66
Adaptive Ecosystem Assessment and Management: The Path of Last Resort?
that separate people to learn new ways to work together. Truth is an approximation that is never at
rest. Scientists must acknowledge a more humble
role, leading from behind. They must stop acting like
high priests; they are contributors to, rather than sole
authors of, greater social and ecological understanding. The challenge is to reinvigorate and reempower societies by offering science as a culture for
change, not a method for decision paralysis.
• We know more than we think, but less than
we understand. The pat answer to most difficult
resource questions is that we need more study.
Rarely do we take full advantage of the breadth and
depth of existing information to get a composite
picture or integrated understanding of what we
know or think we know. Integrative science brings
together the knowledge of various disciplines and,
with deference to local conditions, begins to explore the gaps between disciplines and lines of inquiry. Invariably, learning takes place and tacit understandings are made explicit.
• Adaptive ecosystem assessment is an inductive
and integrative approach to science. There are
two approaches to science, the science of parts and
the science of the integration of parts. Dealing with
a complex real-world setting requires development
of scientific methods and tools that are well suited
for putting puzzle pieces together, discovering and
exploring gaps in understanding, and examining
ways to combine experience, data, and intuition to
develop a shared, but always incomplete, picture of
the problem situation.
• Adaptive ecosystem assessment strives for
creative synthesis and breakthrough thinking.
Much of resource management is reactive, anemic,
and uninspiring in nature. Management fails to concern itself with building adaptive capacity for creative futures that are uncertain. Adaptive ecosystem assessment encourages, facilitates, embraces
human ingenuity, anticipating bursts of human insight that transcend conventional thinking and open
new paths to action.
• "You can't get there from here." Institutions
become trapped in the ritualistic framing of new
ecological challenges in ways that work with less
and less success. The new class of ecological problems (discussed earlier) requires the development
of new methodological approaches that serve temporary platforms for managing the dynamics of science and democracy in deciding how to recouple
social--ecological systems. The design of scientific
inquiry must be more transdisciplinary, with the
goal of consilience in mind.
• Assessment and management are always aiming at a moving target. Adaptive ecological assessments presume that knowledge of the combined
social, economic, and ecological system that we are
faced with is always incomplete; the system itself
is constantly evolving, as is the imprint of management and the progressive expansion of the scale
of human influences on the planet. Hence the actions taken by management must be ones that are
renewed periodically by reassessment of the evershifting assumptions on which shared scientific understanding as well as the socially desired goals are
founded.
4.9 Personal Ethos
In human endeavors in which people are collectively engaged, participants develop relationships
and shared value systems. Such an observation
would traditionally have been viewed as belonging
in the realm of the history of science, largely irrelevant to the accumulation of scientific truths; however, AEAM recognizes that such relationships are
not mere by-products, but explicit components of
the learning process. Over the years those who have
labored diligently and distinguished themselves in
the field of AEAM have become a kind of family,
an "institute without walls"-the Ralf Yorque Society. "The name was born as a product of the
sometimes indelicate, perhaps naive, but always
joyful, creative spirit of the group" (Holling, 1978).
The collective code of norms has been partially articulated by Michael (1973, 1994):
1. Embracing error. Acknowledging specific uncertainties is the basis for building honesty and
integrity, the stuff on which learning systems
are based; it is also the operational precondition
for building capacity to adapt. Institutions have
a penchant for ignoring error and avoid dealing
with it at almost any cost. Without embracing
error, there is no learning, no change in ideas,
attitudes, or behavior.
2. Spanning boundaries. Attempting to expose and
address error even under the most constructive
conditions can be very threatening to people.
Thus it is necessary to develop trust and to reach
out to who and what we are not, a way of being requiring considerable skill and patience.
