ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Patient capital and no net loss: Applying institutional theory to understand publicly-owned mitigation banking in an urban context at a United States port
Austin Thompson-Spain,
Kyle S. Bunds,
Lincoln Larson,
Bethany Cutts,
J. Aaron Hipp,
Corresponding Author
Austin Thompson-Spain
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Correspondence
Austin Thompson-Spain, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, NC State University, Raleigh, NC.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorKyle S. Bunds
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorLincoln Larson
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorBethany Cutts
Center for Geospatial Analytics, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorJ. Aaron Hipp
Center for Geospatial Analytics, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorAustin Thompson-Spain,
Kyle S. Bunds,
Lincoln Larson,
Bethany Cutts,
J. Aaron Hipp,
Corresponding Author
Austin Thompson-Spain
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Correspondence
Austin Thompson-Spain, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, NC State University, Raleigh, NC.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorKyle S. Bunds
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorLincoln Larson
Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorBethany Cutts
Center for Geospatial Analytics, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorJ. Aaron Hipp
Center for Geospatial Analytics, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Search for more papers by this authorFirst published: 06 July 2024
Abstract
As urban areas grow, ecosystem extent and condition continue to decline. Some countries have adopted “no net loss” policies that require compensatory actions for unavoidable ecosystem losses. In the US, mitigation banking has emerged as a means of offsetting losses, but the system remains dominated by private commercial banks and mitigation outside of an urban context. With this in mind, we seek to understand the institutional drivers of innovative finance for urban mitigation projects at the public agency level. Applying institutional logics and institutional isomorphisms as theoretical foundations, we conducted a qualitative case study of innovative finance for habitat restoration at the Port of Seattle, a public port in Seattle, Washington (USA). Findings from interviews, focus groups, and document analysis suggest that hybrid institutional logics, unique organizational characteristics, and coercive and normative isomorphisms drive organizational change in this context, but significant barriers exist to establishing similar systems in the US.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- Apostolopoulou, E., Greco, E. & Adams, W.M. (2019) Biodiversity offsetting and the production of “equivalent natures”: a marxist critique. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies, 17(3), 861–892. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-02441026
- Argento, D., Culasso, F. & Truant, E. (2016) Competing logics in the expansion of public service corporations. Utilities Policy, 40, 125–133. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JUP.2016.02.007
- Ashworth, R., Boyne, G. & Delbridge, R. (2009) Escape from the iron cage? Organizational change and isomorphic pressures in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 165–187. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/JOPART/MUM038
- Banks, S., Brunton, C., Engelburg, D., Roach, T. & Snyder, G. (2014) EPA needs to clarify its claim of “no net loss” of wetlands. US EPA Office of the Inspector General. Washington D.C.
- BenDor, T., Brozovic, N. & Pallathucheril, V.G. (2008) The social impacts of wetland mitigation policies in the United States. Journal of Planning Literature, 22(4), 341–357.
- Berlin, D. (2022). Innovative approaches for port-led advance mitigation and mitigation banking. In: P. J. Erbland & B. N. Jones (Eds.), Ports 2022 (pp. 153–162). American Society of Civil Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784484401.015
- Berlin, D. & Malone, J. (2019) Benefits and challenges of port-sponsored mitigation banks. In: Jain P. & Stahlman W.S. (Eds.) Ports 2019 pp. 22–32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482629.003
- Besharov, M.L. & Smith, W.K. (2014) Multiple institutional logics in organizations: explaining their varied nature and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381 https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43699249.pdf
- Boschken, H.L. (1982) The demands of conflicting change on public enterprise: west coast seaport development and environmental regulation. Public Administration Review, 42(3), 220–226.
- Brooks, M.R., Knatz, G., Pallis, A.A. & Wilmsmeier, G. (2022) Transparency in port governance: setting a research agenda. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 7(1), 1–20. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/S41072-021-00103-4
10.1186/s41072-021-00103-4 Google Scholar
- Brooks, M.R. & Pallis, A.A. (2012) Port governance. In: W.K. Talley (Ed.) The Blackwell companion to maritime economics, 1st edition. Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., pp. 491–516. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444345667.ch25
10.1002/9781444345667.ch25 Google Scholar
- Brown, J.J. (1994) Treaty rights: twenty years after the Boldt decision. Wicazo Sa Review, 10(2), 1. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/1409130
10.2307/1409130 Google Scholar
- Bunds, K.S., McLeod, C.M., Barrett, M., Newman, J.I. & Koenigstorfer, J. (2019) The object-oriented politics of stadium sustainability: a case study of SC freiburg. Sustainability, 11(23), 6712. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11236712
- Commission Agenda Memorandum Action Item. (2020) Terminal 117 habitat restoration and Duwamish shoreline access project. Port of Seattle, 8a, 1–9.
- Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources, 40 C.F.R. § 230 (2008).
- Creswell, J. & Poth, C. (2018) Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches, 4th edition. Washington, D.C.: SAGE Publications, Inc.
- Cutts, B.B., Greenlee, A.J. & Chantrill, C.V. (2022) Coupling ecosystem-centered governance modes with environmental justice. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 4, 1–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/FRSC.2022.826326
- Dethier, M.N. (2010) Overview of the ecology of Puget Sound beaches. In: H. Shipman, M.N. Dethier, G. Gelfenbaum, K.L. Fresh & R.S. Dinicola (Eds.) Puget Sound shorelines and the impacts of armoring-proceedings of a state of the science workshop, 2009, pp. 35–42 US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5254.
- DiMaggio, P.J. & Powell, W.W. (1983) The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Association, 48(2), 147–160.
10.2307/2095101 Google Scholar
- Duwamish Valley Community Benefits Commitment, (2019). Pub. L. No. Resolution No. 3767. https://www.portseattle.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/Resolution%203767%20with%20Exhibit.pdf
- Environmental Law Institute. (2018). Natural resources damages, mitigation banking, and the watershed approach.
- Fawcett, J.A. (2006) Chapter 10 port governance and privatization in the United States: public ownership and private operation. Research in Transportation Economics, 17, 207–235. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0739-8859(06)17010-9
10.1016/S0739-8859(06)17010-9 Google Scholar
- Friedland, R. & Alford, R.R. (1991) Bringing society Back. In: P. Symbols, I. Contradictions, I.W.W. Powell & P.J. DiMaggio (Eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, Vol. Issue 05. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 232–267.
- Frumkin, P. & Galaskiewicz, J. (2004) Institutional isomorphism and public sector organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 283–307.
- Galaskiewicz, J. & Barringer, S.N. (2012) Social enterprises and social categories. In: B. Gidron & Y. Hasenfeld (Eds.) Social enterprises: an organizational perspective. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 47–70.
- Geerts, M., Dooms, M. & Stas, L. (2021) Determinants of sustainability reporting in the present institutional context: the case of port managing bodies. Sustainability, 13(6), 3148. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063148
- Greenberg, M.R. (2021) Ports and environmental justice in the United States: an exploratory statistical analysis. Risk Analysis, 41(11), 2112–2126. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13697
- Greenwood, R., Magán Díaz, A., Li, S.X. & Lorente, C. (2010) The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453
- Greenwood, R., Raynard, M. & Kodeih, F. (2011) Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2011.590299
- Hall, J.E., Greene, C.M., Stefankiv, O., Anderson, J.H., Timpane-Padgham, B., Beechie, T.J. et al. (2018) Large river habitat complexity and productivity of Puget Sound Chinook salmon. PLoS One, 13(11), e0205127. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0205127
- Helling, A. & Poister, T.H. (2000) U.S. maritime ports: trends, policy implications, and research needs. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(3), 300–315.
- Helm, K. (2009) Port of Seattle commission debates raising tax levy. The Seattle Times. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/port-of-seattle-commission-debates-raising-tax-levy/
- Hill, T., Kulz, E., Munoz, B. & Dorney, J.R. (2013) Compensatory stream and wetland mitigation in North Carolina: an evaluation of regulatory success. Environmental Management, 51, 1077–1091. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0027-7
- Hough, P. & Harrington, R. (2019) Ten years of the compensatory mitigation rule: reflections on Progress and opportunities. Environmental Law Reporter, 49, 10018–10037.
- Institute for Water Resources. (2015) The mitigation rule retrospective: a review of the 2008 regulations governing compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources.
- Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (2019) Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services.
- Jones, C.A. & DiPinto, L. (2018) The role of ecosystem services in USA natural resource liability litigation. Ecosystem Services, 29, 333–351. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSER.2017.03.015
- Kilroy, S., Sloan, J., Blomberg, G. & Mach, T. (2020) Terminal 117 habitat restoration and Duwamish shoreline access project [Memorandum]. Seattle: Port of Seattle.
