|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 63
4
Findings and Recommendations
Several themes ran through the symposia and the discussions of the Commit-
tee on Science and Policy for the Coastal Ocean: (1) coastal scientists and
policymakers do not interact sufficiently to ensure that decisions and policies
related to coastal areas are adequately based on science, (2) coastal policies tend
to lack sufficient flexibility and are most often designed to manage single issues,
and (3) the allocation of available resources to the application of coastal science
for policymaking is suboptimal. To address these concerns, the committee devel-
oped three general recommendations:
1. Improve the interaction between natural and social scientists and coastal
policymakers/implementors at all levels of government.
2. Employ integrated and adaptive management approaches in coastal
policymaking and implementation.
3. Improve allocation and coordination of resources to achieve effective
interaction between coastal scientists and policymakers.
The findings that support these recommendations are described separately
below, as are specific suggestions under each of the general recommendations.
Most of the recommendations could be applied at federal, state, and local levels.
Furthermore, these recommendations are directed not only at governmental agen-
cies and elected officials but also scientists and academic institutions, industry,
nongovernmental organizations, the news media, and the public. The recommen-
dations and who should carry them out are summarized in Table 4.
We recommend that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
63
OCR for page 64
64
TABLE 4 Summary of Recommendations
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
Recommendations Federal State
Agencies Congress Agencies
1. Improve Interactions Between Scientists
and Policymakers
A. IMPROVE MECHANISMS
Create mechanisms for external scientific
review of programs
Involve stakeholders in planning and
X X
application of policy-relevant scientific
research X X
Form multidisciplinary regional task
forces to address complex issues
Encourage groups of scientists to
develop plans for strategic research
Reevaluate legal requirements that may hinder
communication exchange
B. ENHANCE COMMUNICATIONS
Policymakers and implementers should
specify their information needs
Summarize results of scientific research in
X
X
X
X
lay language and disseminate widely,
including through electronic X X
information networks
Assist the media in understanding and
disseminating scientific findings
C. BUILD CAPACITY
Assess recent experiences with
science-policy interaction as
possible future models (e.g., NEPs)
Agency scientists should be encouraged
to maintain their expertise and stay
knowledgeable about current
developments in their fields
Enhance science-policy training by:
· enhancing natural marine science programs
with social science and policy studies
· enhancing marine-oriented social science
programs with natural science training
· creating or enhancing programs that train
"science translators"
Create consortia for strategic research
Provide academic rewards to encourage
scientific involvement in policy
development and implementation
Encourage scientific involvement at all
X
stages in the development of coastal policies X
X
X
X
X
OCR for page 65
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
65
State Local
The
Legislatures Authorities Scientists Universities Media
The
NGOs Public
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X X X
X X
X X
X
OCR for page 66
66
TABLE 4 Continued
Recommendations
2. Employ Integrated and Adaptive
Management in Coastal Policymaking
and Implementation
Develop and employ integrated and adaptive
management approaches to policy
development and implementation
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
Federal
State
Agencies Congress Agencies
Allocate resources to implement
existing plans to achieve
integrated and adaptive management X
Evaluate performance of state coastal
programs through application of science X
Assess "state of the coast" in regular
periodic reports
Improve scientific prediction, modeling,
risk assessment, and measures of
uncertainty
3. Allocate, Mobilize, and Coordinate
Resources
Devote a portion of scientific research
budgets to translate and disseminate
scientific research
Promote interdisciplinary policy research
teams in requests for proposals
Integrate science and policy capabilities
through data sharing, colocation of
facilities, and cooperative projects
Facilitate personnel exchange and staff
sharing among universities, NGOs,
industry, and agencies
NGOs nongovernmental organizations
NEPs Nanona1 Estuary Programs
X
~X X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior, the Depart-
ment of Energy, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other relevant federal
agencies review the recommendations in this report for application at the federal
level. Agencies could benefit from the recommendations through revisions to
existing agency policies, programs, and practices and in the creation of new ones.
