Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change

Climate change poses many challenges for ecosystem and resource management. In particular, coastal planners are struggling to find ways to prepare for the potential impacts of future climate change while dealing with immediate pressures. Decisions on how to respond to future risks are complicated by the long time horizons and the uncertainty associated with the distribution of impacts. Existing coastal zone management approaches in the UK either do not adequately incorporate changing stakeholder preferences, or effectively ensure that stakeholders are aware of the trade-offs inherent in any coastal management decision. Using a novel method, scenario-based stakeholder engagement, which brings together stakeholder analysis, climate change management scenarios and deliberative techniques, the necessary trade-offs associated with long term coastal planning are explored. The method is applied to two case studies of coastal planning in Christchurch Bay on the south coast of England and the Orkney Islands off the north coast of Scotland. A range of conflicting preferences exist on the ideal governance structure to manage the coast under different climate change scenarios. In addition, the results show that public understanding of the trade-offs that have to be made is critical in gaining some degree of public support for long term coastal decision-making. We conclude that scenario-based stakeholder engagement is a useful tool to facilitate coastal management planning that takes into account the complexities and challenges of climate change, and could be used in conjunction with existing approaches such as the Shoreline Management Planning process.     

Governance of Water Resources in the Phase of Change: A Case Study of the Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive in Sweden

In this article, focusing on the ongoing implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive, we analyze some of the opportunities and challenges for a sustainable governance of water resources from an ecosystem management perspective. In the face of uncertainty and change, the ecosystem approach as a holistic and integrated management framework is increasingly recognized. The ongoing implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) could be viewed as a reorganization phase in the process of change in institutional arrangements and ecosystems. In this case study from the Northern Baltic Sea River Basin District, Sweden, we focus in particular on data and information management from a multi-level governance perspective from the local stakeholder to the River Basin level. We apply a document analysis, hydrological mapping, and GIS models to analyze some of the institutional framework created for the implementation of the WFD. The study underlines the importance of institutional arrangements that can handle variability of local situations and trade-offs between solutions and priorities on different hierarchical levels.     

Institutional credibility and leadership: critical challenges for community-based natural resource governance in rural and remote Australia

Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) institutions are challenged with finding common ground as a basis for action among diverse resource users and stakeholders. Establishing and maintaining institutional credibility within their regions, catchments, communities and among their membership is fundamental to overcoming the challenge. So too is applying appropriate institutional and governance structures and appointing appropriate leaders. Drawing on triangulated case study data collected over a 12-month period using multiple methods, this paper examines the influence of institutional credibility and leadership on the functioning, decision-making and governance of two CBNRM institutions in Queensland, Australia. The paper shows that stakeholders have very different expectations of what makes a CBNRM institution credible. Satisfying the multiple expectations requires CBNRM institutions to incorporate diverse stakeholder representation, assert their legitimacy and demonstrate accountability, transparency, fairness and justice. The paper also draws attention to the value and importance of appointing inspirational leaders who focus on encouraging followers to pursue collective goals. Comparing the merits and constraints of appointing average Joes versus community elites to the Boards of CBNRM institutions, the paper highlights the urgent need for community-based natural resource governance and inspirational leadership education and training programs to improve the availability and quality of CBNRM leadership in rural Australia. Since combining credible CBNRM institutions with inspirational leaders does not necessarily equate to sustainable on-ground NRM outcomes, it is critical that the education and training programs emphasise the importance of monitoring and evaluating the improvements in decision-making processes and in decision outcomes.     

Creating a Place for Environmental Communication Research in Sustainability Science

Environmental communication scholarship is critical to the success of sustainability science. This essay outlines three pressing areas of intersection between the two fields. First, environmental communication scholarship on public participation processes is essential for sustainability science's efforts to link knowledge with action. Second, sustainability science requires collaborations across diverse institutional and disciplinary boundaries. Environmental communication can play a vital role in reorganizing the production and application of disciplinary knowledge. Third, science communication bridges environmental communication and sustainability science and can move communication processes away from one-way transmission models toward engaged approaches. The essay draws on Maine's Sustainability Solutions Initiative to illustrate key outcomes of a large project that has integrated environmental communication into sustainability science.     

