35.5 References
of participants in this drama represent the "invisible hands" propelling the transformation of environmental policy in this country (Howes et aI.,
1998).
Scientists and disciplinary communities are important players in this evolutionary process. This
chapter describes the challenges facing ecological
assessments and the implementation of ecosystem
management. These challenges confront scientists,
researchers, and the professional communities to
which they belong. The willingness and ability of
ecological scientists to involve themselves in
ecosystem management issues, and sustainability
in general, have been a matter of debate in recent
years (e.g., see Ecological Applications, November
1993; Cooperrider, 1996). As Holling (1993) describes the issue, it is one of choosing between "traditional" science, which is disciplinary, reductionist, and detached from policy, and science that is
integrative and engaged in addressing the critical,
though often messy, issues confronting society.
Funtowicz and Ravetz (1993, 1994) characterize
this "post-normal" science as being issue-driven,
comfortable with ethical and epistemological uncertainty, useful in circumstances of conflict among
stakeholders, and supportive of participatory
democracy by making the scientific enterprise accountable to an "extended peer community." For
Lubchenco (1998), the choice to actively facilitate
and support the pursuit of such inquiry, in concert
with traditional basic science, involves nothing less
than formulating a new "social contract" between
science and society.
Policy making involves the struggle over ideas
and perceptions. In this struggle, science can provide new ideas, arguments, and metaphors for understanding issues and relationships among seemingly unconnected problems. However, scientific
information is only one among many inputs into
the decision-making process. It is essential to understand that decisions about the environment and
natural resources finally are choices among competing values and the degree to which society desires these values. In other words, these decisions
are political. Scientists alone cannot and should not
decide which policy and management decisions are
appropriate.
Instead, scientists can define, clearly communicate, and interpret the implications of different policy options and management scenarios. Their participation should include elaborating the trade-offs
entailed in policy and management choices, the degree of uncertainty involved in these trade-offs, and
an assessment of postimplementation performance.
In providing these services, researchers of all dis523
ciplines not only will contribute in resolving difficult conservation issues, but also assist in defining
decision support tools, disseminating the prototypes of such tools, and furthering the evolution of
ecosystem management. Fulfilling these needs is
both the role and the challenge of ecological assessments. Ultimately, the success of ecological assessments will be measured in terms of their ability to collect and provide useful information,
develop a slate of viable policy and management
options based on this information, and communicate these options to decision makers in a clear and
meaningful fashion. If the scientific community is
able to accept and address this challenge, we all
benefit; if not, decisions will still be made, business will go on as usual, and the cry for more and
better science to aid decision making will remain
unanswered.
35.5 References
Bada, C. 1995. Federal agency management plans are
"ongoing" actions under Endangered Species Act's
section 7: Pacific Rivers Council vs. Thomas and
Northwest Forest Resources Council. Natur. Resour.
J. 35:981-996.
Beanlands, G. 1995. Cumulative effects and sustainable
development. In: Munasinghe, M.; Shearer, W., eds.
Defining and measuring sustainability: the biogeophysical foundations. Washington, DC: The World
Bank: 77-87.
Blahna, D. J.; Yonts-Shepard, S. 1989. Public involvement in resource planning: toward bridging the gap
between policy and implementation. Soc. Natur. Resour. 2:209-227.
Blood, E. 1994. Prospects for the development of integrated regional models. In: Groffman, P. M.; Likens,
G. E., eds. Integrated regional models: interactions
between humans and their environment. New York:
Chapman and Hall.
Botkin, D. B.; Megonigal, P.; Sampson, R. N. 1997. Considerations of the state of ecosystem science and the
art of ecosystem management. Santa Barbara, CA:
Center for the Study of the Environment.
Bourgeron, P. S.; Humphries, H. C.; DeVelice, R. L.;
Jensen, M. E. 1994. Ecological theory in relation to
landscape evaluation and ecosystem characterization.
In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., tech. eds. Volume
II: ecosystem management: principles and applications. PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept.
Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 58-72.
Brown, R. S.; Marshall, K. 1996. Ecosystem management in state governments. Eco!. Appl. 6(3):721-723.
Brunner, R. D.; Clark, T. W. 1997. A practice-based approach to ecosystem management. Conserv. Biol.
