Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process1

Floress, Kristin, Jean C. Mangun, Mae A. Davenport, and Karl W.J. Williard, 2009. Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 45(6):1352‐1360. Abstract: The roles that agencies and other partners play in collaborative watershed management are not always clearly identified. Key factors contributing to group‐level outcomes in watershed groups include both structural and procedural elements. Structural elements include membership systems, project partners, and funding, while procedural elements include leadership, shared vision, and mission development. The current research reports on a case study conducted with a Midwestern watershed group that received Clean Water Act Section 319 funds to undertake a watershed planning process. Data come from focus groups, interviews, public comments, and meeting observation, and were analyzed using grounded theory. Findings of this study indicate that homogenous skill set, discord over group and partner roles, and failed problem identification contributed to the organizational inertia experienced by the watershed group. Implications of this research for groups receiving 319 funds are provided.     

Beyond the Prevention of Harm: Animal Disease Policy as a Moral Question

European animal disease policy seems to find its justification in a “harm to other” principle. Limiting the freedom of animal keepers—e.g., by culling their animals—is justified by the aim to prevent harm, i.e., the spreading of the disease. The picture, however, is more complicated. Both during the control of outbreaks and in the prevention of notifiable, animal diseases the government is confronted with conflicting claims of stakeholders who anticipate running a risk to be harmed by each other, and who ask for government intervention. In this paper, we first argue that in a policy that aims to prevent animal diseases, the focus shifts from limiting “harm” to weighing conflicting claims with respect to “risks of harm.” Therefore, we claim that the harm principle is no longer a sufficient justification for governmental intervention in animal disease prevention. A policy that has to deal with and distribute conflicting risks of harm needs additional value assumptions that guide this process of assessment and distribution. We show that currently, policies are based on assumptions that are mainly economic considerations. In order to show the limitations of these considerations, we use the interests and position of keepers of backyard animals as an example. Based on the problems they faced during and after the recent outbreaks, we defend the thesis that in order to develop a sustainable animal disease policy other than economic assumptions need to be taken into account.     

Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment: An Empirical Model to Describe Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment on the Culling of Healthy Animals During an Animal Disease Epidemic

In this paper, we present and defend the theoretical framework of an empirical model to describe people’s fundamental moral attitudes (FMAs) to animals, the stratification of FMAs in society and the role of FMAs in judgment on the culling of healthy animals in an animal disease epidemic. We used philosophical animal ethics theories to understand the moral basis of FMA convictions. Moreover, these theories provide us with a moral language for communication between animal ethics, FMAs, and public debates. We defend that FMA is a two-layered concept. The first layer consists of deeply felt convictions about animals. The second layer consists of convictions derived from the first layer to serve as arguments in a debate on animal issues. In a debate, the latter convictions are variable, depending on the animal issue in a specific context, time, and place. This variability facilitates finding common ground in an animal issue between actors with opposing convictions.     

A statistical analysis of the carbon dioxide capture process

Post combustion carbon dioxide (CO₂) capture is one of the most commonly adopted technologies for reducing industrial CO₂ emissions, which is now an important goal given the widespread concern over global warming. Research on amine-based CO₂ capture has mainly focused on improving effectiveness and efficiency of the CO₂ capture process. Our research work focuses on studying the relationships among the significant parameters influencing CO₂ production because an enhanced understanding of the intricate relationships among the parameters involved in the process is critical for improving efficiency of the CO₂ capture process. This paper presents a statistical study that explores the relationships among parameters involved in the amine-based post combustion CO₂ capture process at the International Centre for CO₂ Capture (ITC) located in Regina, Saskatchewan of Canada. A multiple regression technique has been applied for analysis of data collected at the CO₂ capture pilot plant at ITC. The parameters have been carefully selected to avoid issues of multicollinearity, and four mathematical models among the key parameters identified have been developed. The models have been tested, and accuracy of the models is found to be satisfactory. The models developed in this study describe part of the CO₂ capture process and can help to predict performance of the CO₂ capture process at ITC under different conditions. Some results from a preliminary validation process will also be presented.     

Compatible Blends of Zein and Polyvinylpyrrolidone

Blends of zein and polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) were compared based on their tensile properties, thermal properties and morphology. Zein was blended with polyvinylpyrrolidone of varying molecular weights (10, 55, and 1,300 kDa) and films were cast from ethanol solutions. Films cast using the higher molecular weight polymers showed an improvement in tensile strength, up to a 24% increase, compared to control. Differential scanning calorimetry data for the blends showed single T_m and T_g values of an intermediate value between those of zein and PVP control samples. Field emission scanning electron microscopy images show no obvious inhomogeneities, and confocal fluorescence microscopy showed no decreased uniformity in the PVP/zein films compared to control. Electrospun fibers of the zein/PVP blends were also obtained. These findings suggest that zein and polyvinylpyrrolidone combine to form a compatible blend, the first such blend of zein with a synthetic polymer.     

