Preface
This document synthesizes insights from over a hundred contributors and relevant literature to outline essential principles and practices for managing scientific and technical information in environmental conflicts It aims to enhance the theory and practice of environmental mediation while encouraging ongoing dialogue on these critical issues.
The information age has accelerated the growth and distribution of scientific knowledge, making it crucial to utilize this information effectively and comprehend its relationship with other forms of inquiry This sourcebook aims to assist in navigating these complexities.
Readers are encouraged to share this document while crediting the authors and sponsors: RESOLVE, Inc., the U.S Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution (USIECR), and the Western Justice Center Foundation RESOLVE, Inc., based in Washington, D.C., and Portland, Oregon, specializes in environmental dispute resolution, mediation, and consensus building, aiming to enhance dialogue and negotiation on public policy issues both domestically and internationally The U.S Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, located in Tucson, Arizona, provides expertise in resolving environmental conflicts involving federal agencies, offering guidance and training while maintaining a nationwide network of practitioners The Western Justice Center Foundation, based in Pasadena, California, focuses on developing conflict resolution models, improving justice quality, conducting research, and teaching conflict resolution skills to children, with programs implemented locally and globally in partnership with various organizations.
This document is available on the websites of three organizations, including the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution and the Policy Consensus Initiative Other organizations and agencies are invited to share and post it on their platforms Readers are encouraged to reach out to working group members with additional thoughts and feedback.
This document is designed for versatile access, allowing readers to engage with it in a way that suits their preferences Some may choose to read it sequentially as a narrative, while others might utilize it as a reference guide, concentrating on sections that address specific challenges they face Its organization facilitates both approaches effectively.
This paper addresses the key challenges in managing scientific and technical information within environmental cases, highlighting specific issues identified by stakeholders and mediators through literature and focus groups It presents foundational ideas and practice principles that inform detailed guidelines, followed by practical “how to’s” and “to do’s” from seasoned environmental and public policy mediators The endnotes provide insights into the project's origins, while the appendices offer contact information for the working group, a list of participants and contributors, and recommended readings, acknowledging the invaluable support and expertise of those involved.
The Challenge
A significant judicial decision has paused nine federal timber sales in the Pacific Northwest, aiming to safeguard wildlife in old growth forests This ruling mandates additional reviews that may lead to the cessation of logging activities across extensive areas in Washington, Oregon, and California.
A recent Federal investigation revealed that a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in Berkeley, California, fabricated key evidence linking electric power lines to cancer This revelation challenges previous assumptions about the potential health risks associated with power lines, as reported by William J Broad in The New York Times on July 24, 1999.
Over 162 years after its construction, the Edwards Dam became historically significant as the first dam to be dismantled by the federal government, despite opposition from its owners.
Environmental disputes present significant challenges to civil societies, often characterized by their complexity and intensity These conflicts typically involve urgent issues requiring resolution, as well as contentious scientific and technical data Additionally, they highlight critical clashes of social and economic values and serve as political fault lines in broader ideological battles.
At the beginning of the 21st Century, there is a pressing need for citizens and policymakers to enhance environmental discourse It is essential to pursue outcomes that are not only conceptually robust and equitable but also sustainable in the long term Additionally, reducing the human and financial transaction costs linked to public interest conflicts in areas such as timber, land, water, hunting, pollution, fishing, and energy development is crucial for fostering effective environmental solutions.
Strategies focused on “joint gains,” problem solving, mediation, facilitation, and consensus building have proven effective in addressing numerous significant cases related to public health, public lands, and natural resources since the 1970s These approaches are applicable in both “upstream” scenarios, where rules and policies are created, and “downstream” situations involving enforcement and compliance The authors of this document advocate for the integration of robust scientific and technical information to enhance the resolution of many more cases amicably and effectively.
The concept of "joint gains" in problem solving highlights the value of a rational, interest-based approach; however, many environmental disputes are influenced by personal and political factors Central to these disputes are key questions: Who is responsible for environmental issues? How can we address harmful conditions? Will proposed projects or policies negatively impact humans or the environment? Lastly, how should we manage environmental resources while considering associated risks, costs, and benefits for the future?
Environmental conflicts are complex and far-reaching, often involving conflicting values and emotional stakes These disputes can engage diverse groups, including those driven by ethical concerns and those focused on economic benefits Key issues at play include cultural identity, economic interests, social justice, public health, risk management, employment, power dynamics, and the influence of professional politics In some instances, environmental issues can significantly sway electoral outcomes.
In some cases, the outcomes of specific conflicts have inter-generational or global impacts.
When controversies arise, advocates, policymakers, and decision-makers rely on scientific and technical experts to enhance their decision-making processes Scientific data is crucial for fostering consensus and informed discussions The availability and application of science-based information significantly influence the confidence of those impacted by decisions in both the process and its outcomes.
