Beyond zero-sum: game theory and national forest management

Following two decades of bitter struggle, the current debate over management of the U.S. national forests is characterized by animosity, controversy, and seemingly intractable gridlock. This view has led some to characterize the current management process a situation of pure conflict or a zero-sum game. In this article, we develop a game-theoretic model based on an argument that national forest policymaking is a game between the U.S. National Forest Service and Environmentalists and that this game is not zero-sum. The model is used to account for outcomes associated with contemporary management policy and to examine some recent changes to the game's rules and how this may affect outcomes. The analysis shows that some changes will have little to no effect on outcomes, while others have a significant potential to do so.