Valuing lives equally in a benefit-coast analysis of safety projects: A method to reconcile theory and practice

A value of statistical life (VSL) is used in cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as a monetary measure of the benefits to people from small risk reductions that arise from safety projects. Despite its widespread use in a number of countries, the concept of a VSL remains controversial, not least because it implies acceptance of the underlying ethical assumptions of CBA together with the idea that ‘social welfare’ can be measured and aggregated in some manner. In addition, to comply with theory, variable VSLs for different groups within society would be advocated. However, without fail, empirically, it is the case that those countries that employ a willingness to pay based approach to cost-benefit analysis of a safety project appraisal tend to use a single value for that accident context that is independent of the per capita income level, or indeed other personal characteristics, of the sub-group in society to which the safety improvement will actually apply. This article presents a straightforward, but theoretically justified adaptation to the calculation of a VSL which allows empirical practice by policymakers i.e. the application of a “common” VSL for any particular hazard within a given society, to be compatible with a CBA decision making approach.     

Research priorities for managing the impacts and dependencies of business upon food,energy, water and the environment

Delivering access to sufficient food, energy and water resources to ensure human wellbeing is a major concern for governments worldwide. However, it is crucial to account for the ‘nexus’ of interactions between these natural resources and the consequent implications for human wellbeing. The private sector has a critical role in driving positive change towards more sustainable nexus management and could reap considerable benefits from collaboration with researchers to devise solutions to some of the foremost sustainability challenges of today. Yet opportunities are missed because the private sector is rarely involved in the formulation of deliverable research priorities. We convened senior research scientists and influential business leaders to collaboratively identify the top forty questions that, if answered, would best help companies understand and manage their food-energy-water-environment nexus dependencies and impacts. Codification of the top order nexus themes highlighted research priorities around development of pragmatic yet credible tools that allow businesses to incorporate nexus interactions into their decision-making; demonstration of the business case for more sustainable nexus management; identification of the most effective levers for behaviour change; and understanding incentives or circumstances that allow individuals and businesses to take a leadership stance. Greater investment in the complex but productive relations between the private sector and research community will create deeper and more meaningful collaboration and cooperation.     

Measuring the effectiveness of landscape approaches to conservation and development

Landscape approaches attempt to achieve balance amongst multiple goals over long time periods and to adapt to changing conditions. We review project reports and the literature on integrated landscape approaches, and found a lack of documented studies of their long-term effectiveness. The combination of multiple and potentially changing goals presents problems for the conventional measures of impact. We propose more critical use of theories of change and measures of process and progress to complement the conventional impact assessments. Theories of change make the links between project deliverables, outputs, outcomes, and impacts explicit, and allow a full exploration of the landscape context. Landscape approaches are long-term engagements, but short-term process metrics are needed to confirm that progress is being made in negotiation of goals, meaningful stakeholder engagement, existence of connections to policy processes, and effectiveness of governance. Long-term impact metrics are needed to assess progress on achieving landscapes that deliver multiple societal benefits, including conservation, production, and livelihood benefits. Generic criteria for process are proposed, but impact metrics will be highly situation specific and must be derived from an effective process and a credible theory of change.     

When experts disagree: the need to rethink indicator selection for assessing sustainability of agriculture

Sustainability indicators are well recognized for their potential to assess and monitor sustainable development of agricultural systems. A large number of indicators are proposed in various sustainability assessment frameworks, which raises concerns regarding the validity of approaches, usefulness and trust in such frameworks. Selecting indicators requires transparent and well-defined procedures to ensure the relevance and validity of sustainability assessments. The objective of this study, therefore, was to determine whether experts agree on which criteria are most important in the selection of indicators and indicator sets for robust sustainability assessments. Two groups of experts (Temperate Agriculture Research Network and New Zealand Sustainability Dashboard) were asked to rank the relative importance of eleven criteria for selecting individual indicators and of nine criteria for balancing a collective set of indicators. Both ranking surveys reveal a startling lack of consensus amongst experts about how best to measure agricultural sustainability and call for a radical rethink about how complementary approaches to sustainability assessments are used alongside each other to ensure a plurality of views and maximum collaboration and trust amongst stakeholders. To improve the transparency, relevance and robustness of sustainable assessments, the context of the sustainability assessment, including prioritizations of selection criteria for indicator selection, must be accounted for. A collaborative design process will enhance the acceptance of diverse values and prioritizations embedded in sustainability assessments. The process by which indicators and sustainability frameworks are established may be a much more important determinant of their success than the final shape of the assessment tools. Such an emphasis on process would make assessments more transparent, transformative and enduring.     

The social and scientific values that shape national climate scenarios: a comparison of the Netherlands,Switzerland and the UK

This paper seeks to understand why climate information is produced differently from country to country. To do this, we critically examined and compared the social and scientific values that shaped the production of three national climate scenarios in the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK. A comparative analysis of documentary materials and expert interviews linked to the climate scenarios was performed. Our findings reveal a new typology of use-inspired research in climate science for decision-making: (i) innovators, where the advancement of science is the main objective; (ii) consolidators, where knowledge exchanges and networks are prioritised; and (iii) collaborators, where the needs of users are put first and foremost. These different values over what constitutes ‘good’ science for decision-making are mirrored in the way users were involved in the production process: (i) elicitation, where scientists have privileged decision-making power; (ii) representation, where multiple organisations mediate on behalf of individual users; and (iii) participation, where a multitude of users interact with scientists in an equal partnership. These differences help explain why climate knowledge gains its credibility and legitimacy differently even when the information itself might not be judged as salient and usable. If the push to deliberately co-produce climate knowledge is not sensitive to the national civic epistemology at play in each country, scientist–user interactions may fail to deliver more ‘usable’ climate information.