Integrating high-quality information into controversial topics to guide decision-making should ideally be simple It involves asking pertinent questions, collecting data through reliable methods, analyzing and interpreting this data logically, and then subjecting the findings to peer review However, in practice, the path from information to effective solutions is often more complex than it appears.
Information gathering in contentious environments is frequently conducted by warring experts, leading to severed communication lines and an adversarial atmosphere that suggests potential litigation In many instances, crucial information becomes secondary to the economics and politics of deal-making, resulting in significant resources being wasted on irrelevant or unusable research As a consequence, unresolved disagreements on key issues persist, leaving uncertainties that could jeopardize the future stability of agreements.
Various stakeholders vie for scarce water resources, highlighting how a single body of water can cater to diverse interests A prime example is Lake Lanier, located north of Atlanta, Georgia, which serves as a marina for recreational boating.
The lake, a reservoir constructed by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950s to manage river flooding, serves as a vital source of drinking water and electricity for hundreds of thousands of people Additionally, it offers a year-round aquatic playground for recreational activities.
The complexity of environmental conflict often stems from the varied ways information is organized, interpreted, and communicated by different stakeholders, including government agencies, community groups, environmental advocates, academics, and businesses Each entity approaches data collection and interpretation based on its unique needs and perspectives, leading to a differential valuation of scientific information influenced by professional training and cultural norms Traditionally, addressing this complexity has relied on adversarial legal and scientific methods to seek the truth.
Joint gains approaches like mediation and facilitation are effective for addressing tensions and data clashes in environmental conflicts When organized effectively, these processes can enhance formal governance structures and provide valuable tools for decision-makers It is crucial for advocates, participants, funders, and users of these processes to adopt more coordinated strategies for gathering, sorting, integrating, and interpreting information This document aims to highlight essential ideas and tools in this specialized area to meet that need.
Rockslides on the Road to Agreement
III Rockslides on the Road to Agreement
III Rockslides on the Road to Agreement
III Rockslides on the Road to Agreement
III Rockslides on the Road to Agreement
Negotiating parties, along with environmental mediators and facilitators, face a wide range of challenges related to the generation, management, interpretation, and application of scientific and technical information This section highlights various scenarios encountered by these parties and those who aim to support them in the negotiation process.
1 Multiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple Disciplines There are various specialized sciences involved in providing critical scientific and technical information but the conclusions do not converge to a logical policy choice.
Environmental organizations aim to stop an agricultural operation from extracting more water from an aquifer, despite geologists and hydrologists confirming the water's availability However, ecologists and wildlife biologists warn that this withdrawal could negatively impact the local stream ecosystems On the other hand, sociologists and economists argue that the introduction of new farms could boost the economy in a struggling region.
Access to scientific and technical information is often hindered for various parties, who struggle to clearly define their information needs, identify relevant data, and determine the appropriate contacts for assistance.
Recreational users, including hikers, horse riders, and cyclists, are involved in a conflict regarding management practices in a multi-purpose wilderness area Despite being knowledgeable and intelligent, these stakeholders are often rigid in their positions and lack experience in navigating such disputes.
The current data is insufficient, lacking essential scientific and technical information that requires further research To effectively address this gap, a well-organized approach and adequate resources are necessary to support the research process.
The January 1994 Northridge earthquake triggered twin landslides that blocked a road near the I-5 interchange with California State Highway 14 These landslides, along with rock falls and rockslides in the Santa Susana and western San Gabriel Mountains, obstructed numerous roads, hindering relief efforts and worsening transportation issues resulting from the earthquake.
A community group is at odds with a resort developer regarding the traffic effects of a new golf course, both in the short and long term While the developer asserts that sufficient studies have been conducted, the community contends that additional research is necessary to fully understand the potential impacts.
The significance of scientific or technical information can often be unclear, leading to confusion about its value In many cases, the relevance of the data remains unknown or is deemed marginal Additionally, the absence of established techniques or methodologies for evaluating or comparing this information further complicates its interpretation.
Supporters and critics utilize computer-generated images to illustrate the visual and aesthetic effects of proposed microwave relay towers on a ridge overlooking a park and residential area While these simulations capture public interest, some individuals remain skeptical about their effectiveness in providing the necessary information for informed decision-making.
5 Restricted DataRestricted DataRestricted DataRestricted DataRestricted Data Several parties have critical information that could help resolve the matter but the data is confidential or proprietary.
Water well drilling permits have a strict deadline for issuance, or project proponents risk losing their chance to proceed Meanwhile, a separate government agency cannot publish its recent study on chloride buildup due to pending approval At the same time, the drilling company is hesitant to reveal trade secrets that could potentially benefit its competitors.
