Changing Expectations for Science and Scientists in Natural Resource Decision Making: A Case Study of the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Program

虽然大多数理论家和参与者都有规范的期望，认为纳入生态科学家和科学信息将提高自然资源决策的质量，但很少有实证研究明确证实这些好处。事实上，我们之前对这一主题的研究表明，对于科学和科学家应该在政策过程中发挥什么作用，太平洋西北地区的科学家、自然资源管理者、非政府组织领导人和关注这一问题的公众之间存在重大分歧。有趣的是，科学家对他们研究的客观性、他们提供科学答案的能力以及有效参与环境政策进程的能力最持怀疑态度(Lach等人，2003年；Steel等人，2002年)。然而，这些模式在太平洋西北部以外的地区有多大程度上仍然存在疑问。这项研究将我们之前由国家科学基金会资助的工作扩展到参与长期生态研究(LTER)计划的国家科学家小组，并包括对选定的LTER地点的深入案例研究。我们的目标包括：(1)描述参与者对生态科学家的角色和科学信息在自然资源决策中的使用的认知、经验和期望；(2)考察和描述可能阻碍或促进在环境政策过程中使用科学和科学家的特定地点特征的影响；(3)描述在资源管理决策中有效整合科学的手段、障碍和战略；以及(4)扩大我们对科学家及其科学知识在资源决策和管理中如何被利用的理论和经验的理解。这项研究的目的是在全国范围内复制我们的区域试点研究，并从广泛的科学家和其他资源管理参与者那里收集数据，了解他们对生态科学和科学家在环境政策进程中的作用变化的态度和期望。这项研究将分两个阶段进行：(1)使用在试点研究中制定的方案对所有现有的长期热核实验堆科学家进行全国调查，以及(2)在长期热核实验堆现场开发五个案例研究，在那里长期热核实验堆的科学家参与了政策问题。案例研究的数据将从三个来源收集：(1)关于该地点的已发表的故事和LTER科学家关于其政策互动的文件；(2)对来自四个群体(生态科学家、资源管理者、利益集团领导人和关注的公众)的代表进行的焦点小组访谈；以及(3)对每个研究地点的管理者、利益集团代表和关注公众的抽样进行邮寄调查。拟议的研究将扩大对参与者对生态科学和科学家在政策过程中的适当作用的期望的一般理解。我们将能够更好地描述参与者如何看待生态科学和科学家在公共决策过程中的性质和功能，让生态信息和科学家参与管理过程和科学家的公共宣传工作的努力如何受到对科学作用的看法的影响，以及各种现场因素(例如，所采用的科学类型、所调查问题的性质及其背景)如何影响这一过程。还将向感兴趣的科学家提供有关有效参与资源决策的培训。

While most theorists and participants have normative expectations that including ecological scientists and scientific information will improve the quality of natural resource decisions, there is little empirical research that clearly verifies such benefits. Indeed, our previous research on this topic reveals significant differences among scientists, natural resource managers, leaders of NGO's, and the attentive public in the Pacific Northwest about what role science and scientists should play in the policy process. Interestingly, scientists were the most skeptical about the objectivity of their research, their ability to provide scientific answers and, to effectively engage in the environmental policy process (Lach et al, 2003; Steel et al., 2002). However, the extent to which these patterns hold outside the Pacific Northwest remains in question. This research extends our previous work funded by the National Science Foundation to the national group of scientists participating in the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program and includes in-depth case studies of selected LTER sites. Our objectives include: (1) describing the perceptions, experiences, and expectations of participants regarding the role of ecological scientists and the use of scientific information in natural resource decision making; (2) examining and characterizing the impact of site specific characteristics that may impede or promote the use of science and scientists in the environmental policy process; (3) characterizing the means, obstacles, and strategies for effective integration of science in resource management decisions; and (4) expanding our theoretical and empirical understanding of how scientists and their scientific knowledge are utilized in resource decision making and management. The purpose of this study is to replicate our regional pilot study nationally and collect data from a full range of scientists and other participants in resource management about their attitudes and expectations for the changing roles of ecological science and scientists in the environmental policy process. The research will be conducted in two phases: (1) a national survey of all current LTER scientists using the protocol developed in the pilot study and, (2) development of five case studies at LTER sites where there has been engagement in policy issues by LTER scientists. Data for the case studies will be collected from three sources: (1) published stories about the site and documentation by LTER scientists about their policy interactions; (2) focus group interviews with representatives from each of the four groups (ecological scientists, resource managers, leaders of interest groups, and the attentive public); and (3) a mail out survey to a sample of managers, interest group representatives, and members of the attentive public at each study site. The proposed research will extend general understanding of the expectations that participants have about the appropriate roles of ecological science and scientists in the policy process. We will be able to better describe how participants view the nature and functions of ecological science and scientists in public decision processes, how efforts to involve ecological information and scientists in management processes and public outreach efforts by scientists are affected by perceptions of the role of science, and how various site factors (e.g., types of science employed, nature of the issues investigated, and their context) influence the process. Training will also be provided to interested scientists about effective engagement in resource decision-making.