IIc: Representational Validity of Computer Visualizations for Environmental Value Assessments

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

During the last thirty years in the United States, significant environmental management decisions have required the participation of the public. The justification for requiring public input is most clear for actions by public agencies on public lands, but the condition of the environment necessarily affects everyone so we are all stakeholders in every environmental management decision. People's opinions about the consequences of environmental changes are important, and they are often legally required. But the consequences of environmental management are often complex, they are frequently only to be realized far into the future, and they are always somewhat uncertain. How, then, is the public to be meaningfully engaged in the environmental management decision process? How are alternative future states of the environment to be communicated? How can the public determine and express their preferences for these alternatives?Many different "public participation" methods have been developed and tried with varying levels of success, ranging from the posting of notices and the publication of lengthy environmental impact statements to holding open meetings to implementing elaborate conflict resolution processes. Every method has advantages and disadvantages, and all have a legitimate role. One of the most important public participation methods is a formal values assessment--a systematic survey of relevant public preferences. Environmental values assessments typically present management alternatives, including processes and expected outcomes, to representative samples of the public who indicate their preferences, usually by assigning numerical ratings or rankings or by making choices. For this process to be meaningful, it is critical that the values and preferences expressed in the assessment are consistent with the values and preferences that would be elicited if the alternative environmental conditions represented were actually realized--the results of environmental values assessments must be valid. Among the most basic factors affecting the validity of environmental values assessments is the accuracy and completeness of the representation of alternatives. That is, the words, numbers, maps and/or pictures used to describe relevant environmental conditions must allow participants to correctly understand the alternatives at issue, and to ascertain how those conditions affect things that they value.The proposed study investigates the validity of computer visualizations as a means for representing alternative environmental conditions in formal value assessments. Environmental visualization technology has advanced very rapidly, from crude schematics to cartoon-like images to photographic realism to "virtual reality." These representations can very efficiently be distributed to audiences world-wide over interactive computer networks, providing unprecedented opportunities for public participation. But the effects of these representations on public understanding and evaluations of environmental alternatives is not known. This study will inform environmental managers and assessment specialists of the advantages and limitations of computer visualizations, and help to insure that public input to environmental decisions is valid.