Politicized information often clouds the decision-making process, as crucial scientific and technical data is perceived as biased due to political spin and media sensationalism This perception can hinder the effective use of valuable information that could otherwise enhance understanding and inform better choices.
A debate is ongoing regarding enhancements to a highway that, despite being statistically safe, is viewed as hazardous by the public While data indicates a significant number of serious accidents, the overall accident rate is low Advocacy groups have launched campaigns demanding costly upgrades, while city officials contend that these improvements would be expensive and unlikely to yield substantial benefits.
A significant challenge in decision-making arises from a lack of expertise among the involved parties While valuable scientific and technical information is accessible, many individuals may struggle to comprehend its relevance, hindering effective decision-making.
Private and civic sector organizations collaborate to address differing views on significant public spending for secondary and tertiary sewage treatment They face challenges due to the intricate and often contradictory nature of toxicological, engineering, and ecological research.
The reliance on inconclusive data in scientific and technical discussions leads to uncertainty, as the available information is fragmented and lacks clear cause-and-effect relationships This ambiguity makes it challenging to draw definitive conclusions or make informed policy decisions, despite potential inferences about cumulative effects.
Key Concepts and Practice Principles
IV Key Concepts and Practice Principles
IV Key Concepts and Practice Principles
IV Key Concepts and Practice Principles
IV Key Concepts and Practice Principles
Environmental mediation theory and practice draw on diverse concepts from various fields and are increasingly informed by case studies As outlined in Appendix C, Selected Readings, these insights contribute to a framework for effectively managing scientific information in environmental disputes The assumptions presented serve as foundational elements for the practical guidelines and strategies discussed in Sections V and VI.
This list serves as a valuable supplement to traditional training methods and existing literature on mediation, facilitation, and consensus building, but it is not intended to be definitive or comprehensive.
A A On the Nature of Knowledge On the Nature of Knowledge On the Nature of Knowledge On the Nature of Knowledge On the Nature of Knowledge
Scientific and technical knowledge alone is insufficient to resolve environmental conflicts, as various forms of knowledge such as traditional, cultural, local, and remembered knowledge also play crucial roles in the resolution process Each type of knowledge contributes unique perspectives and insights, highlighting the importance of inclusive dialogue among all parties involved in environmental disputes.
All forms of information, whether scientific, technical, cultural, or traditional, must be scrutinized for validity, accuracy, authenticity, and reliability Each type of knowledge adheres to specific quality standards that can be evaluated and discussed Consequently, the processes of examination—including what is assessed, the methods used, the individuals conducting the evaluation, and the timing of the assessment—are all open to negotiation.
3 Useful knowledge rarely remains static in the subject matters that come into play in envi- ronmental conflict.
Knowledge builds off new questions and new informa- tion 7
Many people believe that science is solely based on testable knowledge, focusing on experimentation and quantifiable results However, subjective knowledge significantly influences scientific inquiry, often more than is acknowledged Factors such as past experiences, intuition, personal values, and even decision-making processes play a critical role in shaping scientific understanding and outcomes.
“Monte Carlo” analysis often enter into the scientific process, particularly in framing ques- tions for research and data collection.
In Central Arizona, technician Karen Beaulieu utilizes her laptop to download temperature and conductivity data from probes at a monitoring site dedicated to surface-water and aquatic biology, as captured by the U.S Geological Survey.
Scientific and technical research across life, engineering, and social sciences often yields probabilities rather than absolute answers Knowledge is frequently represented through metrics such as beta-weights and standard deviations, leaving space for reasonable debate regarding the methodologies of knowledge generation and the evidence that supports it.
Environmental disputes frequently involve complex systems where the overall behavior cannot be understood merely by analyzing individual components This reductionist approach, which focuses solely on the units and their interactions, can lead to misunderstandings, as issues may not stem from specific elements or their relationships.
B B On Uncertainty On Uncertainty On Uncertainty On Uncertainty On Uncertainty
Despite having extensive information and knowledge, our comprehension of environmental, social, and economic realities is still limited Perfect decision-making remains elusive, especially when it involves predicting impacts Acknowledging biological and social uncertainty is essential, even if it may not always be relevant in every environmental dispute.
In environmental conflicts, it is essential to acknowledge the inherent risks and uncertainties Thorough research and inquiry by the involved parties are often necessary to address potential future consequences and impacts, whether integrated into the conflict resolution process or as part of the final outcome.
Understanding risks and uncertainties in environmental cases is crucial, requiring clarity in both layman’s and scientific language There are three primary types of uncertainties: first, those stemming from insufficient measurements or observations that hinder proper explanation; second, uncertainties arising from conflicting measurements; and third, uncertainties related to competing or incomplete theoretical frameworks.