- Knatz, G. (2017) How competition is driving change in port governance, strategic decision-making and government policy in the United States. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 22, 67–77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2016.08.003
- Laihonen, H. & Kokko, P. (2023) Knowledge management and hybridity of institutional logics in public sector. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 21(1), 14–28. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2020.1788429
- Levrel, H., Scemama, P. & Vaissière, A.C. (2017) Should we Be wary of mitigation banking? Evidence regarding the risks associated with this wetland offset arrangement in Florida. Ecological Economics, 135, 136–149. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2016.12.025
- Ligorio, L., Caputo, F. & Venturelli, A. (2022) Sustainability disclosure and reporting by municipally owned water utilities. Utilities Policy, 77, 101382. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JUP.2022.101382
- Martin, S. & Madsen, B. (2023) The time it takes for restoration: an analysis of mitigation bank instrument timelines. Environmental Policy Innovation Center and Ecological Restoration Business Association, Washington D.C.
- Merriam, E.J. & Tisdell, S.B. (2016) Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation, 4th edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Meyer, J.W. & Rowan, B. (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363 http://www.ccsa.ufpb.br/gets/contents/documentos/meyer_rowan_teoria_institucional.pdf
- Monios, J. & Ng, A.K.Y. (2021) Competing institutional logics and institutional erosion in environmental governance of maritime transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 94, 103114. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2021.103114
- Morales, L. (2000) Local government involvement in mitigation banking. National Conference on Tools for Urban Water Resource Management and Protection, 322–331.
- Moran, S. (2010) Cities, creeks, and erasure: stream restoration and environmental justice. Environmental Justice, 3(2), 61–69. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2009.0036
10.1089/env.2009.0036 Google Scholar
- NOAA. (2006) Habitat equivalency analysis: an overview. https://crrc.unh.edu/sites/default/files/migrated_unmanaged_files/hea_metrics/heaoverv_paper.pdf
- NWIFC. (n.d.) Fisheries Management. Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://nwifc.org/about-us/fisheries-management/
- Port of Seattle. (2019). Resolution No. 3767. https://www.portseattle.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/Resolution%203767%20with%20Exhibit.pdf
- Port of Seattle. (2020a) Port commission moves forward on 14 acres of habitat restoration on the Duwamish River. https://www.portseattle.org/news/port-commission-moves-forward-14-acres-habitat-restoration-duwamish-river
- Port of Seattle. (2020b) Port of Seattle creates first-ever equity Department for a U.S. port authority. https://www.portseattle.org/news/port-seattle-creates-first-ever-equity-department-us-port-authority
- Port of Seattle. (2020c). Transcript of Special Meeting on April 28, 2020.
- Port of Seattle. (2022) Duwamish River People's park and shoreline habitat. https://www.portseattle.org/peoplespark
- Port of Seattle. (n.d.). Our Mission. Retrieved April 10, 2023, from https://www.portseattle.org/about/our-mission
- Port of Tacoma. (2022) Port of Tacoma 2023 Budget. pp. 1–110. https://vecportal.blob.core.windows.net/portoftacoma/Documents/822481ae05d6b5cd308f9119c005df56/3A-BUDGET%20DOC.pdf
- Puget Sound Regional Council. (2020) Region gained 166 people a day last year. https://www.psrc.org/whats-happening/blog/region-gained-166-people-day-last-year
- Quinn, T. (2010) An environmental and historical overview of the puget sound ecosystem. In: H. Shipman, M.N. Dethier, G. Gelfenbaum, K.L. Fresh & R.S. Dinicola (Eds.) Puget Sound shorelines and the impacts of armoring-proceedings of a state of the science workshop, may 2009, pp. 11–18 US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5254.
- Ravit, B., Gallagher, F., Doolittle, J., Shaw, R., Muñiz, E., Alomar, R. et al. (2017) Urban wetlands: restoration or designed rehabilitation? AIMS Environmental Science, 4(3), 458–483. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2017.3.458
10.3934/environsci.2017.3.458 Google Scholar
- Reay, T. & Jones, C. (2016) Qualitative capturing institutional logics. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 441–454. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127015589981
- Robertson, M.M. (2004) The neoliberalization of ecosystem services: wetland mitigation banking and problems in environmental governance. Geoforum, 35(3), 361–373. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEOFORUM.2003.06.002
- Rogers, E. (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York City: Free Press.
- Ruhl, J.B. & Salzman, J.E. (2006) The effects of wetland mitigation banking on people. National Wetlands Newsletter, 28(2), 7–13 https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=878331
- Sherman, R.B. (2002) Seaport governance in the United States and Canada. Alexandria, VA: American Association of Port Authorities.