Congress should consider the recommendations contained herein in the de-
velopment of legislation affecting coastal environments and their resources, par-
ticularly in the next reauthorization of the Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA).
These recommendations could provide useful guidance to state agencies and
legislatures. Authorities in states and regions could benefit from an analysis of
OCR for page 67
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
67
State Local The The
Legislatures Authorities Scientists Universities Media NGOs Public
X
~X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X X
region-specific suggestions summarized in Chapter 2 arid discussed in more de-
tail in the proceedings of the regional symposia.
ISSUE 1
INTERACTIONS BETWEEN COASTAL
SCIENTISTS AND POLICYMAKERS
Finding: Coastal scientists and policymakers do not interact sufficiently to
ensure that decisions and policies related to coastal areas are adequately
based on science.
OCR for page 68
68
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
Interactions between coastal scientists and policymakers have not been ad-
equate to support the decisions and policies made for coastal areas. In many
cases, federal, state, and local entities with responsibility for designing, imple-
menting, and enforcing decisions and policies related to coastal management do
not elicit independent advice from natural and social scientists and must therefore
rely on their often limited internal resources and expertise. Often, scientists who
are employed by government agencies are unable to maintain their expertise and
find it difficult to provide all the scientific services needed within an agency.
There are few mechanisms to plan and carry out "strategic research" to
support science-based policymaking and to encourage agency and external scien-
tists to participate in policy development, implementation, and evaluation, al-
though many federal and state agencies have established scientific advisory and
review mechanisms (see pp. 35-42~. Unfortunately, the mismatch in cultures and
time scales between scientists and policymakers (see pp. 29-35) sometimes di-
minishes the effectiveness of advisory committees.
The human and other dimensions of coastal environments and their resources
are inextricably linked, and their linkage creates a need for the integration of
social and natural sciences. Natural and social scientists seldom interact profes-
sionally and have different traditions, languages, world views, and incentive
systems (see pp. 42-45~. In part, such barriers exist because there is inadequate
cross-training between the social and natural sciences in graduate programs,
although public policy programs increasingly stress interdisciplinary skills.
The public can have a major influence on coastal policy. Whether public
influence helps solve environmental problems or hinders solutions depends on
the public's level of knowledge about an issue. The public can exert tremendous
political influence regardless of its knowledge of the details or scientific back-
ground of an issue. This means that the transfer of scientific knowledge to the
public is at least as important as its transfer to policymakers. Means of commu-
nicating scientific information to promote understanding about coastal environ-
mental issues, through the media and other fore, are deficient in that regard (see
pp. 57-58~.
Laws, regulations, and administrative and legal decisions are designed ide-
ally to protect the environment and the public's health, safety, and rights and to
manage resources wisely. Many coastal problems are regional in nature, crossing
jurisdictional boundaries and having both environmental and social aspects. Such
problems may require teams of experts from different sciences and different
levels of government to work together. However, interactions among federal
officials, state officials, and external scientists can sometimes be seriously inhib-
ited by well-intended laws designed to ensure public access to policymaking,
such as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (NRC, 1995c).
Some coastal management programs have gained experience in applying
science to design and implement coastal programs. For example, the National
Estuary Program (NEP) of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) forms
OCR for page 69
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
69
broadly constituted groups of scientists, citizens, and policymakers to design
programs for protecting and improving coastal environmental quality. The Chesa-
peake Bay and Great Lakes programs bring together similar constituencies to
focus on coastal environmental issues in their regions.
Recommendation: Improve the interaction between scientists (natural and
social) and coastal policymakers/implementers at all levels.
Improve Mechanisms for Focusing Scientific Attention on Coastal
Environmental Issues
· Federal, state, and local entities are encouraged to create or enhance
mechanisms for internal and external scientific review and assessment of their
coastal programs (NRC, l995b), including the science conducted by internal staff
and contractors.