Higher levels of scientific or technical uncertainty regarding significant outcomes of proposed actions necessitate increased future research, either during conflict resolution or as part of agreements Consequently, the resulting agreements should be more adaptive and heuristic, meaning they should incorporate mechanisms for integrating future information and be flexible enough to adjust based on compelling new evidence.
Environmental decisions often lead to unintended consequences, regardless of their good intentions Every action, law, policy, or program designed to address a conflict carries the risk of unforeseen outcomes These "revenge effects" arise when new systems, devices, or organisms interact with people in unpredictable ways, highlighting the complexity of real-world situations.
C C emphasizes the significance of effective information management in resolving environmental conflicts By facilitating clear communication and sharing relevant data, stakeholders can better understand diverse perspectives and work towards collaborative solutions This approach not only enhances decision-making processes but also fosters trust among parties involved, ultimately leading to more sustainable environmental outcomes.
1 Conflicts over information, data, ideas, and knowledge are an inevitable and integral part of most environmental conflict resolution processes This holds true whether the conflicts are
“upstream” in the policy formation or rule making stages or “downstream” in enforcement proceedings.
Environmental disputes typically arise not from scientific or technical data alone, but rather from perceived competition over interests, varying criteria for evaluating ideas, conflicting goals and values, misinformation, and unequal power dynamics in resource distribution.
On Stakeholders, Experts, and Other Third Parties
Rules of Thumb for Mediators and Facilitators
Environmental dispute resolution and consensus-building integrate theories and principles from various fields, including public administration, law, applied psychology, planning, industrial relations, public health, and communications Although mediation and facilitation can be highly effective, they are often more of an art than a science, relying on tacit, reflexive, and improvisational strategies These practices evolve through experience and are often encapsulated as "rules of thumb" in training.
This article aims to clarify implicit rules related to the management of scientific and technical issues, providing valuable supplements to traditional training methods and literature on mediation and consensus building.
Conflict resolution is inherently complex, as real disputes often involve chaotic elements that require careful navigation Assisting parties in addressing these complexities is crucial, necessitating multiple evaluations of the legal, social, economic, and technical issues involved Recognizing the uniqueness of each situation, we provide suggestions that should be tailored to fit the specific context of each case.
Different agencies representing diverse disciplines often cooperate in assessing environmental impacts In the Oasis Valley,
Nevada, hydrologists drill a well to monitor potential environmen- tal hazards from underground testing of nuclear weapons at the
Department of Energy established an Environmental Restoration
Program to acquire information about the site The U.S Geologi- cal Survey provides expertise and guidance on characterization of the ground-water flow system
Substantive Knowledge
If you lack the necessary experience or knowledge, consider collaborating with a scientist, technical expert, or a more seasoned mediator This individual can provide valuable advice, act as a private sounding board, or work alongside you as a co-mediator to enhance the group's effectiveness.
It is crucial for all parties to perceive the designated individual as impartial and acceptable, particularly when the partner will engage directly with the group While your general process and relationship skills are important, they are not enough to navigate complex, science-based multi-party cases effectively.
To enhance your understanding and formulate better inquiries in environmental mediation, it's essential to familiarize yourself with the relevant issues, language, and terminology of the dispute Gaining insight into the institutional frameworks involved and becoming comfortable with the specific jargon is crucial However, it's important to remain honest about your expertise and not to misrepresent your knowledge.
To make informed decisions, it is essential to fully educate yourself on the technical and scientific issues presented by the parties involved This knowledge will enable you to identify the scientific aspects of their conflicts and discern which issues are rooted in factual evidence and which are not.
To become a quick and savvy learner, leverage your unique outsider perspective as a valuable asset However, it's essential to regularly seek feedback from others to determine when your insightful naivete is beneficial and when it may be a limitation.
If the parties lack professional representation or guidance, refrain from acting as their technical adviser Instead, encourage them to seek independent assistance for their scientific concerns Maintaining your impartiality is crucial to avoid conflicts with other stakeholders involved.
When you possess expertise in a specific field, it's crucial to practice self-restraint in showcasing your knowledge or proposing solutions, as this may unintentionally create the impression that you are taking on a role of authority rather than mediation If you feel the need to share your insights, make sure to clarify that you are stepping into the role of a technical expert temporarily, and always seek the group’s permission before doing so.
Effectively managing the diverse substantive expertise that stakeholders contribute is crucial, as various professions are trained in distinct approaches to problem-solving.
To ensure effective resolution in complex, high-stakes cases, it is essential to involve a diverse mix of scientists with varying expertise This includes field and lab specialists, as well as professionals with qualitative, quantitative, applied, and theoretical knowledge A multidisciplinary approach enhances the search for effective solutions by incorporating different experiences and perspectives.