Scientific research, stakeholders, and policy: continuing dialogue during research on radionuclides on Amchitka Island, Alaska

It is increasingly clear that a wide range of stakeholders should be included in the problem formulation phase of research aimed at solving environmental problems; indeed the inclusion of stakeholders at this stage has been formalized as an integral part of ecological risk assessment. In this paper, we advocate the additional inclusion of stakeholders in the refinement of research methods and protocols and in the execution of the research, rather than just at the final communication and reporting phase. We use a large study of potential radionuclide levels in marine biota around Amchitka Island as a case study. Amchitka Island, in the Aleutian Island Chain of Alaska, was the site of three underground nuclear tests (1965-1971). The overall objective of the biological component of the study was to collect a range of marine biota for radionuclide analysis that could provide data for assessing current food safety and provide a baseline for developing a plan to monitor human and ecosystem health in perpetuity. Stakeholders, including regulators (State of Alaska), resource trustees (US Fish and Wildlife Service, State of Alaska), representatives of the Aleut and Pribilof Island communities, the Department of Energy (DOE), and others, were essential for plan development. While these stakeholders were included in the initial problem formulation and approved science plan, we also included them in the refinement of protocols, selection of bioindicators, selection of a reference site, choice of methods of collection, and in the execution of the study itself. Meetings with stakeholders resulted in adding (or deleting) bioindicator species and tissues, prioritizing target species, refining sampling methods, and recruiting collection personnel. Some species were added because they were important subsistence foods for the Aleuts, and others were added because they were ecological equivalents to replace species deleted because of low population numbers. Two major refinements that changed the research thrust were (1) the inclusion of Aleut hunters and fishers on the biological expedition itself to ensure that subsistence foods and methods were represented, and (2) the addition of a fisheries biologist on a NOAA research trawler to allow sampling of commercial fishes. Although the original research design called for the collection of biota by Aleut subsistence fishermen, and by a commercial fishing boat, the research was modified with continued stakeholder input to actually include Aleuts and a fisheries biologist on the expeditions to ensure their representation. The inclusion of stakeholders during the development of protocols and the research itself improved the overall quality of the investigation, while making it more relevant to the interested and affected parties. Final responsibility for the design and execution of the research and radionuclide analysis rested with the researchers, but the process of stakeholder inclusion made the research more valuable as a source of credible information and for public policy decisions.     

The role of symbolic capital in stakeholder disputes: decision-making concerning intractable wastes

This paper examines almost 30 years of disputation concerning the disposal of the world's largest stockpile of the toxic organochlorine, hexachlorbenzene. It describes the study of a chemicals company in its attempt to manage the disposal of the toxic waste in a collaborative fashion with government, environmentalists and the local community. The study describes the new processes and structures specifically designed to address the decision-making and the issues of stakeholder perception and identity construction which have influenced the outcomes. Decision-making in such disputes is often theorized from the perspective of the emergence of highly individualized and reflexive risk communities and changing modes and expectations of corporate responsibility as a result of detraditionalization. We argue that the stakeholder interaction in this study reflects competing discourses in which corporate actors prioritize the building and maintaining of identity and symbolic capital rather than an active collaboration to solve the ongoing issue of the waste. As well, issues of access to expert knowledge highlight the relationship between conditions of uncertainty, technoscientific expertise and identity. The events of the study highlight the challenges faced by contemporary technoscientific corporations such as chemicals companies as they must deliver on requirements of transparency and openness, while maintaining technoscientific capacity and strong internal identity. We conclude that the study demonstrates the co-existence of social processes of individualization and detraditionalization with quasi-traditions which maintain authority, thus challenging the radical distinctions made in the literature between modernity and late or reflexive modernity.     