Review and advice may be solicited from standing scientific committees,
peer review panels, or through other mechanisms. As agencies seek review and
advice, they should keep in mind the impediments to participation of scientists in
the advisory process, as well as impediments to the success of advisory activities
noted on pp. 37-41. Effective use of scientific review and advice not only
improves the use of science in coastal policymaking and management but also
engages scientists as more active participants in coastal management programs.
· Federal, state, and local entities are encouraged to involve stakeholders in
policy development, implementation, evaluation, and modification, including the
planning and application of policy-relevant scientific research.
Particularly important is stakeholder involvement in the initial planning,
definition of tasks to be accomplished, and identification of entities that should
be involved in the process. Actions should be initiated to educate stakeholders
about the availability of scientific information and the importance of using it in
the coastal management process (NRC, 1995b). Experience gained from the
NEPs, the Chesapeake Bay Program, and the Great Lakes Program could provide
a model for stakeholder involvement in coastal management. Including stake-
holders in the process will give them a vested interest in the outcome (NBC,
1995c) and will reduce uncertainty about the range of outcomes desired by the
public (NRC, l995b). Human motivation and responses should be included as
part of the social systems to be studied and managed (McKinney, 1995~.
· Federal, state, and local entities should encourage the formation of regional
problem-solving task forces or groups to address coastal problems that cross
subject areas, legal jurisdictions, and policy sectors, using, when relevant, an
ecosystem approach.
Participants in the Gulf of Mexico symposium suggested that, to deal with
OCR for page 70
70 .
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
the interactive issues of oyster production, water quality, and human health,
health officials and environmental quality officials should work together to inte-
grate their efforts (NRC, 1995c). Participants in the California symposium sug-
gested the formation of a blue-ribbon panel, including scientists, policymakers,
and resource agency personnel, to "define the information needed for
decisionmaking over the long term, define a research agenda to obtain this infor-
mation, and assess and synthesize ongoing science" in the area of habitat m~tiga-
tion (NRC, 1995a). Sabatier (1995) suggested the formation of specialized fore
to promote interactions, which should be sufficiently prestigious to induce pro-
fessionals from different advocacy coalitions to participate and should be domi-
nated by scientific norms. Such fore should receive funding independent of any
single participant, should be long term (at least one year), and should have a
balance of perspectives represented.
· To assist in the process of defining science and management goals, profes-
sional scientific associations, groups of scientists, and university research consor-
tia are encouraged to develop syntheses of the state of knowledge and develop
plans for strategic research on important coastal problems.
These efforts should be guided by information about research priorities pro-
vided by policymakers. The scientific community could help improve the appli-
cation of appropriate scientific information to coastal management problems by
developing consensus-forming processes that support credible analyses for use in
policymaking. Many descriptions of priority environmental quality issues have
been developed. A good recent summary is given by NRC (1994a).
· Congress and state legislatures should amend legislation to remove barri-
ers to the exchange of inflation between state and federal levels and between
governmental agencies and external scientists, while preserving the intent of such
legislation (NRC, l995c).
Enhance Communications Among Scientists, Policymakers, and the Public
· Policymakers and implementers are encouraged to clearly identify their
short- and long-term research needs, and to indicate how the information is to be
used, what resources are available to support the collection and analysis of infor-
mation about natural and social systems, and when the information is needed
(NRC, l995b).
Lists of the priority scientific activities should be developed by individual
agencies, or as cooperative efforts among them, in collaboration with scientists
and stakeholders. Such lists could form the basis for requests for proposals
issued for applied research (NRC, 1995b). New means should be developed to
communicate this vital information to scientists and to provide incentives to
encourage scientists to carry out identified research. These mechanisms should
OCR for page 71
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
71
be designed to improve the transfer of information to scientists on a regular basis
(biannually to monthly) as well as on an immediate basis for urgent situations.
Such a process could be enhanced by forming a network of science and manage-
ment professionals interested in cooperation and the timely exchange of informa-
tion. Improved communications and increased interactions among scientists,
policymakers, and the public could make political processes more fact-based and
predictable.