Pre-Case Consultation
Collaborate early and closely with the sponsoring agency or organization to identify potential scientific and technical issues Formulate insightful questions to uncover and examine these technical challenges Clearly define the information needs of all parties involved, including the types of data they depend on, and anticipate potential data conflicts that may arise as the case or project progresses.
2 Do not assume because one group has chosen you, you have been accepted by all You will still need to gain the acceptance and confidence of all the protagonists.
To ensure effective early assessment and planning, establish a coordinating committee as soon as an agency requests assistance This committee should include representatives from key stakeholders, facilitating their involvement from the outset of the process.
Create a visual representation, such as a diagram or map, highlighting the key stakeholders, groups, and interests that could be impacted, contribute to solutions, or potentially disrupt the process if overlooked Assess their technical and scientific expertise from the outset, as it should not be assumed that the sponsoring organization has already addressed this aspect.
5 Find out what sources of information, what methods, and what specific scientists are most trusted by each party Find out why.
Challenge your assumption that the core of a dispute lies solely in scientific or technical issues Often, the lack of data, misinformation, or varying interpretations contribute to disagreements without being the primary focus.
Adequate funding is crucial for effective conflict resolution processes, yet sponsoring groups often face limited resources It's essential to make preliminary assessments on how to allocate these resources among technical evaluations, public engagement, and skilled mediation Be ready to adjust these estimates as the situation evolves and stakeholders begin to participate and advocate for their interests.
Scoping and Conflict Assessment
Conduct a formal conflict assessment by integrating scientific and technical issues into your initial scoping process Gather information on the technical and scientific dimensions of the dispute through observation, secondary sources, or interviews with involved parties Formulate questions that pinpoint potential information requirements, identify the types of data stakeholders depend on, and highlight possible data conflicts that may arise.
2 Get the scientists to explain how they define risks by talking about specific, levels of statisti- cal significance and map accuracy for the particular problem or analysis.
To effectively engage with strong assertions made by parties, it's essential to formulate insightful questions that clarify and reframe technical and scientific issues By presenting these issues as challenges to be addressed rather than rigid positions, we foster a more constructive dialogue Focus on phrasing questions with "how" instead of "should," encouraging exploration and problem-solving.
Identify the key issues in disputes without prioritizing scientific and technical aspects over political, social, economic, and cultural factors Mediators often feel compelled to rationalize conflicts through a scientific lens; however, these disputes are primarily rooted in ideological and political differences rather than just technical concerns.
Question the assumption that science-related issues, such as data scarcity, misunderstanding, misinformation, or varying interpretations, are the primary concerns at hand Engage parties in dialogue about whether they believe the main issues are technical, as they may publicly assert this while privately acknowledging otherwise Third parties should strive to frame these issues without favoring certain perspectives or parties It is crucial to avoid diminishing the significance of institutional racism, power dynamics, risk preferences, and the economic distribution of costs and benefits Focusing exclusively on scientific aspects in environmental conflicts can overlook or misrepresent the underlying issues and the subsequent processes.
When engaging with current or prospective disputants, it is essential to inquire about the types of information they expect to require Additionally, discuss the potential impacts, risks, precautions, and benefits that may arise as the case or project progresses.
7 Acquire a preliminary understanding of how much outside information may be available to help focus the issues, what is proprietary, and what can be freely shared with other parties.
In the initial assessment phase, it is essential to guide the involved parties on various strategies for addressing complex, information-heavy issues Additionally, fostering collaboration on the methods for jointly collecting and analyzing information will enhance the resolution process.
Process Design
1 Help the parties assess (and pre-negotiate) the financial and time investments that will be needed to grapple with scientific and technical information.
To ensure effective decision-making
To effectively address technical and scientific issues, it is essential to develop a mediation or collaboration strategy that is both anticipatory and intentional This strategy should consider various approaches, including joint working sessions, private caucuses, position papers, oral presentations, single-text negotiating documents, and the involvement of external experts, ensuring a comprehensive and adaptable framework for successful negotiations.
To effectively navigate complex disputes, it is essential to anticipate and organize the involvement of partisan and external experts early in the process, ideally before positions become entrenched Various design strategies can be employed, including appointing a scientific fact-finding team, facilitating a "science summit" to clarify disagreements and identify areas of consensus, and convening roundtable discussions that allow experts to express differing views in a safe environment Additionally, moderated panel discussions can enable parties to engage directly with experts, while jointly selecting a third-party researcher can provide valuable insights from peer-reviewed studies Other options include conducting "Daubert" hearings to assess scientific validity, hosting public discussions to inform citizens, and creating background papers to outline key issues and potential areas for consensus Lastly, focused sessions where experts draft or comment on negotiating documents can further enhance the deliberative process.
