Communicating Ecological Indicators to Decision Makers and the Public

Abstract

Ecological assessments and monitoring programs often rely on indicators to evaluate environmental conditions. Such indicators are frequently developed by scientists, expressed in technical language, and target aspects of the environment that scientists consider useful. Yet setting environmental policy priorities and making environmental decisions requires both effective communication of environmental information to decision makers and consideration of what members of the public value about ecosystems. However, the complexity of ecological issues, and the ways in which they are often communicated, make it difficult for these parties to fully engage such a dialogue. This paper describes our efforts to develop a process for translating the indicators of regional ecological condition used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency into common language for communication with public and decision-making audiences. A series of small-group sessions revealed that people did not want to know what these indicators measured, or how measurements were performed. Rather, respondents wanted to know what such measurements can tell them about environmental conditions. Most positively received were descriptions of the kinds of information that various combinations of indicators provide about broad ecological conditions. Descriptions that respondents found most appealing contained general reference to both the set of indicators from which the information was drawn and aspects of the environment valued by society to which the information could be applied. These findings can assist with future efforts to communicate scientific information to nontechnical audiences, and to represent societal values in ecological programs by improving scientist-public communication.

Ten common mistakes in designing biodiversity indicators for forest policy

“…preservation of spotted owl). In another approach, Schiller et al (2001) replace individual scientific terms (e.g. foliar chemistry, lichen chemistry, dendrochemistry, and branch evaluations) with 'common language indicators' (e.g.…”

Identifying functional stakeholder clusters to maximise communication for the ecosystem approach to fisheries management

“…Creating such management tools has proven difficult, partly due to treatment of stakeholders as a homogeneous audience. There is an opportunity to contextualise information to the interests of different stakeholder groups and a need for a Common Language to facilitate communication and interactions between science and other stakeholders [10,55]. Now that functional stakeholder clusters can be identified from a stakeholder collective, information from ecological models can be customised to match cluster interests.…”

Predicting effects of future development on a territorial forest songbird: methodology matters

“…Metrics need to be biologically meaningful, easy to understand, and straightforward to communicate (Schiller 2001). Maximum clique analysis is a methodology that can translate occupancy probabilities and other habitat suitability maps to yield species population parameters, particularly for territorial species.…”