· Federal, state, and local entities, with the assistance of universities, non-
governmental organizations (NGOs), and others, should ensure that the results of
policy-relevant scientific research are summarized in a manner intelligible to the
lay public and are widely disseminated to decisionmakers and the public through
various media, including electronic information networks (NRC, l995c).
It was evident throughout the regional symposia that the public is often a
missing component in the application of science to coastal policy. Although an
informed public will not always agree with scientists and managers, their reasons
for disagreement will more likely be based on knowledge, allowing the possibil-
ity of informed compromise. Government agencies and the scientific community
must, on a continuing basis, take actions to increase public understanding and
awareness of the relative roles of science and policy and the importance to
policymakers and implementers of objective, credible, and timely scientific in-
formation. These should include communication by scientists to the public and
policymakers about the role of science and its limitations (NRC, l995c).
· Federal, state, and local entities, scientists, NGOs, and others should assist
representatives of the print, radio, and television media understand and dissemi-
nate the results of policy-relevant scientific research (NRC, 1995b).
Special awards for science and environmental reporting could improve the
quality of media coverage. For example, the American Geophysical Union (a
professional society) recognizes high-quality science reporting on geoscience
issues through its Walter Sullivan Award.
Build Capacity for Science-Policy Interactions
· Federal, state, and local entities that have made innovative efforts to apply
scientific expertise in the design and implementation of coastal programs (e.g.,
EPA's National Estuary Program and the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes pro-
grams) should be encouraged to prepare assessments of effective models for
science-policy interaction that can be used as a guide for implementation in other
relevant contexts.
· Federal, state, and local entities should encourage staff scientists to main-
tain their expertise and stay current with developments in knowledge and tech-
nology in their fields (NRC, 1995a).
OCR for page 72
72
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
· Institutions of higher education, as well as individual scientists, should be
encouraged to:
Improve the cross-disciplinary training of natural and social scien-
tists-for example, by enhancing existing programs of advanced training in the
marine-oriented natural sciences by including additional training in the social
sciences and policy (to attain policy literacy); by enhancing existing programs of
advanced training in the marine-oriented social sciences to include additional
training in the natural sciences (to attain natural science literacy); and by enhanc-
ing or creating programs of training for "science translators" (NRC, 1994a,
1995b,c).
Training programs for science translators should include exposure to the
natural and social sciences, policy development and implementation, and conflict
management and communication skills. Science translators should not substitute
for the involvement of scientists and policymakers directly with one another.
Translators can provide a supplementary means to draw practitioners from the
two fields together and to help them communicate more effectively with one
another and with the public. Scientists and policymakers need to understand each
other to work together in defining coastal environmental problems, by posing the
appropriate research questions, explaining methods and results, and exploring the
possible implications and policy responses to the research results (Douglas, 1995~.
Create consortia for strategic research, in collaboration with federal,
state, and local authorities. The consortia should facilitate regular communica-
tion of state-of-the-art science to policymakers. This could be accomplished in
week-long summer "institutes," individual seminars, and trips to research sites or
laboratories (Glidden, 1995~. In addition, consortia could sponsor summer in-
ternships for graduate students and faculty to work in policymaking organiza-
tions (NRC, l995c). Such consortia could sponsor the joint preparation of writ-
ten plans describing how science and policy will be integrated in coastal
management programs.
Modify the academic reward system to encourage the involvement of
scientists in the policy development and implementation process (NRC, 1995b)
by recognizing scholarship in synthesis and application as well as discovery and
teaching (Boyer, 1990~. Although this is a daunting task, the lack of incentives to
encourage involvement of academic scientists in coastal management problems
was often cited in the regional symposia as a major barrier to effective use of
. . .. .
science in pollcyma any.
Encourage the application of scientific knowledge in the development
of coastal policies by working closely with state coastal zone management pro-
grams and other state agencies. This may require new legislation at the federal
and state levels. Participants in the Gulf of Maine symposium believed that state-
level environmental impact assessment processes, akin to the federal process
required under the National Environmental Policy Act, should be developed
(NRC, 1995b).
