Understanding the Changing Roles of Scientists and Scientific Information in Natural Resource Decision Making: A Pilot Study with the LTER Program

虽然大多数理论家和参与者预计，包括生态科学家和信息在内的决定将改善复杂自然资源的质量，但很少有实证研究明确证实这种好处。而且，越来越多的经验证据表明，决策者和科学家不同的机构需求和文化价值观之间的紧张关系可能会阻碍在此类决策中有效地使用科学。这项试点研究的目标是确定是否有可能捕捉和衡量资源决策参与者对生态科学和科学家在分散治理、共享权力、合作管理和公民对专家和政府资源机构的不信任的世界中角色变化的态度和期望。这项试点研究旨在确定与科学家和科学信息的期望、需求和用途有关的复杂问题是否可以通过一种结构化的协议进行操作，足够清楚地进行衡量，该协议可以管理到自然资源决策的广泛参与者。这项研究的数据将主要通过对太平洋西北地区自然资源决策的各种参与者的深入访谈来收集。参与者群体将包括长期热核实验堆科学家、联邦和州自然资源管理人员和决策者，以及中央级联中参与资源决策过程的个人。定性访谈的数据将被用来实施所关注的问题，特别是生态科学和科学家的现有作用，以及为有效利用科学进行决策提供激励和制约的体制和文化特征。将从这些问题中提出结构化调查协议的问题。-为了测试协议的可靠性和有效性，我们将对太平洋西北地区参与或对自然资源决策感兴趣的个人进行邮寄调查。数据将被收集和管理，并有可能在其他LTER-研究地点以及其他研究计划或项目中复制。-如果成功，在这一试点工作中开发和测试的方案-可以被管理给参与自然资源决策的广泛个人，以了解所有参与者的期望和信念-生态科学和生态科学家在这些过程中的作用。我们将能够更好地描述决策过程的参与者如何看待科学在这些过程中的性质和功能，参与者对科学作用的看法如何影响让生态信息和科学家参与管理过程和公共宣传努力的努力，以及参与者如何看待科学家在自然资源决策中可能发挥的不同作用。这项研究还将为社会科学家提出的问题提供实证支持，这些问题涉及在复杂决策中需要科学专业知识与民主参与解决问题之间的矛盾。

While most theorists and participants expect that-including ecological scientists and information will improve the quality of complex natural resource-decisions, there is little empirical research that clearly verifies such benefits. And, there is-increasing experiential evidence that tensions between the distinct institutional needs and cultural-values of decision makers and scientists may preclude the effective use of science in such-decisions. The goal of this pilot study is to determine whether it is possible to capture and measure-the attitudes and expectations of participants in resource decisions about the changing roles of-ecological science and scientists in a world of decentralized governance, shared power,-collaborative management, and citizen mistrust of experts and government resource agencies. The-pilot study is designed to determine whether complex issues related to the expectations, needs, and-uses of scientists and scientific information can be operationalized clearly enough to be measured-through a structured protocol that can be administered to a wide array of participants in natural-resource decision making. Data for this study will be collected primarily through in-depth interviews with-a wide variety of Pacific Northwest participants in natural resource decision making. Participant-groups will include LTER scientists, federal and state natural resource managers and decision-makers, as well as individuals in the Central Cascades who have been involved in resource-decision processes. Data from the qualitative interviews will be used to operationalize issues of-concern, particularly available roles for ecological science and scientists as well as the institutional-and cultural features that provide incentives and constraints for the effective use of science in-decision making. Questions for a structured survey protocol will be developed from these issues.-To test the protocol for reliability and validity, we will conduct a mail-out survey with a sample of-individuals in the Pacific Northwest who are involved or interested in natural resource decision-making. Data will be collected and managed with the potential for replications at other LTER-research sites as well as other research programs or projects.-If successful, the protocol developed and tested in this pilot effort-can be administered to a wide array of individuals involved in natural resource decision making in-order to understand the expectations and beliefs that all participants have about-the role of ecological science and ecological scientists in those processes. We will be able to better-describe how participants in decision processes view the nature and functions of science in-those processes, how participants' perceptions of the role of-science affect efforts to involve ecological information and scientists in management-processes and public outreach efforts, and how participants perceive different roles that scientists may play in natural resource-decision making. This research will also provide empirical support for issues raised by social-scientists about tensions between the need for scientific expertise in complex decision making and-democratic participation in problem solving.