Adversarial science: Conflict resolution and scientific review in British Columbia's central coast

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 24, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 902-916

  Clapp, Roger Alex ^a   Mortenson, Cecelia ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Boundary object; Boundary organization; Conflict resolution; Ecosystem management; Environmental planning; Open source; Science review; Temperate rainforests

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; CONFLICT MANAGEMENT; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DISPUTE RESOLUTION; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH; LAND USE PLANNING; RAINFOREST; SUSTAINABILITY; TEMPERATE FOREST;

BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA;

EID: 79961162361     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941921003801505     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allen, R. 2005. Coast Information Team: Review report. http://www.citbc.org/c-citreviewjan05.pdf (accessed 5 March 2010).
2. Barnes, T. 2005. Lost in translation: Towards economic geography as boundary object. Presentation to the annual meetings of the Association of American Geographers, Denver, CO, April 5-9.
3. Bocking, S. 2005. Protecting the rain barrel: Discourses and the roles of science in a suburban environmental controversy. Environ. Polit. 14(5):611-628.
4. Central Coast Land and Resource Management Planning. 2004. Report of consensus recommendations to the provincial government and First Nations. http://ilmbwww.gov.bc.ca/slrp/lrmp/nanaimo/cencoast/docs/table_rec/final_report_may20_04.pdf (accessed 5 March 2010).
5. Clapp, A. 2004. Wilderness ethics and political ecology: Remapping the Great Bear Rainforest. Polit. Geogr. 23:839-862.
6. Clark, R., and E. Meidinger. 1998. Integrating science and policy in natural resource management. Seattle, WA: United States Forest Service.
7. Cutcliffe, S. 2000. Ideas, machines, and values. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
8. da Fonseca, G. 2003. Conservation science and NGOs. Conserv. Biol. 17(2):345-347.
9. Day, C., and T. Gunton. 2003. Toward environmental sustainability in British Columbia: The role of collaborative planning. Environments 31(2):21-39.
10. Dietz, T., and P. Stern. 1998. Science, values, and biodiversity. BioScience 48(6):441-444.
11. Evans, P. 1996. Development strategies across the public-private divide. World Dev. 24(6):1033-1037.
12. Forest Ecosystem Assessment Management Team. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: An ecological, economic and social assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
13. Forsyth, T. 2003. Critical political ecology. New York: Routledge.
14. Frickel, S. 2004. Scientist activism in environmental justice conflicts. Society Nat. Resources 17:369-376.
15. Hadley, M. 2004. Coast information team experience: Recommendations on processes and structures for success. Cortex Consultants. http://www.citbc.org/c-proc-recommend-31Dec04.pdf (accessed 5 March 2010).
16. Hamilton, G. 2008. Love-in ends war in Great Bear Rainforest. Vancouver (British Columbia, Canada) Sun 8 February:F1.
17. Harvey, F., and N. Chrisman. 1998. Boundary objects and the social construction of GIS technology. Environ. Plan. A 30:1683-1694.
18. Hayter, R. 2003. The war in the woods: Post-fordist restructuring, globalization and the contested remapping of British Columbia's forest economy. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geographers 93(3):706-729.
19. Hoberg, G. 2002. Finding the right balance: Designing policies for sustainable forestry in the new era. Jubilee Lecture Series. Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, Canada. September 12.
20. Hutchings, J., C. Walters, and R. Haedrich. 1997. Is scientific inquiry incompatible with government information control? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54:1198-1210.
21. Irwin, A. 1995. Citizen science. New York: Routledge.
22. Jackson, T., and J. Curry. 2004. Peace in the woods: Sustainability and the democratization of land use planning and resource management on Crown lands in British Columbia. Int. Plan. Stud. 9(1):27-42.
23. Jasanoff, S. 1997. NGOs and the environment: From knowledge to action. Third World Q. 18:579-594.
24. Jasanoff, S. 2001. Judicial fictions: The Supreme Court's quest for good science. Society May/June:27-36.
25. Jasanoff, S. 2003. (No?) accounting for expertise. Science Public Policy 30(3):157-162.
26. Jeo, R., M. Sanjayan, and D. Sizemore. 1999. A conservation area design for the central coast region of British Columbia, Canada. Salt Lake City, UT: Round River Conservation.
27. Krajnc, A. 2002. Conservation biology, civil science, and the preservation of B.C. forests. J. Can. Stud. 37(3):219-238.
28. Krimsky, S. 2003. Science in the private interest. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
29. Kyem, P. 2004. Of intractable conflicts and participatory GIS applications. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 94(1):37-57.
30. Latour, B. 2004. Politics of nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. McAllister, I., K. McAllister, and C. Young. 1997. The great bear rainforest. Madeira Park, BC, Canada: Harbour.
32. Meffe, G., P. Boersma, D. Murphy, B. Noon, R. Pulliam, M. Soulé, and D. Waller. 1998. Independent scientific review in natural resource management. Conserv. Biol. 12(2):268-270.
33. Meine, C. 1996. Conservation values, conservation science: A healthy tension. Conserv. Biol. 10(3):916-917.
34. Mills, T., and R. Clark. 2001. Roles of research scientists in natural resource decision-making. For. Ecol. Manage. 153(1):189-198.
35. Moore, K. 1991. An inventory of watersheds in the coastal temperate forests of British Columbia. Vancouver, Canada: Earthlife Canada.
36. Mortenson, C. 2005. Adversaries and science. MA thesis, Department of Geography, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
37. Poore, B. 2003. The open black box: The role of the end-user in GIS integration. Can. Geogr. 47(1):62-74.
38. Pouyat, R. 1999. Science and environmental policy-Making them compatible. BioScience 49(4):281-286.
39. Price, K., A. Roburn, and A. MacKinnon. 2009. Ecosystem-based management in the great bear rainforest. For. Ecol. Manage. 258:495-503.
40. Satterfield, T. 2002. Anatomy of a conflict: Identity, knowledge, and emotion in old-growth forests. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
41. Schneider, S. 2001. A constructive deconstruction of deconstructionists. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 91(2):338-344.
42. Sismondi, S. 2004. An introduction to science and technology studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
43. Star, S., and J. Griesemer. 1989. Institutional ecology, 'translations' and boundary objects. Social Stud. Sci. 19:387-420.
44. Tauber, A. 1999. Is biology a political science? BioScience 49(6):479-486.
45. White, D., E. Corley, and M. White. 2008. Water managers' perceptions of the science-policy interface in Phoenix, Arizona: Implications for an emerging boundary organization. Society Nat. Resources 21:230-243.
46. Wilson, J. 1998. Talk and log. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
47. Yaffee, S. 1994. The wisdom of the spotted owl. Washington, DC: Island Press.
48. Yearley, S. 1989. Bog standards: Science and conservation at a public inquiry. Social Stud. Sci. 19:421-438.