OCR for page 73
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
73
Management programs should be evaluated, in part, relative to their ef-
forts to and successes in incorporating science in their activities. Research and
management reviews of coastal environmental management programs, such as
the Section 312 reviews of state coastal management programs, and the activities
of the National Estuarine Research Reserves, National Marine Sanctuaries, and
the National Estuary Program, should be coordinated or integrated (NRC, l995b).
ISSUE 2
INTEGRATED AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Finding: Coastal policies tend to lack sufficient flexibility and are most often
designed to manage single issues.
Often, coastal management is conducted separately by different levels of
government (e.g., state versus federal agencies) and by different agencies in state
governments or the federal government. Management usually is not integrated or
coordinated among entities in a meaningful way to encompass all relevant as-
pects of a given coastal environmental issue. Actions taken by different parts of
government often conflict owing to such factors as divergent legislative man-
dates, agency cultures, lack of communication, and constituency pressures. Lack
of coordination may relate to different groups within a single political jurisdiction
but are even more challenging when more than one political jurisdiction is in-
volved.
Adaptive environmental management (see pp. 61-62) implies regular evalu-
ation of management success as measured by some predetermined variables and
predictive scientific approaches that can be used to assess and predict risk and to
estimate uncertainties related to management processes. There are few instances
of adaptive management being used formally as a regular part of coastal manage-
ment programs. In some cases, adaptive management plans have been devel-
oped, but have not been implemented (e.g., coastal zone management and na-
tional estuary programs) due to lack of funding.
Recommendation: Employ integrated and adaptive management approaches
in coastal policymaking and implementation.
Policy and management processes should be integrated, so that all sectors,
political and administrative jurisdictions, stakeholders, and scientific disciplines
relevant to particular coastal issues or problems, are included in the process. This
should include linkages between land use and marine environmental quality
(Terkla, 1995~. Policy and management processes should be adaptive in that new
data and information, analytical and evaluative techniques, and lessons from
management experience are continually incorporated into the process (NRC,
l995b). A clear set of quantitative goals should be articulated for coastal man
OCR for page 74
74
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
agement programs to achieve in a prescribed period of time. For example, coastal
management programs might select goals related to wetlands protection, beach
and dune management, public access, management of coastal development to
reduce losses from natural hazards, and nonpoint-source pollution (Knecht, 1995~.
Greater specificity and accountability should be built into coastal management
systems (Knecht, 1995), with emphasis on outcome-oriented goals. One means
of improving linkages would be a greater use of economic methods for valuing,
prioritizing, and allocating scarce resources for monitoring (Terkla, 19959. Tra-
ditional and nontraditional (Odum, 1995) valuation methods should be used for
the allocation of natural resources such as fish, fresh water, and habitat. Specific
recommendations include the following:
· Federal, state, and local entities should strive to work across agency bound-
aries to develop integrated management programs that are adaptive in their for-
mulation and implementation.
· Government entities that have developed programs to achieve integrated
and adaptive management (e.g., coastal zone management programs, NEPs, other
interagency ecosystem management efforts) should allocate sufficient resources
to implement such programs.
Participants in the Gulf of Maine symposium suggested that cumulative
impact problems could be reduced if coastal management agencies develop area-
wide comprehensive planning programs for all sectors of the coast (e.g., Compre-
hensive Conservation and Management Plans of the NEPs or Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern in Massachusetts) (ARC, l995b). Rational schemes to
manage cumulative impacts should include management goals that are conceptu-
ally clear, that demonstrate causal relationships and infrastructure to allow the
calculation of key thresholds and monitoring of conditions, and that have ad-
equate capacity for governance (NRC, 1995a). Governance must be flexible so
that it can be adapted to greater or lesser intervals of time and geographic area as
more information is gathered regarding a coastal environmental issue.
.
State legislatures are encouraged to evaluate the performance of their
coastal programs by requiring the application of scientific expertise to such evalu-
ations.
.
