservation partnership activity in Texas • The landscape is widely regarded as a unique and amenity-rich eco- system that underpins the region’s quality of life • The Hill Country provides natural, scenic and water resources for the Austin-San Antonio corridor • Opportunities exist to