management collaboration when addressing complex ecosystem management issues.
Lesson 1. Effective ecosystem management on public lands requires
meaningful collaboration among managers/planners, scientists, and the interested public. Ecosystem management can be viewed as a science-based
approach to managing natural resources, thereby requiring interaction
between scientists and managers. However, ecosystem management is also
a process that requires making difficult decisions (i.e., making tradeoffs)
involving substantial public assets and should therefore involve the full
suite of interested and affected parties. To leave out the public interest
suggests (falsely) that mangers can isolate “scientifically correct” management solutions to these complex problems. It is important to remember that
knowledge can illuminate the potential consequences of alternative actions,
but only rarely does it lead to an unambiguous conclusion regarding the
correct decision (Cortner et al. 1999).
The SAA developed an effective approach to the three-way exchange of
information. Important elements included (1) developing early public ownership in the process through an initial public scoping of issues, (2) settling
on a fixed set of questions to guide the assessment as it addressed issues
(this defined a tacit contract with the interested public and was a foundation upon which additional trust could be built), and (3) providing complete
access to assessment deliberations through the use of a structured public
meeting format, again promoting trust in the process.
This lesson has implications for modeling efforts that are targeted toward
resource management. For the modeling results to be accepted, stakeholders need to be involved enough to build ownership of the process. The
modeling process should be designed to address a specific set of questions.
The model should be available, and its documentation should be clear,
so that the stakeholders accept the modeling process. Access to modeling
decisions (e.g., defining inputs and forecast assumptions) seems necessary
to build trust.
Lesson 2. Where jurisdictions overlap, meaningful coordination of
different government agencies can enhance, indeed may be requisite for, the
development of effective ecosystem management strategies. Because ecosystem management addresses the structure and function of very large,
complex systems, it clearly defines a situation where considerable returns
might accrue to collaboration. Clearly, coordination of actions across multiple landowners and other institutional entities can enhance the quality of
resource management and the quality of ecosystems. However, federal and
state agencies often can only address portions of these systems in pursuit
of their different missions. The SAA formed an effective multiagency
collaboration that was facilitated by a unique cooperative arrangement.
SAMAB links nine federal agencies in an institutional framework that
provides a mechanism whereby efforts within the Southern Appalachians
can be linked to or filtered by other relevant agencies but does not bind
members to specific levels or forms of support. This type of organization
4. Large-Scale Regional Assessments
81
Lesson 1. Effective ecosystem management on public lands requires
meaningful collaboration among managers/planners, scientists, and the interested public. Ecosystem management can be viewed as a science-based
approach to managing natural resources, thereby requiring interaction
between scientists and managers. However, ecosystem management is also
a process that requires making difficult decisions (i.e., making tradeoffs)
involving substantial public assets and should therefore involve the full
suite of interested and affected parties. To leave out the public interest
suggests (falsely) that mangers can isolate “scientifically correct” management solutions to these complex problems. It is important to remember that
knowledge can illuminate the potential consequences of alternative actions,
but only rarely does it lead to an unambiguous conclusion regarding the
correct decision (Cortner et al. 1999).
The SAA developed an effective approach to the three-way exchange of
information. Important elements included (1) developing early public ownership in the process through an initial public scoping of issues, (2) settling
on a fixed set of questions to guide the assessment as it addressed issues
(this defined a tacit contract with the interested public and was a foundation upon which additional trust could be built), and (3) providing complete
access to assessment deliberations through the use of a structured public
meeting format, again promoting trust in the process.
This lesson has implications for modeling efforts that are targeted toward
resource management. For the modeling results to be accepted, stakeholders need to be involved enough to build ownership of the process. The
modeling process should be designed to address a specific set of questions.
The model should be available, and its documentation should be clear,
so that the stakeholders accept the modeling process. Access to modeling
decisions (e.g., defining inputs and forecast assumptions) seems necessary
to build trust.
Lesson 2. Where jurisdictions overlap, meaningful coordination of
different government agencies can enhance, indeed may be requisite for, the
development of effective ecosystem management strategies. Because ecosystem management addresses the structure and function of very large,
complex systems, it clearly defines a situation where considerable returns
might accrue to collaboration. Clearly, coordination of actions across multiple landowners and other institutional entities can enhance the quality of
resource management and the quality of ecosystems. However, federal and
state agencies often can only address portions of these systems in pursuit
of their different missions. The SAA formed an effective multiagency
collaboration that was facilitated by a unique cooperative arrangement.
SAMAB links nine federal agencies in an institutional framework that
provides a mechanism whereby efforts within the Southern Appalachians
can be linked to or filtered by other relevant agencies but does not bind
members to specific levels or forms of support. This type of organization
4. Large-Scale Regional Assessments
81