a number of reasons. For example, at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA), administrators in Washington, District of Columbia, are
miles away from the regional offices that collect data and implement management decisions. The individual regions are fairly autonomous, and
solutions to problems used in one region may not adequately diffuse to the
other regions. The research done by USEPA through the Office of Research
and Development (ORD) provides a firm foundation for regulatory
decisions made by the agency, but the time frame for the development
of information through the research process sometimes lags behind the
needs of the regional programs to make decisions regarding resource
management.
The technical expertise, background, and jargon at each decision level
may be so different that communication may not be optimal. Even though
the same language is used, the areas of expertise may not overlap enough
to provide for the best understanding of the problems and issues. This leads
to the requirement that some degree of communication and participation
is required at all levels of the information-flow hierarchy (Walters 1997;
Rogers 1998).
Data must be acquired that fit the modeling process. Models must be
developed that not only use appropriate data but also are designed to
answer the appropriate questions. Options for the decision-making process
should be included in the model. Ecological models often do not have
appropriate links to the decision-making process to develop scenarios that
aid in making resource-based decisions. Given that decision makers often
do not know the limitations of models and data, the quality and quantity
of data and information must be well documented for environmental
resource managers to make informed decisions.
9.2 Data and Modeling Issues
One example of a successful environmental management decision-making
process that included modeling was developed by a multiagency Regional
Ecosystem Office (REO). The REO assembled a six-sequence procedure
on how to address environmental conditions at the watershed scale (REO
1995). The REO analysis procedure is similar to USEPA’s Watershed
Assessment approach (USEPA 1996). The REO analysis procedures
include:
• Characterization of the watershed area to be studied
• Definition of key questions
• Data collection on existing environmental conditions in the watershed
relative to the key question
• Data analyses and making information available on baseline conditions
9. Data and Information Issues: Communication Is the Key
169
Agency (USEPA), administrators in Washington, District of Columbia, are
miles away from the regional offices that collect data and implement management decisions. The individual regions are fairly autonomous, and
solutions to problems used in one region may not adequately diffuse to the
other regions. The research done by USEPA through the Office of Research
and Development (ORD) provides a firm foundation for regulatory
decisions made by the agency, but the time frame for the development
of information through the research process sometimes lags behind the
needs of the regional programs to make decisions regarding resource
management.
The technical expertise, background, and jargon at each decision level
may be so different that communication may not be optimal. Even though
the same language is used, the areas of expertise may not overlap enough
to provide for the best understanding of the problems and issues. This leads
to the requirement that some degree of communication and participation
is required at all levels of the information-flow hierarchy (Walters 1997;
Rogers 1998).
Data must be acquired that fit the modeling process. Models must be
developed that not only use appropriate data but also are designed to
answer the appropriate questions. Options for the decision-making process
should be included in the model. Ecological models often do not have
appropriate links to the decision-making process to develop scenarios that
aid in making resource-based decisions. Given that decision makers often
do not know the limitations of models and data, the quality and quantity
of data and information must be well documented for environmental
resource managers to make informed decisions.
9.2 Data and Modeling Issues
One example of a successful environmental management decision-making
process that included modeling was developed by a multiagency Regional
Ecosystem Office (REO). The REO assembled a six-sequence procedure
on how to address environmental conditions at the watershed scale (REO
1995). The REO analysis procedure is similar to USEPA’s Watershed
Assessment approach (USEPA 1996). The REO analysis procedures
include:
• Characterization of the watershed area to be studied
• Definition of key questions
• Data collection on existing environmental conditions in the watershed
relative to the key question
• Data analyses and making information available on baseline conditions
9. Data and Information Issues: Communication Is the Key
169