Boundary spanning is the negotiation of the no
man's land that separates peoples and institutions. Akin to coordination and conflict resolution, it is a process of searching for ways to create new meaning and offers the potential to
Adaptive Ecosystem Assessment and Management: The Path of Last Resort?
that separate people to learn new ways to work together. Truth is an approximation that is never at
rest. Scientists must acknowledge a more humble
role, leading from behind. They must stop acting like
high priests; they are contributors to, rather than sole
authors of, greater social and ecological understanding. The challenge is to reinvigorate and reempower societies by offering science as a culture for
change, not a method for decision paralysis.
• We know more than we think, but less than
we understand. The pat answer to most difficult
resource questions is that we need more study.
Rarely do we take full advantage of the breadth and
depth of existing information to get a composite
picture or integrated understanding of what we
know or think we know. Integrative science brings
together the knowledge of various disciplines and,
with deference to local conditions, begins to explore the gaps between disciplines and lines of inquiry. Invariably, learning takes place and tacit understandings are made explicit.
• Adaptive ecosystem assessment is an inductive
and integrative approach to science. There are
two approaches to science, the science of parts and
the science of the integration of parts. Dealing with
a complex real-world setting requires development
of scientific methods and tools that are well suited
for putting puzzle pieces together, discovering and
exploring gaps in understanding, and examining
ways to combine experience, data, and intuition to
develop a shared, but always incomplete, picture of
the problem situation.
• Adaptive ecosystem assessment strives for
creative synthesis and breakthrough thinking.
Much of resource management is reactive, anemic,
and uninspiring in nature. Management fails to concern itself with building adaptive capacity for creative futures that are uncertain. Adaptive ecosystem assessment encourages, facilitates, embraces
human ingenuity, anticipating bursts of human insight that transcend conventional thinking and open
new paths to action.
• "You can't get there from here." Institutions
become trapped in the ritualistic framing of new
ecological challenges in ways that work with less
and less success. The new class of ecological problems (discussed earlier) requires the development
of new methodological approaches that serve temporary platforms for managing the dynamics of science and democracy in deciding how to recouple
social--ecological systems. The design of scientific
inquiry must be more transdisciplinary, with the
goal of consilience in mind.
• Assessment and management are always aiming at a moving target. Adaptive ecological assessments presume that knowledge of the combined
social, economic, and ecological system that we are
faced with is always incomplete; the system itself
is constantly evolving, as is the imprint of management and the progressive expansion of the scale
of human influences on the planet. Hence the actions taken by management must be ones that are
renewed periodically by reassessment of the evershifting assumptions on which shared scientific understanding as well as the socially desired goals are
founded.
4.9 Personal Ethos
In human endeavors in which people are collectively engaged, participants develop relationships
and shared value systems. Such an observation
would traditionally have been viewed as belonging
in the realm of the history of science, largely irrelevant to the accumulation of scientific truths; however, AEAM recognizes that such relationships are
not mere by-products, but explicit components of
the learning process. Over the years those who have
labored diligently and distinguished themselves in
the field of AEAM have become a kind of family,
an "institute without walls"-the Ralf Yorque Society. "The name was born as a product of the
sometimes indelicate, perhaps naive, but always
joyful, creative spirit of the group" (Holling, 1978).
The collective code of norms has been partially articulated by Michael (1973, 1994):
1. Embracing error. Acknowledging specific uncertainties is the basis for building honesty and
integrity, the stuff on which learning systems
are based; it is also the operational precondition
for building capacity to adapt. Institutions have
a penchant for ignoring error and avoid dealing
with it at almost any cost. Without embracing
error, there is no learning, no change in ideas,
attitudes, or behavior.
2. Spanning boundaries. Attempting to expose and
address error even under the most constructive
conditions can be very threatening to people.
Thus it is necessary to develop trust and to reach
out to who and what we are not, a way of being requiring considerable skill and patience.
Boundary spanning is the negotiation of the no
man's land that separates peoples and institutions. Akin to coordination and conflict resolution, it is a process of searching for ways to create new meaning and offers the potential to