- Shipman, H., Gelfenbaum, G., Dethier, M.N. & Fresh, K.L. (2010) Puget Sound shoreline armoring: state of the science workshop. In: H. Shipman, M.N. Dethier, G. Gelfenmaum, K.L. Fresh & R.S. Dinicola (Eds.) Puget Sound shorelines and the impacts of armoring—proceedings of a state of the science workshop, may 2009, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report (pp. 1–8).
- Sibbing, J.M. (2008) Nowhere near no-net-loss. National Wildlife Federation. https://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Wildlife/Nowhere_Near_No-Net-Loss.pdf
- Skelcher, C. & Smith, S.R. (2015) Theorizing hybridity: institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: the case of nonprofits. Public Administration, 93(2), 433–448. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/PADM.12105
- Stanford, B., Zavaleta, E. & Millard-Ball, A. (2018) Where and why does restoration happen? Ecological and sociopolitical influences on stream restoration in coastal California. Biological Conservation, 221, 219–227. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2018.03.016
- Tarlock, A.D. (2002) The potential role of local governments in watershed management. Pace Environmental Law Review, 20, 149–176.
10.58948/0738-6206.1164 Google Scholar
- Thornton, P.H. & Ocasio, W. (1999) Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958-1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1086/210361
- Thornton, P.H. & Ocasio, W. (2008) Institutional logics. In: R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin & R. Suddaby (Eds.) The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism. Washington, D.C.: SAGE Publications, pp. 99–129.
10.4135/9781849200387.n4 Google Scholar
- Thornton, P.H., Ocasio, W. & Lounsbury, M. (2012) The Institutional Logics Perspective: a new approach to culture, structure, and process. New York City: Oxford University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199601936.001.0001
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199601936.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Trozzi, C. & Vaccaro, R. (2000) Environmental impact of port activities. In: C.A. Brebbia & J. Olivella (Eds.) Maritime engineering and ports II. Billerica: WIT Press, Seaport governance in the United States and Canada. https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/PORTS00/PORTS00013FU.pdf
- Trudeau, D. (2018) Integrating social equity in sustainable development practice: institutional commitments and patient capital. Sustainable Cities and Society, 41, 601–610. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.05.007
- UNCTAD. (2022). Now 8 billion and counting: where the world's population has grown most and why that matters. United Nations.
- United Nations. (2019) UN report: Nature's dangerous decline “unprecedented”; species extinction rates “accelerating”—United Nations sustainable development. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/
- US EPA. (2008) Wetlands compensatory mitigation. https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/compensatory-mitigation-factsheet-under-cwa-section-404
- US EPA. (2013). Environmental justice analysis for the lower Duwamish waterway cleanup. https://d10k7k7mywg42z.cloudfront.net/assets/512fbf027a507244640002ea/ej_analysis_ldw_feb_2013.pdf
- US EPA. (2020) Environmental justice primer for ports: the good neighbor guide to building partnerships and social equity with communities. (EPA-420-B-20-007). www.epa.gov/ports-initiative
- US EPA. (n.d.) Mitigation Banks under CWA Section 404. https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/mitigation-banks-under-cwa-section-404
- van der Lugt, L., Dooms, M. & Parola, F. (2013) Strategy making by hybrid organizations: the case of the port authority. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 8, 103–113. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2013.06.005
10.1016/j.rtbm.2013.06.005 Google Scholar
- Washington Ports. (n.d.) FAQs about ports. Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://www.washingtonports.org/frequently-asked-questions
- Washington State Department of Ecology. (n.d.) Lower Duwamish waterway site history. Retrieved January 10, 2022, from https://ecology.wa.gov/Spills-Cleanup/Contamination-cleanup/Cleanup-sites/Lower-Duwamish-Waterway/Site-history
- West Coast Chinook Salmon Biological Review Team. (1997) Review of the status of Chinook Salmon from Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. NOAA. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/3034
- Wilkinson, J. & Thompson, J. (2006) 2005 status report on compensatory mitigation in the United States. www.eli.org
- Williams, T.G., Logan, T.M., Zuo, C.T., Liberman, K.D. & Guikema, S.D. (2020) Parks and safety: a comparative study of green space access and inequity in five US cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 201, 103841. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2020.103841
- Yin, R.K. (2018) Case study research and applications: design and methods, 6th edition. Washington, D.C.: SAGE Publications.
- Zu Ermgassen, S.O.S.E., Utamiputri, P., Bennun, L., Edwards, S. & Bull, J.W. (2019) The role of “no net loss” policies in conserving biodiversity threatened by the global infrastructure boom. One Earth, 1(3), 305–315. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ONEEAR.2019.10.019