To ensure confidentiality in technical and scientific discussions, it is essential to prepare in advance by creating submission documents or contractual agreements Explicitly mentioning Rule 408 of the Rules of Evidence or other privileges can encourage participants to engage more openly in consensus-seeking discussions.
When developing a strategy, it is essential to determine the appropriate balance between transparency and confidentiality in the decision-making process This involves assessing the necessary requirements for public engagement while also recognizing the importance of private discussions and potential disagreements Striking this balance ensures that both public input and internal deliberations are effectively integrated into the overall strategy.
Initial Meetings
To ensure an inclusive conventional start-up process, it is essential to establish ground rules and limit topics while fostering an understanding of each participant's interests Acknowledge that the mediation process will likely involve significant scientific and technical exchanges, highlighting that underlying policy considerations—such as economic, political, social, and public policy issues—are inherent to the dispute Reassure all parties that these critical aspects will be identified and addressed throughout the negotiation.
To effectively develop criteria for evaluating options and create the options themselves, it is essential to outline a systematic process for the collaborative production and analysis of technical information This structured approach ensures that all relevant data is considered, facilitating informed decision-making and the generation of viable alternatives.
To enhance understanding of technical and scientific challenges, it is essential to generate diverse descriptions rather than adhering to a rigid single problem definition Engaging with various descriptions can foster insights into the interconnectedness of these issues, benefiting both scientists and stakeholders in their problem-solving processes.
Avoid prioritizing data and data analysis in the early stages of your research Instead, it is crucial to first grasp the legal, political, social, economic, and scientific contexts This understanding will help you formulate clear questions and emphasize the importance of seeking high-quality information to support informed decision-making in these areas.
Structuring and Managing Discussions
To effectively navigate complex technical discussions, it is essential to initiate strategic opening moves Encourage the parties involved to distinguish between their official and unofficial communications Additionally, it can be beneficial for them to assess the implications of their decisions or agreements, considering how these outcomes may affect their personal lives compared to the broader community or society.
Effectively manage the generation, compilation, and analysis of technical information, as strategic timing is crucial Within the mediator's or facilitator's role, assist parties in pacing their technical inquiries to ensure equitable participation and prevent the scientific process from outpacing legal considerations or hindering problem-solving efforts.
In examining the differing perceptions of "risk" and "precaution" among stakeholders, it is crucial to recognize that these definitions can significantly vary Each party involved may interpret these concepts through their unique lenses, influenced by their interests and experiences Understanding these nuances is essential, as they shape how each stakeholder approaches the case at hand By analyzing the various meanings attributed to "risk" and "precaution," we can gain deeper insights into the complexities of the situation and the implications for decision-making processes.
4 Use data as a discussion point rather than assuming it will inherently lead to an answer.
To address the issue of unequal access to scientific and technical expertise, it is essential to avoid overly sophisticated presentations that may create an impression of predetermined solutions Instead of relying solely on PowerPoint slides, polished graphs, and intricate maps, consider utilizing collaboratively developed visual tools such as decision trees, flow charts, and cognitive maps These alternatives can effectively illustrate the thought processes of all parties involved, fostering a clearer understanding of both content and decision-making processes.
Encourage lay stakeholders to prioritize the persuasiveness of evidence over the perceived authority of experts Just as in a trial, the effective presentation of statistics by skilled professionals can sometimes overshadow the essential principles of sound scientific methodology.
Working with Experts
To assist stakeholders in resolving issues, it's essential to clarify relevant scientific and technical activities, which typically fall into several categories These include generating accurate inventories and habitat maps, analyzing the causes and consequences of ecological disturbances, and predicting ecological impacts of specific decisions Additionally, prescriptive design involves formulating performance and emission standards, while valuing entails assessing the economic impacts of resources, including internalized and externalized costs.
Incorporating social scientists is essential, as they provide valuable insights into the cultural and social impacts of environmental issues While biophysical and life science experts focus on the scientific aspects, social scientists enhance the analysis by addressing qualitative and subjective elements of decision-making, ensuring a more comprehensive understanding of environmental challenges.
To foster effective communication between scientists and non-scientists, it is essential to bridge the gap in understanding their differing perspectives, values, and methods of knowledge acquisition Often, experts and the general public fail to connect, leading to miscommunication By strategically organizing discussions and allocating time for stakeholders to learn about the viewpoints of scientists and the significance of alternative ways of valuing and decision-making, we can enhance mutual understanding and collaboration.
When scientists share models, maps, or graphs, it is essential to clearly articulate the underlying assumptions of the data and provide guidance on how to interpret and appreciate these visual representations.
