Improving the Use of Science in Collaborative Environmental Governance

今天，许多复杂的环境问题--如栖息地保护和水污染--都是通过公共机构、非营利组织和私人行为者的自愿伙伴关系来管理的。在20世纪，公共机构单独解决环境问题很常见，几乎没有其他机构的帮助，公民和其他行为者的投入也很有限。在21世纪，公共机构越来越多地参与管理环境问题的合作伙伴关系，以此作为跨司法管辖区分担管理责任和让非政府行为者参与制定计划和项目的一种手段。这种解决环境问题的新方法被称为协作治理。虽然从集中规划和监管转向协作治理可以促进公平、建立信任和包容不同类型的知识，但它可能会减少科学发现对政策的影响。目前，人们对科学如何在合作伙伴关系中做出决策知之甚少。相比之下，学者们长期以来一直在研究公共机构如何使用科学，这些机构有法律义务证明自己的决策是基于科学的。相比之下，合作伙伴关系没有类似的法律义务。因此，重要的是要了解科学如何为这些伙伴关系内的决策提供信息，特别是考虑到科学知识和证据在解决环境问题方面应发挥的重要作用。这一研究项目将建立对如何将科学用于合作伙伴关系的学术理解，并为政策制定者和机构管理人员提供指导，指导他们如何产生可用于合作伙伴关系的有用科学，以改善环境条件和人类福祉。该项目试图回答以下两个问题：(1)科学研究如何在协作环境治理中得到重视、获得、评估和应用？(2)这些当前做法的影响是什么？经验性的焦点是美国第二大河口普吉特湾。利用调查、访谈、文件分析和会议观察，研究小组将比较不同类型的伙伴关系如何使用科学，从主要由公民在地方一级运作的伙伴关系到主要由政府机构在更大规模上运作的伙伴关系。在每个伙伴关系中，将进行调查和访谈，以了解参与者如何看待科学在其伙伴关系中应该发挥的作用以及确实发挥的作用。文件分析和会议观察将提供更多数据，以审查利用科学为每个伙伴关系的决策进程提供信息的机制。该项目将通过测试从协作治理和科学与政策之间的接口领域合成的假设来建立理论。此外，结果将被用来确定加强科学和协作治理之间联系的实用战略。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Many complex environmental problems – such as habitat conservation and water pollution – are managed today through voluntary partnerships of public agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private actors. In the 20th Century, it was common for public agencies to address environmental problems individually, with little assistance from other agencies and limited input from citizens and other actors. In the 21st Century, public agencies have increasingly participated in collaborative partnerships for managing environmental problems as a means for sharing management responsibility across jurisdictions and involving non-governmental actors in developing plans and projects. This new means for addressing environmental problems is known as collaborative governance. While the move from centralized planning and regulation to collaborative governance can promote fairness, trust building, and inclusion of different types of knowledge, it may reduce the impact of scientific findings on policies. At present, little is known about how science informs decision making within collaborative partnerships. By comparison, academics have long studied how science is used in public agencies, which are under legal obligations to justify their decisions based on science. Collaborative partnerships, by contrast, are not under similar legal obligations. It is thus important to understand how science informs decision making within these partnerships, particularly given the important role that scientific knowledge and evidence should play in addressing environmental problems. This research project will build academic understanding of how science is used in collaborative partnerships and provide policy makers and agency managers with guidance on generating usable science that can be employed in collaborative partnerships to improve environmental conditions and human wellbeing. The project seeks to answer the following two questions: (1) How is scientific research valued, acquired, evaluated, and applied in collaborative environmental governance? (2) What are the impacts of these current practices? The empirical focus is Puget Sound, the second-largest estuary in the United States. Drawing on surveys, interviews, document analysis, and meeting observations, the research team will compare how science is used in different types of partnerships, ranging from partnerships comprised mainly of citizens operating at the local level to partnerships comprised primarily of government agencies operating at larger scales. Within each partnership, surveys and interviews will be conducted to understand how participants think about the role science should play, and does play, in their partnerships. Document analysis and meeting observations will provide additional data to examine the mechanisms through which science is used to inform decision-making processes in each partnership. The project will build theory by testing hypotheses synthesized from the fields of collaborative governance and the interface between science and policy. In addition, results will be used to identify practical strategies to enhance links between science and collaborative governance.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.