Design of an institutional decision-making process: the case of urban water management

Urban water infrastructure expenditures cause a major financial burden to municipalities. In the opinion of many policy-makers, public funds may alleviate this burden and facilitate environmental policies. However, practice has shown that despite ambitious policies, funding often follows traditional cost-dominated thinking. In Austria, national policy-makers were interested in new guidelines for funding that increase the transparency of the planning, ensure the adequate treatment of ecological problems, and foster stakeholder involvement, but keep the process as simple as possible, and require minimal changes of the current guidelines. An interdisciplinary project team conducted such a study. Its outcome was tested in two pilot projects. Based on these experiences, policy-makers finally implemented the recommended guidelines for the funding of communal urban water infrastructure projects. A general observation about the policy-making process was a conservative attitude of policy-makers. They prefer simple constraints (precautionary principle) and flexible negotiations (delegation) to complex assessment and decision-aid methodologies.     

基于延拓盲数的湖库水体富营养化评价模型

基于湖库水环境系统随机性、模糊性、灰性、未确知性等多种不确定性共存或交叉存在的特点,将延拓盲数引入水体富营养化评价,通过与综合营养状态指数方法的综合集成,构建了湖库水体富营养化评价延拓盲数模型和等级识别模式,并将其应用于巢湖塘西河河口水体富营养化评价.结果表明:塘西河河口水体处于重富营养化状态,可信度超过0.86(即86%),且在模糊截集水平α=0.8情形下,综合营养状态指数期望值达79.34,属于重富营养等级.实例研究证明了新构建模型对于不确定性条件下湖库水体富营养化评价的适用性和有效性.     

Assessing Societal Impacts When Planning Restoration of Large Alluvial Rivers: A Case Study of the Sacramento River Project, California

Studies have shown that ecological restoration projects are more likely to gain public support if they simultaneously increase important human services that natural resources provide to people. River restoration projects have the potential to influence many of the societal functions (e.g., flood control, water quality) that rivers provide, yet most projects fail to consider this in a comprehensive manner. Most river restoration projects also fail to take into account opportunities for revitalization of large-scale river processes, focusing instead on opportunities presented at individual parcels. In an effort to avoid these pitfalls while planning restoration of the Sacramento River, we conducted a set of coordinated studies to evaluate societal impacts of alternative restoration actions over a large geographic area. Our studies were designed to identify restoration actions that offer benefits to both society and the ecosystem and to meet the information needs of agency planning teams focusing on the area. We worked with local partners and public stakeholders to design and implement studies that assessed the effects of alternative restoration actions on flooding and erosion patterns, socioeconomics, cultural resources, and public access and recreation. We found that by explicitly and scientifically melding societal and ecosystem perspectives, it was possible to identify restoration actions that simultaneously improve both ecosystem health and the services (e.g., flood protection and recreation) that the Sacramento River and its floodplain provide to people. Further, we found that by directly engaging with local stakeholders to formulate, implement, and interpret the studies, we were able to develop a high level of trust that ultimately translated into widespread support for the project.     

Wrestling with the complexity of evaluation for organizations at the boundary of science,policy, and practice

Boundary organizations are situated between science, policy, and practice and have a goal of supporting communication and collaboration among these sectors. They have been promoted as a way to improve the effectiveness of conservation efforts by building stronger relationships between scientists, policy makers, industry, and practitioners (Cook et al. 2013). Although their promise has been discussed in theory, the work of and expectations for boundary organizations are less defined in practice. Biodiversity conservation is characterized by complexity, uncertainty, dissent, and tight budgets, so boundary organizations face the challenging task of demonstrating their value to diverse stakeholders. We examined the challenges boundary organizations face when seeking to evaluate their work and thus aimed to encourage more productive conversations about evaluation of boundary organizations and their projects. Although no off‐the‐shelf solution is available for a given boundary organization, we identified 4 principles that will support effective evaluation for boundary organizations: engage diverse stakeholders, support learning and reflection, assess contribution to change, and align evaluation with assumption and values.