Technical experts and scientists often become absorbed in their own interests and fields, making it essential to align the scientific discussions and data with the pertinent issues at hand To achieve this, mediators should facilitate dry runs of presentations, rigorously prompting scientists to clarify the relevance of their assertions to the decisions being considered by the group.
Encourage stakeholders to present peer-reviewed studies and data, as the peer review process enhances the credibility and reliability of scientific and technical information amidst competing claims While non-peer-reviewed information can still be valuable, the rigor of peer review adds significant weight to the findings.
Technical and scientific presentations require clear explanations and effective translations It is essential for scientists to utilize plain language and incorporate engaging visuals, such as images, maps, and cartoons, to enhance understanding of complex issues, data, and uncertainties among participants.
To facilitate discussions between conflicting experts, consider introducing a neutral third-party scientist who is respected in their field Engaging a credible colleague can encourage experts to openly address their differences Begin by inquiring about the criteria for selecting this individual, followed by a discussion of potential candidates.
9 When dueling parties (who themselves may or may not be scientists) utilize an adjunctive or
To enhance the sidebar meeting process, it is essential to establish clear terms of reference for the working group, enabling stakeholders to concentrate their inquiries effectively Documenting these questions and achieving explicit consensus on their phrasing is crucial Avoid vague threshold questions like "Should we?" and instead pose inquiries that facilitate nuanced judgments, such as "Under what circumstances might we?" In certain situations, stakeholders may preemptively agree to adhere to the responses generated during the sidebar discussions.
In environmental conflicts, mediators should function as "agents of reality," posing questions that encourage parties to reassess the viability of their positions For instance, a mediator might highlight a judge's statement about the unacceptability of the current situation, prompting stakeholders to reconsider their viewpoints, as it is unlikely that one perspective can dominate while dismissing others Additionally, involving experts in discussions can aid parties in evaluating the potential outcomes of their positions.
Recognize that scientists possess diverse personal skills, styles, and political preferences, making perfect neutrality impossible It is essential to allow parties to examine their own and each other's experts' assumptions and biases Mediators and facilitators can assist by prompting each expert to articulate their understanding of relevant risks, benefits, and cautions, as well as how these elements can be quantitatively and qualitatively assessed, ensuring clarity in their definitions as they relate to the facts at hand.
When addressing conflicts over scientific assertions, it’s crucial to clarify the underlying assumptions that inform these claims Emphasize that differing viewpoints typically stem from legitimate variations in professional approaches, scientific judgment, past experiences, and stakeholder interests, rather than malice or ignorance This understanding fosters constructive dialogue and enhances collaborative problem-solving.
Negotiation and Problem Solving
Agreement-Making and Implementation
1 Help parties understand when they have sufficient agreement on technical issues to go ahead and negotiate solutions Often, scientists want to keep fighting until they get com- plete agreement on precise numbers However, the accuracy that is necessary to develop a solution may not be as extreme as scientists would prefer For instance, it may not be neces- sary for all parties to agree on the exact level of pollution in order to recommend a remediation strategy which handles both the high and low estimates of the various parties and achieves regulatory criteria.
2 Assist the parties in making as explicit as possible the key scientific assumptions on which the agreement is based Explore with them what mechanisms they will put in place to monitor those assumptions what they will do if those assumptions turn out to be different or untrue.
3 Promote dynamic, flexible, and adaptive agreements that balance reasonable stability (which is usually needed for business stability) with flexibility and performance-based adaptability (which are needed for higher levels of environmental assurance) While it may not always be possible, try to help the parties craft an agreement that allows for change so that if they are wrong about the science, they can revisit and re-negotiate the issues This kind of agreement-making is intrinsically difficult, especially in public health issues Defendants and respondents usually require closure and release so that they do not have on-going liability or adverse publicity Plaintiffs and complainants are often unwilling to concede closure because of scientific uncertainties Options to consider might include: a A contingent agreement for additional rounds of negotiation based on further research and testing. b The capping of future liabilities by private parties through the purchase of an insurance policy or bond to cover unknown exigencies For example, an insurance policy could be made to cover a capped high and low of the disputed potential cleanup costs for an underground cleanup. c An agreement that will be revisited within a certain period of time.
4 Help parties understand that all scientific decisions are provisional despite the seeming finality of legal, administrative, and political decision-making In essence, it may be impor- tant to help parties understand that they are fashioning a resolution that is “temporary” until such time as future scientific evidence can better inform the decision.
5 It may prove critical for the mediator to bluntly confront the parties to make their best case/ worst case arguments to the other stakeholders The mediator may need to state: “We are not going to settle this unless you can convince the other side to agree Let’s chart out everyone’s best facts and arguments.”
