The Watershed as a Focus for Public Administration: Conventional and Bioregional Approaches

References

• Box, R. C. (Ed.). (1999). Symposium: Community governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21, 280–361.
   Google Scholar
• Cairns, J. Jr., Dickson, K. L. & Herricks, E. E. (1977). Recovery and restoration of damaged ecosystems. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Charles, L., Dodge, J., Milliman, L. & Stockley, V. (1981). Where you at? CoEvolution Quarterly, 32, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Committee to Review the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. (1985). The Great Lakes water quality agreement: An evolving instrument for ecosystem management. Joint Project of the U.S. National Research Council & the Royal Society of Canada. Washington, DC: Water Science and Technology Board, National Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Cortner, H. J. & Moote, M. A. (1999). The politics of ecosystem management. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dasmann, R. (1976). Future primitive. The CoEvolution Quarterly, 11, 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, C. (Ed.). (2001). Western public lands and environmental politics, (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dodge, J. (1981). Living by life: Some bioregional theory and practice. CoEvolution Quarterly, 32, 6–12.
   Google Scholar
• Doppelt, B., Scurlock, M., Frissell, C. & Karr, J. (1993). Entering the watershed: A new approach to save America’s river ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press/The Pacific Rivers Council.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, T. & Leopold, L. (1978). Water in environmental planning. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Fausold, C. J. & Lilieholm, R. J. (1996). The economic value of open space. Land Lines 8 (September). [ Available on line at http://www.igc.apc.org/lincoln/opspace2.html].
   Google Scholar
• Fesler, J. W. (1949). Area and administration. University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gulick, L. (1937/1997). Notes on the theory of organization. In J.M. Shafritz, & A.C. Hyde (Eds.), Classics of public administration, (4th ed.). (pp. 81–89). Harcourt Brace.
   Google Scholar
• Kettl, D. (2000). The transformation of governance: Globalization, devolution, and the role of government. Public Administration Review; 60, (November/December), 488–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, C. S. (1999). Circa 1999: The possibilities for community and democracy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21, 288–301.
   Google Scholar
• Kirlin, J. J. (1996). What governments must do well: Creating value for society. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 161–185.
   Google Scholar
• MacKaye, B. (1928/1962). The new exploration: A philosophy of regional planning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCluskey, D. S. & Bennit, C. C. (1997). Partnership protects watersheds: The case of the New Haven Water Company. Land Lines 9 (January). [ Available on line at http://www.igc.ape.org/lincoln/watershed,html].
   Google Scholar
• Miller, H. T. & Nunemaker, J. R. (1999). “Citizen governance” as image management in postmodern context. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21, 302–308.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, L. S. (1999). Environment in the community, community in the environment. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21, 354–361.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, L. S. & Weschler, L. F. (1996). Community sustainability as a dimension of administrative ethics. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 18, 13–26.
   Google Scholar
• North, R. M., Dworsky, L. B. & Allee, D. J. (Eds.). (1980). Unified river basin management, symposium proceedings, Gatlinburg, Tennessee. Minneapolis, MN: American Water Resources Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. L., Dickey, G. E. & Dola, S. (1980). The future of unified river basin management. In North et al. (Eds.), Unified river basin management, symposium proceedings Gatlinburg, Tennessee. (pp. 50–54). Minneapolis, MN: American Water Resources Association.
   Google Scholar
• Sale, K. (1985). Dwellers in the land: The bioregional vision. San Francisco: Sierra Club.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. W. (1993). Ethics for leaders. In J. K. Berry & J. C. Gordon (Eds.), Environmental leadership: Developing effective skills and styles (pp. 31–45). Washington DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Todd, J. & Tukel, G. (1981). Reinhabiting cities and towns: Designing for sustainability. San Francisco: Planet Drum Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Tukel, G. (1982). Toward a bioregional model, clearing ground for watershed planning. San Francisco: Planet Drum Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1996). Why watersheds? EPA800-F- 96-001 (Revised March 25, 1996). [Available on line at: http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/why.html].
   Google Scholar
• Van Newkirk, A. (1976). Institute for Bioregional Research. The CoEvolution Quarterly, 11, 31.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, R., Rosentraub, M. S. & Weschler, L. F. (1992). Building urban governance: An agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Urban Affairs, 14, 399–422.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, R. & Weschler, L. F. (1976). The multiple boundaries of cities: A framework for the policy analysis of urban space. In P. M. Gregg (Ed.), Problems of theory in policy analysis (pp. 103–113). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
   Google Scholar
• Warshall, P. (1976/77). Streaming wisdom: Watershed consciousness in the twentieth century. The CoEvolution Quarterly, 12, 4–13.
   Google Scholar
• Wengert, N. (1980). A critical review of the river basin as a focus for resources planning, development and management. In North et al., Unified river basin management, symposium proceedings, Gatlinburg, Tennessee (pp. 9–27). Minneapolis, MN: American Water Resources Association.
   Google Scholar
• Wondolleck, J. M. & Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar