Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the neuse river watershed

Citation
M. Borsuk et al., Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the neuse river watershed, GR DECIS N, 10(4), 2001, pp. 355-373
Citations number
34
Categorie Soggetti
Management
Journal title
GROUP DECISION AND NEGOTIATION
ISSN journal
09262644 → ACNP
Volume
10
Issue
4
Year of publication
2001
Pages
355 - 373
Database
ISI
SICI code
0926-2644(200107)10:4<355:SVASMI>2.0.ZU;2-D
Abstract
In 1998, the North Carolina Legislature mandated a 30% reduction in the nit rogen loading in the Neuse River in an attempt to reduce undesirable enviro nmental conditions in the lower river and estuary. Although sophisticated s cientific models of the Neuse estuary exist, there is currently no study di rectly relating the nitrogen-reduction policy to the concerns of the estuar ine system's stakeholders. Much of the difficulty lies in the fact that exi sting scientific models have biophysical outcome variables, such as dissolv ed oxygen, that are typically not directly meaningful to the public. In add ition, stakeholders have concerns related to economics, modeling, implement ation, and fairness that go beyond ecological outcomes. We describe a decis ion-analytic approach to modeling the Neuse River nutrient-management probl em, focusing on linking scientific assessments to stakeholder objectives. T he first step in the approach is elicitation and analysis of stakeholder co ncerns. The second step is construction of a probabilistic model that relat es proposed management actions to attributes of interest to stakeholders. W e discuss how the model can then be used by local decision makers as a tool for adaptive management of the Neuse River system. This discussion relates adaptive management to the notion of expected value of information and ind icates a need for a comprehensive monitoring program to accompany implement ation of the model. We conclude by acknowledging that a scientific model ca nnot appropriately address all the stakeholder concerns elicited, and we di scuss how the remaining concerns may otherwise be considered in the policy process.