11(1):48-58.
of participants in this drama represent the "invisible hands" propelling the transformation of environmental policy in this country (Howes et aI.,
1998).
Scientists and disciplinary communities are important players in this evolutionary process. This
chapter describes the challenges facing ecological
assessments and the implementation of ecosystem
management. These challenges confront scientists,
researchers, and the professional communities to
which they belong. The willingness and ability of
ecological scientists to involve themselves in
ecosystem management issues, and sustainability
in general, have been a matter of debate in recent
years (e.g., see Ecological Applications, November
1993; Cooperrider, 1996). As Holling (1993) describes the issue, it is one of choosing between "traditional" science, which is disciplinary, reductionist, and detached from policy, and science that is
integrative and engaged in addressing the critical,
though often messy, issues confronting society.
Funtowicz and Ravetz (1993, 1994) characterize
this "post-normal" science as being issue-driven,
comfortable with ethical and epistemological uncertainty, useful in circumstances of conflict among
stakeholders, and supportive of participatory
democracy by making the scientific enterprise accountable to an "extended peer community." For
Lubchenco (1998), the choice to actively facilitate
and support the pursuit of such inquiry, in concert
with traditional basic science, involves nothing less
than formulating a new "social contract" between
science and society.
Policy making involves the struggle over ideas
and perceptions. In this struggle, science can provide new ideas, arguments, and metaphors for understanding issues and relationships among seemingly unconnected problems. However, scientific
information is only one among many inputs into
the decision-making process. It is essential to understand that decisions about the environment and
natural resources finally are choices among competing values and the degree to which society desires these values. In other words, these decisions
are political. Scientists alone cannot and should not
decide which policy and management decisions are
appropriate.
Instead, scientists can define, clearly communicate, and interpret the implications of different policy options and management scenarios. Their participation should include elaborating the trade-offs
entailed in policy and management choices, the degree of uncertainty involved in these trade-offs, and
an assessment of postimplementation performance.
In providing these services, researchers of all dis523
ciplines not only will contribute in resolving difficult conservation issues, but also assist in defining
decision support tools, disseminating the prototypes of such tools, and furthering the evolution of
ecosystem management. Fulfilling these needs is
both the role and the challenge of ecological assessments. Ultimately, the success of ecological assessments will be measured in terms of their ability to collect and provide useful information,
develop a slate of viable policy and management
options based on this information, and communicate these options to decision makers in a clear and
meaningful fashion. If the scientific community is
able to accept and address this challenge, we all
benefit; if not, decisions will still be made, business will go on as usual, and the cry for more and
better science to aid decision making will remain
unanswered.
35.5 References
Bada, C. 1995. Federal agency management plans are
"ongoing" actions under Endangered Species Act's
section 7: Pacific Rivers Council vs. Thomas and
Northwest Forest Resources Council. Natur. Resour.
J. 35:981-996.
Beanlands, G. 1995. Cumulative effects and sustainable
development. In: Munasinghe, M.; Shearer, W., eds.
Defining and measuring sustainability: the biogeophysical foundations. Washington, DC: The World
Bank: 77-87.
Blahna, D. J.; Yonts-Shepard, S. 1989. Public involvement in resource planning: toward bridging the gap
between policy and implementation. Soc. Natur. Resour. 2:209-227.
Blood, E. 1994. Prospects for the development of integrated regional models. In: Groffman, P. M.; Likens,
G. E., eds. Integrated regional models: interactions
between humans and their environment. New York:
Chapman and Hall.
Botkin, D. B.; Megonigal, P.; Sampson, R. N. 1997. Considerations of the state of ecosystem science and the
art of ecosystem management. Santa Barbara, CA:
Center for the Study of the Environment.
Bourgeron, P. S.; Humphries, H. C.; DeVelice, R. L.;
Jensen, M. E. 1994. Ecological theory in relation to
landscape evaluation and ecosystem characterization.
In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., tech. eds. Volume
II: ecosystem management: principles and applications. PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept.
Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 58-72.
Brown, R. S.; Marshall, K. 1996. Ecosystem management in state governments. Eco!. Appl. 6(3):721-723.
Brunner, R. D.; Clark, T. W. 1997. A practice-based approach to ecosystem management. Conserv. Biol.
11(1):48-58.