A Framework for Understanding Social Science Contributions to Ecosystem Management

Abstract

We propose a framework for understanding the role that the social sciences should play in ecosystem management. Most of the ecosystem management literature assumes that scientific understanding of ecosystems is solely the purview of natural scientists. While the evolving principles of ecosystem management recognize that people play an important role, social considerations are usually limited to political and decision-making processes and to development of environmental education. This view is incomplete. The social science aspect of ecosystem management has two distinct components: one that concerns greater public involvement in the ecosystem management decision-making process, and one that concerns integrating social considerations into the science of understanding ecosystems. Ecosystem management decisions based primarily on biophysical factors can polarize people, making policy processes more divisive than usual. Ecological data must be supplemented with scientific analysis of the key social factors relevant to a particular ecosystem. Objective social science analysis should be included on an equal basis with ecological science inquiry and with data from public involvement. A conceptual framework is presented to communicate to ecological scientists the potential array of social science contributions to ecosystem management.

The Need for a Preference‐Based Multicriteria Prioritization Framework in Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

“…Who makes those value judgments, and whose value systems are considered during the decision process, is a matter of some debate (see, e.g., Endter‐Wada et al. ; Johnsen and Løkke ; Thabrew et al. ; Van den Bergh and Verbruggen ).…”

“…This is particularly relevant given that ecological science has a history of viewing people as obstacles to decisions and as sources of damage to rather than beneficiaries of natural resources (Endter‐Wada et al. ) and given a real chance that the expert community holds nonrepresentative ethical orientations that make other perspectives difficult to anticipate (Hauschild ).…”

“…; Zhang et al ), as is the need to better engage the public and include social issues (see, e.g., Endter‐Wada et al. ; Hofstetter et al. ; Johnsen and Løkke ; Thabrew et al.…”

Function and “functioning” in ecology: what does it mean?

“…The scientific idea of the “functioning” of a system in terms of processes and elements that sustain it, that is, the effort of a mechanistic explanation of natural processes, thus merges with the normative idea of ecosystem services. Travelling further along this way will increasingly require interdisciplinary approaches to biodiversity research, integrating not only economical considerations but also the social sciences (Machlis 1992, Endter‐Wada et al 1998, Jentsch et al 2003).…”

The importance of human dimensions research in managing harmful algal blooms

“…Insight into human psychology and behavior informs the coastal decision‐making process that increasingly aims to combine ecosystem understanding with meaningful stakeholder participation (Endter‐Wada et al . 1998) in establishing management objectives and evaluating tradeoffs.…”