Collaborative planning rests upon a foundation of scientific information developed
by scientists and other knowledgeable people in an open, public process. This
‘assessment’ process ensures that current scientific thinking is a part of the planning
process as well as a sound foundation of credible information. Issues in planning
that have a significant scientific content include: whether the temporal and spatial
scales being considered are appropriate for the questions being asked, whether all
relevant information is being considered, whether that information is interpreted in
a manner consistent with current scientific understanding, whether the level of risk
to species and ecosystems associated with the alternatives is acknowledged, and
whether the uncertainty of our knowledge is recognized.
If collaborative planning is the very foundation of decision making, then
appropriate and effective use of scientific data is the foundation of collaborative modeling and assessment.
Toolkits must be formulated to integrate scientific discovery and data into
the decision-making process. This integration requires that the toolkit facilitate better use of existing or new scientific information in resource management. An example of how a toolkit could facilitate better use of existing
technology involves improved use of modeling results in estimating likely
outcomes from implementation of management alternatives. A second
example involves integration of new scientific understanding from different disciplines, such as economics, ecology, biology, and hydrology. Experience of the authors in the development of the Department of Defense
(DoD) Groundwater Modeling System (GMS) (Holland et al. 2001) has
shown that, when a toolkit (in the case of the GMS, for subsurface modeling) with standard protocols is employed by the research community, new
scientific discoveries (e.g., new subsurface remediation processes) are codified and implemented in decision making much more quickly than would
happen without such a toolkit. It is likely that the economies experienced
in the development of the GMS would be repeated with the development
of a more generalized ecological modeling toolkit.
12.2.5 Knowledge Repositories and Management
The envisioned toolkits must provide for repositories and catalog services
that document lessons learned, components of the decision process, existing technical capabilities (such as software and subject-matter experts), and
the location of relevant data. Up-to-date capabilities of these types would
improve decision makers’ and stakeholders’ abilities to be “smart buyers”
in environmental management and would assist modelers in understanding
model applicabilities and limitations. The establishment and maintenance
of these services would require a number of technological advances. Open
“wizards” would have to be developed that facilitate placing data within
Web-accessible repositories. The repositories themselves would have to be
defined with interoperability protocols, such as those described above, so
12. Role of Computational Toolkits in Environmental Management
229
by scientists and other knowledgeable people in an open, public process. This
‘assessment’ process ensures that current scientific thinking is a part of the planning
process as well as a sound foundation of credible information. Issues in planning
that have a significant scientific content include: whether the temporal and spatial
scales being considered are appropriate for the questions being asked, whether all
relevant information is being considered, whether that information is interpreted in
a manner consistent with current scientific understanding, whether the level of risk
to species and ecosystems associated with the alternatives is acknowledged, and
whether the uncertainty of our knowledge is recognized.
If collaborative planning is the very foundation of decision making, then
appropriate and effective use of scientific data is the foundation of collaborative modeling and assessment.
Toolkits must be formulated to integrate scientific discovery and data into
the decision-making process. This integration requires that the toolkit facilitate better use of existing or new scientific information in resource management. An example of how a toolkit could facilitate better use of existing
technology involves improved use of modeling results in estimating likely
outcomes from implementation of management alternatives. A second
example involves integration of new scientific understanding from different disciplines, such as economics, ecology, biology, and hydrology. Experience of the authors in the development of the Department of Defense
(DoD) Groundwater Modeling System (GMS) (Holland et al. 2001) has
shown that, when a toolkit (in the case of the GMS, for subsurface modeling) with standard protocols is employed by the research community, new
scientific discoveries (e.g., new subsurface remediation processes) are codified and implemented in decision making much more quickly than would
happen without such a toolkit. It is likely that the economies experienced
in the development of the GMS would be repeated with the development
of a more generalized ecological modeling toolkit.
12.2.5 Knowledge Repositories and Management
The envisioned toolkits must provide for repositories and catalog services
that document lessons learned, components of the decision process, existing technical capabilities (such as software and subject-matter experts), and
the location of relevant data. Up-to-date capabilities of these types would
improve decision makers’ and stakeholders’ abilities to be “smart buyers”
in environmental management and would assist modelers in understanding
model applicabilities and limitations. The establishment and maintenance
of these services would require a number of technological advances. Open
“wizards” would have to be developed that facilitate placing data within
Web-accessible repositories. The repositories themselves would have to be
defined with interoperability protocols, such as those described above, so
12. Role of Computational Toolkits in Environmental Management
229