180
1. Organisational structures (institutional design) of the risk assessment activities
and the generation, selection and implementation of management options
2. The management of scientifi c uncertainties and stakeholder disagreements
Under organisational structures , we are concerned with the institutional interfaces between risk assessment and management activities. We therefore analyse the
regional (Baltic Sea) basis of science-policy cooperation in the fi ve cases asking the
following questions: who is performing the assessment activities and how are
assessment activities organised and carried out in committees, etc.?
With regard to the second point, the management of scientifi c uncertainties and
stakeholder disagreements , we investigate the science-policy interfaces with respect
to how actual procedures of assessment activities are linked to the processes of giving advice and how management and decision-making bodies deal with different
states of (often incomplete) knowledge and information from various sources and
sectors. We also examine how stakeholder participation , knowledge inclusion and
deliberation procedures are implemented.
By using this analytical framework we aim to achieve a better understanding of
how governance arrangements and processes linked to various environmental problems and risks can deal effectively with the challenges of incomplete knowledge,
uncertainty and stakeholder disagreements. We fi nally give a number of recommendations about how to possibly redesign institutional and procedural structures of
science-policy interactions more effectively in the fi ve cases of environmental governance as this will be of value also to other complex cases of environmental
governance.
Methodologically, the analyses informing this chapter are based on empirical
research conducted for the fi ve case studies of the RISKGOV project,
1 which are
described in the fi rst part of this volume (Hassler 2016 ; Karlsson and Gilek 2016 ;
Karlsson et al. 2016 ; Sellke et al. 2016 ; Smolarz et al. 2016 ). The case studies analysed the fi ve marine environmental governance issues mentioned above with
respect to three governance dimensions (see Gilek et al. 2016 ), one of which was
‘ assessment -management processes and interactions’ which informed the metaanalysis presented in this chapter. For comparative purposes, the case studies used a
common analytical framework and similar methodological research design (for a
description, see Gilek et al. 2016 ; cf. Gilek et al. 2011 ). The results of the case studies are derived from three main data sources: document studies, semi-structured
qualitative interviews (ca. 15 per case) as well as three joint thematic round-table
discussions. This extensive empirical material, in combination with other research
on science-policy interactions in different fi elds of environmental governance (see,
e.g., Linke et al. 2014 ; Gilek et al. 2015 ), forms the background for the analyses
presented in this chapter and allows us to draw conclusions and give recommendations
for improving science-policy interactions for environmental governance of the
Baltic Sea.
1 Environmental Risk Governance of the Baltic Sea (2009–2015). See www.sh.se/riskgov
S. Linke et al.
1. Organisational structures (institutional design) of the risk assessment activities
and the generation, selection and implementation of management options
2. The management of scientifi c uncertainties and stakeholder disagreements
Under organisational structures , we are concerned with the institutional interfaces between risk assessment and management activities. We therefore analyse the
regional (Baltic Sea) basis of science-policy cooperation in the fi ve cases asking the
following questions: who is performing the assessment activities and how are
assessment activities organised and carried out in committees, etc.?
With regard to the second point, the management of scientifi c uncertainties and
stakeholder disagreements , we investigate the science-policy interfaces with respect
to how actual procedures of assessment activities are linked to the processes of giving advice and how management and decision-making bodies deal with different
states of (often incomplete) knowledge and information from various sources and
sectors. We also examine how stakeholder participation , knowledge inclusion and
deliberation procedures are implemented.
By using this analytical framework we aim to achieve a better understanding of
how governance arrangements and processes linked to various environmental problems and risks can deal effectively with the challenges of incomplete knowledge,
uncertainty and stakeholder disagreements. We fi nally give a number of recommendations about how to possibly redesign institutional and procedural structures of
science-policy interactions more effectively in the fi ve cases of environmental governance as this will be of value also to other complex cases of environmental
governance.
Methodologically, the analyses informing this chapter are based on empirical
research conducted for the fi ve case studies of the RISKGOV project,
1 which are
described in the fi rst part of this volume (Hassler 2016 ; Karlsson and Gilek 2016 ;
Karlsson et al. 2016 ; Sellke et al. 2016 ; Smolarz et al. 2016 ). The case studies analysed the fi ve marine environmental governance issues mentioned above with
respect to three governance dimensions (see Gilek et al. 2016 ), one of which was
‘ assessment -management processes and interactions’ which informed the metaanalysis presented in this chapter. For comparative purposes, the case studies used a
common analytical framework and similar methodological research design (for a
description, see Gilek et al. 2016 ; cf. Gilek et al. 2011 ). The results of the case studies are derived from three main data sources: document studies, semi-structured
qualitative interviews (ca. 15 per case) as well as three joint thematic round-table
discussions. This extensive empirical material, in combination with other research
on science-policy interactions in different fi elds of environmental governance (see,
e.g., Linke et al. 2014 ; Gilek et al. 2015 ), forms the background for the analyses
presented in this chapter and allows us to draw conclusions and give recommendations
for improving science-policy interactions for environmental governance of the
Baltic Sea.
1 Environmental Risk Governance of the Baltic Sea (2009–2015). See www.sh.se/riskgov
S. Linke et al.