Published on 2025-12-15 by Natalia Piland
About this Interview from Dr. Natalia Piland
The Stewardship Mapping and Assessment Project was started by social scientists at the USDA Forest Service Northern Research station to pinpoint where known stewardship groups are improving their surroundings. The project began by developing a methodology, known by its short-hand “STEW-MAP,” that tackles that very question of Who takes care of this place? by mapping the groups and their social relationships. Since it began, the project has expanded to develop other methodologies that complement STEW-MAP, including a facilitated exercise called “Systems of Care,” and a community engagement program called “Stewardship Salons.”
In another article in this newsletter, we hear about PhD candidate Sally Donovan’s work applying STEW-MAP to urban forestry groups in the Twin Cities Metro Area. In this piece, I ask spatial ecologist Dr. Michelle L. Johnson to delve into the story and value of mapping stewardship work across the world.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Natalia: When did STEW-MAP start and what led to its development?
Michelle: STEW-MAP preceded me. It was started by my colleagues Drs. Erika Svendsen and Lindsay Campbell in 2007 (or even a little bit earlier) in NYC [New York City]. They were part of a collective building an online interactive map of social and ecological features of NYC and realized they couldn’t easily say who was managing the green spaces they were highlighting in the map. They then developed STEW-MAP so they could show on that map where stewardship organizations are working in a given place, how they’re connected, and the kind of work they are doing.
Natalia: What makes STEW-MAP different from other stakeholder mapping methods?
Michelle: I’d say that it’s much larger in scope. Oftentimes, stakeholder mapping happens in a workshop and doesn’t have a chance to have a broad reach over time. In STEW-MAP, we start compiling a list of potential stewardship organizations that takes, depending on the size, up to six months to build. For NYC, the population is 8.5 million people, so it takes up to six months. In a smaller town with a smaller population, it would take less time. Sending the survey out also takes up time. STEW-MAP just gives us a much more comprehensive view of things across physical and social network space than you could from a focus group of 8-10 people sharing who they work with. That distinguishes it a lot from other methods.
Natalia: In how many places has STEW-MAP been implemented? What have we learned from implementing it in different places?
Michelle: It’s been implemented in over 20 different locations globally. A lot of work has been done in the United States, but also in Latin America, Canada, France, and even Poland. There have also been some ideas and exchanges in the Philippines and China. Some of the things we’ve learned is that in the places that we have done the survey more than once, a number of groups persist. They sometimes augment and sometimes pivot their work in response to a changing landscape socially and ecologically. We’ve also seen that things can be both similar and different when comparing locations. For example, we are currently using network analysis to compare what predicts collaboration in different U.S. cities. Results from that analysis are forthcoming, so keep an eye out for that! We’ve also seen that when you compare across countries there are cultural differences in what stewardship actions are taken, but we haven’t dug into that work enough yet.
Natalia: What has been your favorite thing you’ve learned through your work with STEW-MAP?
Michelle: One of my favorite things is being able to analyze social space in the same way as I have done with physical space, with a map across a landscape, seeing where there are more or less groups, and how that changes the knowledge of place that I can gather by having things mapped in that way. I’m not really talking about rigorous scientific exploration, but more the specific exploration of a place and what emerges from having that social angle included in the conversation. When you’re working through the data after you receive the STEW-MAP survey, you’re drawing where the groups work if they haven’t already self-mapped. By doing that, I can explore place in part through looking at that: What’s here? What’s there? What’s the elevation here? What’s the political boundary here? Is this forest? Is this grassland? Is this built environment? Now you’ve added a new layer: As the group is describing their work, it happens on this side of the street not the other side of the street, and you can start to understand the place better and see why the place looks the way it does.
Natalia: Can anyone implement STEW-MAP? What do you need to implement it?
Michelle: If you have enough grit and determination and ability to put together a team, anyone can do it. But it does need a specialized team. What is really needed is someone who can serve as a project manager, cheerleader, and communicator of what STEW-MAP is, why you are doing it in a certain location, and how you are going to bring stakeholders together to start the process. That person needs to see it from beginning to the end and ensure that as much bias as possible is removed through the survey techniques that are taken. At the same time, you also need a team member that is excellent at working with geospatial data and with network data. Bringing those skill sets towards digitalization of the data, learning different tools and having access to tools like ArcGIS Online Experience Builder at your fingertips can also help. There is more than one way to visualize the data, which is exciting and creative, and some are less expensive than others. If you are willing to figure it all out, with the manuals that we provide, with those skill sets in a project manager and cheerleader and a GIS/data person, it can be a very successful project.
In Closing, from Dr. Natalia Piland
Until recently, both Michelle and I were part of the USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station’s Stewardship Science team. We are still doing research in our new roles that leverages our knowledge, skills, and data from our time there (Michelle is now working for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation as a Spatial Ecologist and I am working as a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Environment, Community, & Equity at American University). We were excited to support Sally with her MSP LTER STEW-MAP work, providing advice and insight when we could. Sally was both the project manager and the GIS/data person for her chapter. But she also enlisted the help of her own personal network, not only through us, but by hosting Carleton College externships and collaborating with other researchers. Collaboration is the foundation for good social-ecological interdisciplinary science!
About Dr. Michelle L. Johnson
Michelle Johnson is a Spatial Ecologist at the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Trained in both social and ecological sciences, her research toolkit includes spatial analysis, quantitative social science, and field ecology methods.
About Dr. Natalia C. Piland
Natalia Piland is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Environment, Community, & Equity at American University and is based in Minneapolis. She is motivated by the research question, "How do we create a better world together?”, and uses a variety of methods drawn from the life and social sciences to explore the question and its implications with others.