6 Help the scientists maintain face at the conclusion of an agreement that still poses great uncertainty.
7 Include the scientists when you celebrate closure.
Navigating the Rocks on the Road: Practice Tips
Section III listed 23 fact-patterns that mediators and facilitators sometimes encounter While there are many possible responses to these challenges, we asked a number of experienced practi- tioners to suggest what tools, techniques, or tactics they might use in each situation.
1.1 Multiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple DisciplinesMultiple Disciplines The Problem: Environmental groups seek to prevent an agricultural operation from withdrawing additional water from an aquifer Geologists and hydrologists find the water is available Ecologists and wildlife biologists show that withdrawal will harm nearby stream biota Sociologists and economists conclude that new farms will revitalize an economically depressed area.
Gail Bingham, RESOLVE, Inc Washington, D.C.
Gail Bingham, RESOLVE, Inc Washington, D.C.
Gail Bingham, RESOLVE, Inc Washington, D.C.
Gail Bingham, RESOLVE, Inc Washington, D.C.
Gail Bingham from RESOLVE, Inc in Washington, D.C., emphasizes that while information from various disciplines can lead to confusion and heighten environmental disputes, it is also essential for finding solutions To effectively harness the benefits of diverse perspectives, it is crucial to clarify the decision-making goals of all parties involved early in the process This approach helps establish criteria for identifying relevant information and facilitates the integration of disparate data Bingham acknowledges that scientists and individuals often pose different questions based on their unique backgrounds, which can enhance problem-solving when interactions are clear, but may also lead to discord if not managed properly.
In various situations, it's essential for involved parties to engage in a clear discussion about the specific questions they aim to address By doing so, they can proactively seek relevant information for decision-making and prevent the collection of data that may seem unrelated but actually pertains to different inquiries.
This method offers scientists a clear framework for combining insights from various disciplines Geologists and hydrologists typically focus on water availability, while biologists assess the potential harm from water extraction Although both perspectives are valid, they may not address the most pressing questions for stakeholders involved.
If I bring the tools of interest-based negotiation to bear (specifically reframing the question to be as inclusive of different interests as possible), the parties may actually be able to agree that the questions are as follows: How much water can be withdrawn? From where? And under what conditions without harming nearby stream biota?
By carefully framing questions to address diverse interests, we can effectively integrate the strengths of various disciplines to discover innovative, interest-based solutions.
Greg Bourne, Cave Creek, Arizona
Greg Bourne, Cave Creek, Arizona
Greg Bourne, Cave Creek, Arizona
Greg Bourne, Cave Creek, Arizona
Greg Bourne from Cave Creek, Arizona, emphasizes that while having more information may seem beneficial for addressing complex scientific or technical issues, it can be counterproductive without considering underlying values The absence of these values creates a gap that diminishes the effectiveness of the information Therefore, the optimal approach is to leverage information to facilitate discussions and prioritize values, ensuring a more meaningful analysis and application of data.
To make informed decisions, I would analyze available data to identify which resources are under the most pressure, are highly valued, or are sensitive to impacts In situations where resources face competing demands, I would employ strategic planning and goal-setting techniques, such as values mapping, to prioritize values and clarify potential trade-offs in resource management.
Utilizing geographic information systems and visual overlays can enhance understanding of diverse information, enabling stakeholders to prioritize values effectively This approach clarifies which data is most relevant for informed decision-making.
Tom Fee, The Agreement Zone, Freehold, New Jersey:
Tom Fee, The Agreement Zone, Freehold, New Jersey:
Tom Fee, The Agreement Zone, Freehold, New Jersey:
Tom Fee, The Agreement Zone, Freehold, New Jersey:
Tom Fee of The Agreement Zone in Freehold, New Jersey, aims to assist participants in understanding and evaluating their perceptions of conflicting worldviews He addresses the challenges posed by clashing data, competing reports, and opposing evidence, while also referencing William James's concept of “mind-created manacles” to highlight the mental barriers that hinder open-mindedness.
Participants possess diverse backgrounds, education, training, and experiences, despite being experts in the same field I will facilitate opportunities for them to explore and appreciate the different perspectives of their peers.
To foster a more inclusive negotiation process, we will encourage participants to adopt diverse perspectives, moving beyond their initial viewpoints This method invites the group to explore various angles of observation, promoting a deeper understanding of the issues at hand.
Access to data is crucial in addressing the ongoing dispute among recreational users—hikers, horse riders, and bicycle riders—over management practices in a multi-purpose wilderness area Despite the stakeholders being knowledgeable and well-positioned individuals, they are not familiar with navigating such conflicts.
David Keller is affiliated with the U.S Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution in San Diego, where he plays a significant role in addressing environmental disputes His expertise contributes to effective conflict resolution strategies that promote sustainable practices and collaboration among stakeholders.
David Keller, U.S Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, San Diego, California