A dialogue, not a diatribe Effective integration of science and policy through joint fact finding

Environment

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 20-34

  Karl, Herman R ^a,b,c   Susskind, Lawrence E ^b,d,e,f   Wallace, Katherine H ^d  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b MIT USGS Science Impact Collaborative (MUSIC)

^c Bureau of Land Management   (United States)

^d Architecture Machine Group

^e HARVARD LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

^f Consensus Building Institute ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34447535918     PISSN: 00139157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/ENVT.49.1.20-34     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. J. Machacek, "Boehlert Calls It a Career after 24 Years," Gannett News Service, 27 November 2006.
2. J. A. Layzer, The Environmental Case - Translating Values into Policy (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002), 209-37;
3. and J. A. Layzer and H. A. Karl, Deep Freeze - The Impact of Science on U.S. Climate Change Policy (U.S. Geological Survey Western Region Evening Public Lecture Series), mms://video.wr.usgs.gov/science/jun05A.wmv.
4. J. M. Wondolleck and S. L. Yaffee, Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resources Management (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000);
5. and D. Kemmis, "Science's Role in Natural Resource Decisions," Issues in Science and Technology Online, Summer 2002, http://www.issues.org/issues/18.4/p_kemmis.htm, 5.
6. V. Bush, Science: The Endless Frontier (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1945). accessible via http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/ nsf50/vbush1945.htm.
7. H. Zuckerman, "The Sociology of Science," in N.J. Smesler, ed., Handbook of Sociology (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988);
8. D. Sarewitz, R. A. Pielke Jr., and R. Byerly Jr., eds., Prediction: Science, Decision Making, and the Future of Nature (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000), 405;
9. and Layzer, note 2 above, pages 1-17.
10. Layzer, note 2 above, pages 1-17.
11. N. Lane, "Alarm Bells Should Help Us Refocus," Science 312, no. 5782 (30 June 2006): 1847.
12. H. Rittel and M. Webber, "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning," Policy Sciences 4 (1973): 155-69;
13. and A. Miller, Environmental Problem Solving: Psychosocial Barriers to Adaptive Change (New York: Springer, 1999).
14. M. McMahon, "'Publick Service' versus 'Mans Properties': Dock Creek and the Origins of Urban Technology in Eighteenth Century Philadelphia," in J. A. McGraw, ed., Early American Technology: Making and Doing Things from the Colonial Era to 1850 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1994), 114-47.
15. D. W. Cash et al., "Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development," Proceedings of the National Academies of Science 100, no. 14, (2003): 8086-91;
16. and G. McVicker, "Community-Based Stewardship: A Model for Applied Science," paper presented at the Aurora Partnership National Meeting, Charleston, SC, 14-15 November 2000, http://ocs.fortlewis.edu/Stewardship/Pubns/ Effectiveness%20%20science%20Gary%20McVicker.rtf.
17. National Research Council (NRC), Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), 144, 363.
18. R. W. Kates et al., "Sustainability Science," Science 292, no. 5517 (27 April 2001): 641-42 at 641.
19. J. R. Ehrman and B. L. Stinson, "Joint Fact-Finding and the Use of Technical Experts," in L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, and J. Thomas-Larmer, eds., The Consensus-Building Handbook (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999), 375-99.
20. L. E. Susskind and J. L. Cruikshank, Breaking Robert's Rules: The New Way to Run Your Meeting, Build Consensus, and Get Results (Oxford University Press, 2006), 222.
21. Ibid.
22. Susskind, McKearnan, and Thomas-Larmer, note 13 above, 1147.
23. L. E. Susskind and J. Cruikshank, Breaking the Impasse: Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public Disputes (New York: Basic Books, 1987).
24. Sarewitz, Pielke Jr., and Byerly Jr., note 5 above, page 9. See also S. Kamieniecki, "Navigating the Maze: Corporate Influence Over Federal Environmental Rulemaking," Environment 48, no. 5 (June 2006): 8-20.
25. C. J. Andrews, Humble Analysis: The Practice of Joint Fact-Finding (London and Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002), 200;
