Responding to a Forest Catastrophe: The Emergence of New Governance Arrangements in Southern California

Table 6

MAST’s regulatory dimension.

Regulatory indicators	MAST
Quantity and diversity of actors engaged in the regulatory arrangement	Formal and informal partners contributed to regulatory arrangement. Decisions followed a soft law process in which partners contributed to decisions (i.e., no formal entity had jurisdiction to institute or demand hard law outcomes).
Precision (how closely does the output prescribe and constrain private action?)	Precision: the decisions made had direct implications for federal, state, and county agencies, as well as private landowners (i.e., the decisions affected land of all types of land jurisdictions).
Obligation (how legally binding is the obligation?)	Obligation: policy changes at the state level as well as changes to county and property laws facilitated legally binding actions regarding forest and property management that did not exist prior to the outbreak.
Delegation (is the duty of adjudicating and enforcing the obligation vested in an independent third party or retained by the regulator?)	Delegation: Policy changes provided delegation of enforcement to MAST partners, supported by the public legal system.