Science-policy in environmental and health risk assessment: if we cannot do without, can we do better?

How can empirical evidence of adverse effects from exposure to noxious agents, which is often incomplete and uncertain, be used most appropriately to protect human health? We examine several important questions on the best uses of empirical evidence in regulatory risk management decision-making raised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s science-policy concerning uncertainty and variability in human health risk assessment. In our view, the US EPA (and other agencies that have adopted similar views of risk management) can often improve decision-making by decreasing reliance on default values and assumptions, particularly when causation is uncertain. This can be achieved by more fully exploiting decision-theoretic methods and criteria that explicitly account for uncertain, possibly conflicting scientific beliefs and that can be fully studied by advocates and adversaries of a policy choice, in administrative decision-making involving risk assessment. The substitution of decision-theoretic frameworks for default assumption-driven policies also allows stakeholder attitudes toward risk to be incorporated into policy debates, so that the public and risk managers can more explicitly identify the roles of risk-aversion or other attitudes toward risk and uncertainty in policy recommendations. Decision theory provides a sound scientific way explicitly to account for new knowledge and its effects on eventual policy choices. Although these improvements can complicate regulatory analyses, simplifying default assumptions can create substantial costs to society and can prematurely cut off consideration of new scientific insights (e.g., possible beneficial health effects from exposure to sufficiently low 'hormetic' doses of some agents). In many cases, the administrative burden of applying decision-analytic methods is likely to be more than offset by improved effectiveness of regulations in achieving desired goals. Because many foreign jurisdictions adopt US EPA reasoning and methods of risk analysis, it may be especially valuable to incorporate decision-theoretic principles that transcend local differences among jurisdictions.

The Politics of Permaculture: Towards an Ecologically Situated Approach to Resource Policy and Governance

The contributions to environmental politics of Torgerson, Oelschlager, Dryzek, Harrè and others, converge in their respective acknowledgements that the shift towards an ‘ecologically situated’ approach to environmental policy, including resource governance, will require the emergence and consolidation of a new lingua franca of environmental discourse. In this paper, I suggest that an extrapolation of permaculture ethics may provide a gambit through which such a discourse may be assembled and organised. I examine six key signifying elements derived from Orr and Capra’s approach to ecological literacy – network, nested system, flow, cycle, development and dynamic balance – and explore the implications that these might have for resource governance and policy, including the (re)framing of assessment indicators, energy auditing, resource management and integrated planning and development.

Systems for assessing the effectiveness of management in protected areas

Since the mid-1990s, numerous methodologies have been developed to assess the management effectiveness of protected areas, many tailored to particular regions or habitats. Recognizing the need for a generic approach, the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) developed an evaluation framework allowing specific evaluation methodologies to be designed within a consistent overall approach. Twenty-seven assessment methodologies were analyzed in relation to this framework. Two types of data were identified: quantitative data derived from monitoring and qualitative data derived from scoring by managers and stakeholders. The distinction between methodologies based on data types reflects different approaches to assessing management. Few methodologies assess all the WCPA framework elements. More useful information for adaptive management will come from addressing all six elements. The framework can be used to adapt existing methodologies or to design new, more comprehensive methodologies for evaluation, using quantitative monitoring data, qualitative scoring data, or a combination of both.

Management effectiveness: Assessing management of protected areas?

To maximise the potential of protected areas, we need to understand the strengths and weaknesses in their management and the threats and stresses that they face. There is increasing pressure on governments and other bodies responsible for protected areas to monitor their effectiveness. The reasons for assessing management effectiveness include the desire by managers to adapt and improve their management strategies, improve planning and priority setting and the increasing demands for reporting and accountability being placed on managers, both nationally and internationally. Despite these differing purposes for assessment, some common themes and information needs can be identified, allowing assessment systems to meet multiple uses. Protected-area management evaluation has a relatively short history. Over the past 20 years a number of systems have been proposed but few have been adopted by management agencies. In response to a recognition of the need for a globally applicable approach to this issue, the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas developed a framework for assessing management effectiveness of both protected areas and protected area systems. This framework was launched at the World Conservation Congress in Jordan in 2000. The framework provides guidance to managers to develop locally relevant assessment systems while helping to harmonise assessment approaches around the world. The framework is strongly linked to the protected area management process and is adaptable to different types and circumstances of protected areas around the world. Examples from Fraser Island in Australia and the Congo Basin illustrate the use of the framework.

The role of uncertainty in the relationship between fairness evaluations and willingness to pay

Participants in contingent valuation studies may be uncertain about a number of aspects of the policy and survey context. The uncertainty management model of fairness judgments states that individuals will evaluate a policy in terms of its fairness when they do not know whether they can trust the relevant managing authority or experience uncertainty due to insufficient knowledge of the general issues surrounding the environmental policy. Similarly, some researchers have suggested that, not knowing how to answer WTP questions, participants convey their general attitudes toward the public good rather than report well-defined economic preferences. These contentions were investigated in a sample of 840 residents in four urban catchments across Australia who were interviewed about their WTP for stormwater pollution abatement. Four sources of uncertainty were measured: amount of prior issue-related thought, trustworthiness of the water authority, insufficient scenario information, and WTP response uncertainty. A logistic regression model was estimated in each subsample to test the main effects of the uncertainty sources on WTP as well as their interaction with fairness and proenvironmental attitudes. Results indicated support for the uncertainty management model in only one of the four samples. Similarly, proenvironmental attitudes interacted rarely with uncertainty to a significant level, and in ways that were more complex than hypothesised. It was concluded that uncertain individuals were generally not more likely than other participants to draw on either fairness evaluations or proenvironmental attitudes when making decisions about paying for stormwater pollution abatement.