26. K. L. Jacobs, S. N. Luoma, and K. A. Taylor, "CALFED: An Experiment in Science and Decisionmaking," Environment 45, no. 1 (January/February 2003): 30-41;
27. S. McCreary et al., "Applying a Mediated Negotiation Framework to Integrated Coastal Zone Management," Coastal Management 29 (2001): 183-216;
28. and S. McCreary, J. Gamman, and B. Brooks, "Refining and Testing Joint Fact-Finding for Environmental Dispute Resolution: Ten Years of Success," Mediation Quarterly 18, no. 4 (2003).
29. Unless otherwise noted, this example of a joint fact-finding (JFF) process is derived from a case study presented in J. Peyser, "How Does Participation in the Framing, Review, and Incorporation of Scientific Information Affect Stakeholder Perspectives on Resource Management Decisions?" (master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 18 May 2005).
30. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Technical Memorandum 4.3: Draft Final Conceptual Model Report, Guadalupe River Watershed Mercury TMDL Project, Agreement No. A2643G (prepared by Tetra-Tech, Inc., 2004), 2-1.
31. This example of a JFF process is derived from S. McKearnan and P. Field, "The Northern Oxford County Coalition: Four Maine Towns Tackle a Public Health Mystery," in Susskind, McKearnan, and Thomas-Larmer, eds., note 13 above, chapter 9.
32. Unless otherwise noted, this example of a JFF process is derived from a case study presented by S. McCreary, J. Gamman, and B. Brooks, "Refining and Testing Joint Fact-Finding for Environmental Dispute Resolution: Ten Years of Success," Mediation Quarterly 18, no. 4 (2001).
33. B. Fuller, "Trading Zones: Cooperating for Water Resource and Ecosystem Management When Stakeholders Have Apparently Irreconcilable Differences (PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 2006).
34. Ibid.
35. L. E. Susskind, R. K. Jain, and A. O. Martyniuk, Better Environmental Policy Studies: How to Design and Conduct More Effective Analyses (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2001), 187.
36. U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), Strategic Plan FY 2003-2008, http://www.doi.gov/ppp/strat_plan_fy2003_2008.pdf.
37. The Interagency Cooperative Conservation Team (ICCT) was formerly the 4Cs Partnership and Collaboration team; see http://www.doi.gov/partnerships/ and http://www.doi.gov/initiatives/conservation.html.
38. It should be noted that these statements are based on internal reviews conducted by ICCT. Herman Karl, one of the authors of this article, is a member of ICCT and has been involved with these analyses and reviews for three years.
39. See MIT-USGS Science Impact Collaborative, http://scienceimpact.mit.edu.
40. DOI, note 27 above, pages 15 and 24.
41. DOI, note 27 above, pages 15 and 22.
42. T. M Koontz et al., Collaborative Environmental Management: What Roles for Government? (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2004), 210.
43. P. L. Scarlett, Joint Fact-Finding: The Interface of Science, Policy, and Communities, unpublished paper presented to USGS January 2004, accessible via http://scienceimpact.mit.edu. Scarlett is now DOI's deputy secretary.
44. T. A. Bryan, "Tragedy Averted: The Promise of Collaboration," Society and Natural Resources 17 (2004): 881-96.
45. DOI, note 27 above.
46. T. C. Beierle and J. Cayford, Evaluating Dispute Resolution as an Approach to Public Participation, Discussion Paper 01-40 (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2001); and Western Consensus Council and Consensus Building Institute, "Community-based Collaboration on Federal Lands and Resources: An Evaluation of Participant Satisfaction," draft of 24 September 2003, Consensus Building Institute, Cambridge, MA, September 2003.
47. See the White House Conference on Cooperative Conservation (http://cooperativeconservation.gov/conference805home.html) for examples of hundreds of citizen collaborative groups that have come together to practice collaborative governance and stewardship.
48. C. Ozawa, Recasting Science: Consensual Procedures in Public Policy (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1991);
49. R. Showstack, "Panelists Urge Scientists to Become Involved in Public Policy Issues," EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 78, no. 51, (1997): 598-99;
50. NRC, Science, Policy, and the Coast: Improving Decisionmaking (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1995), 85;
51. NRC, Future Roles and Opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001), 179;
52. and Susskind, Jain, and Martyniuk, note 26 above, page 187.