Concerted efforts should be made to assess changes in conditions of
coastal environments, resources, and human populations and the degree of
achievement of policy goals as a key requirement for adaptive management.
These should include strategic assessments and monitoring programs of a
national scope, yielding a periodic (e.g., every five years) assessment of the "state
of the coast." However, these efforts should ensure that the information provided
covers appropriate spatial and temporal scales to be useful for coastal policy and
management at the state and regional levels. Present federal monitoring pro
OCR for page 75
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
75
grams tend to monitor conditions too sparsely over the geographic areas that most
concern state and local managers.
· Scientists should improve the application of predictive approaches (see pp.
45-50) to policy development and implementation, including modeling and risk
assessment, complete with estimates of their associated uncertainty.
Such information should be used to build integrated multidisciplinary (natu-
ral and social sciences) models of systems that need to be understood better.
These models should take into consideration, while at the same time striving to
overcome, impediments to the effective use of models (NRC, 1995c), including
incompleteness of models, imperfect input data, and lack of a widely accepted
means to combine environmental and economic factors in a model. Science
activities should be focused on making predictions and identifying variables that
create uncertainties in these predictions. Modeling should be linked with moni-
toring and research in an adaptive management framework.
ISSUE 3
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
Finding: The allocation of available resources for coastal science and
policymaking is suboptimal because few of the resources are devoted to
making the connections necessary to promote the appropriate use of science
in policymaking.
A great deal of human, fiscal, and physical resources are presently devoted to
coastal science and management. For example, the federal government expended
a total of $672 million on coastal research in FY1991-1993 (SUSCOS, 1993~.
U.S. expenditures for management and protection of coastal areas are difficult to
estimate but may equal or exceed the research expenditure. Despite these large
investments, the use of science in coastal policy development, implementation,
and evaluation has not been as effective as desired, in part because little support
has been directed to disseminating information between scientists and
policymakers, promoting interdisciplinary research teams, integrating science
and policy components of individual agencies, and sharing personnel among
science and policy portions of agencies. The reallocation of existing resources
could draw coastal science and policy into a more cooperative endeavor.
Recommendation: Improve the allocation and coordination of resources to
achieve effective interaction between coastal scientists and policymakers.
Although the allocation of some new resources (fiscal, physical, and human)
will be needed to increase the use of science in coastal policymaking, much can
be accomplished through better mobilization and coordination of existing re-
sources. Additional resources may be needed to build long-term data bases
OCR for page 76
76
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND THE COAST
needed to guide management (Glidden, 19959. It was noted at the California
symposium (NRC, 1995a) and in a previous NRC assessment (NRC, 1990a) that
many resources are wasted on ineffective or unnecessary monitoring. Agencies
responsible for coastal ecosystem protection should reevaluate their monitoring
priorities and appropriately adjust the focus of their monitoring activities (NRC,
l990b). Many issues could benefit from understanding and documenting past
actions and how they affected natural and social systems (NRC, l995c). Geo-
graphic information systems can be used to organize this information (Chang et
al., 1995~. New monitoring technologies and data collection by community-
based volunteers should be explored (Chang et al., 1995). Specific recommenda-
tions include the following:
· Federal, state, and local entities should require that a given portion of
scientific research budgets be devoted to the translation and dissemination of
scientific results.
· Federal, state, and local entities, in their request for proposals, should
promote the formation of interdisciplinary teams to carry out policy-relevant
research.
.
Federal, state, and local entities should develop mechanisms for better
integration of their science and policy capabilities, through such means as data
sharing, coloration of facilities, and cooperative programs.
· Federal, state, and local entities should facilitate personnel exchange or
staff-sharing arrangements, whereby scientists and NGO and industry personnel
may spend time in government, and government employees can work in univer-
sities, NGOs, and corporations on temporary assignments.
The committee offers the recommendations in this chapter as suggestions
that could be implemented immediately. Undoubtedly, as more experience is
gained using science in coastal management, new ideas for further improvements
will emerge.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
local entities
