Readings must be completed before the class number noted.
|Theme A: The Challenge of using Scientific and Technical Information in Environmental Policy-Making|
|1||Introduction and Overview|
|2||Discussion of Readings||Adler, P. S., R. C. Barret, M. C. Bean, J. E. Birkhoff, C. P. Ozawa, and E. B. Rubin. Managing Scientific and Technical Information in Environmental Cases: Principles and Practices for Mediators and Facilitators. 2000, pp. 5-21. |
Kendler, H. H. "Should Scientists Remain Objective?" Science 301 (2003): 310-311.
|3||Guest Participant: P. Patrick Leahy, Assoc. Director for Geology, USGS (Invited)||Sarewitz, D., and R. A. Pielke. "Prediction in Science and Policy." In Prediction: Science, Decision-making and the Future of the Nation. Edited by D. Sarewitz, Jr. R. A. Pielke, and Jr. R. Byerly. Island Press, 2000, pp. 11-21.|
|4||Discussion of Readings||McCreary, S. "Resolving Science-intensive Public Policy Disputes-reflections on the New York Bight Initiative." In The Consensus Building Handbook. Edited by L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, and J. Thomas-Larmer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 1999, pp. 829-858. |
Smith, M. E. "Chaos, Consensus and Common Sense." The Ecologist 25, no. 2/3 (1995): 80-85.
|5||Discussion of Readings||Jacobs, K. L., S. N. Luoma, and K. A. Taylor. "CALFED an Experiment in Science and Decision-making." Environment 45, no. 1 (2003): 30-41. |
S. McCreary, J. Gamman, B. Brooks, L. Whitman, R. Bryson, B. Fuller, A. McInerny, and R. Glazer. "Applying a Mediated Negotiation Framework to Integrated Coastal Zone Management." Coastal Management 29 (2001): 183-216. (Read pp. 202-209.)
|6||Guest Participant: Stanley Ponce, Senior Advisor for Partnerships and Business Policy, USGS (Invited)||Susskind, L. E. "The Need for a Better Balance between Science and Politics." In Environmental Diplomacy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994, pp. 63-78.|
|Theme B: Introduction and Development of the Joint Fact Finding Approach|
|7||Discussion of Readings||Leshner, A. I. "Public Enagement with Science." Science 299 (2003): 977. |
Karl, H. A., and C. E Turner. "Incorporating Science into Decision-making." Science 300 (2003): 1370.
Walker, G. B., and S. E. Daniels. "Natural Resource Policy and the Paradox of Public Involvement - Bringing Scientists and Citizens Together." In Understanding Community-based Ecosystem Management. Edited by G. J. Gray, M. J. Enzer, and J. Kusel. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc., 2001, pp. 253-269.
|8||Discussion of Readings||Ozawa, C., and L. E. Susskind. "Mediating Science-intensive Disputes." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 5, no. 1 (1985): 23-39. |
Ehrman, J. R., and B. L. Stinson. "Joint Fact Finding and the Use of Technical Experts." In The Consensus Building Handbook. Edited by L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, and J. Thomas-Larmer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1999, pp. 375-399.
|9||Discussion of Readings||Andrews, C. J. Humble Analysis - the Practice of Joint Fact Finding. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2002, p. 200. |
Read the following:
"Joint Fact Finding," Chapter 1, pp. 3-16
"Lessons Learned," Chapter 16, pp. 165-176
"Elements of a Successful Joint Fact Finding," Chapter 17, pp. 177-186
|10||Discussion of Readings||Daniels, S. E., and G. B. Walker. Working through Environmental Conflict - the Collaborative Learning Approach. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2001, p. 299. |
Read the following:
Preface, pp. xi-xiv
Chapter 1, pp. 1-13
|11||Discussion of Readings||Daniels, S. E. and G. B. Walker. Working through Environmental Conflict - the Collaborative Learning Approach. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2001, p. 299. |
Read the following:
"Systems Thinking," Chapter 6, pp. 97-106
Cash, D. W., W. C. Clark, F. Alcock, N. M. Dickson, N. Eckley, D. H. Guston, J. Jager, and R. B. Mitchell. "Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development." In Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. (In press)
Powell, K. "Open the Floodgates." Nature 420 (2002): 356-358.
|12||Natural Resource Management in Rural Eastern Oregon |
Guest Participant: Robert Alverts, Science Advisor, Office of the Regional Biologist, USGS (Invited)
Guest Participant: Christine Turner, Research Geologist, USGS (Invited)
|Kusel, J., S. C. Doak, S. Carpenter, and V. E. Sturtevant. "The Role of the Public in Adaptive Ecosystem Management." InSierra Neveda Ecosystem Project: Final Report to Congress 2. Vol. 2. Assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildlife Resources, 1996, pp. 611-624. |
Shindler, B., and K. A. Cheek. "Integrating Citizens in Adaptive Management: A Propositional Analysis." Conservation Ecology 3, no. 1, 14 (1999).
Turner, C. E. "An Experience in John Day, Oregon - the Need for USGS Agenda-less Science in Collaborative Partnerships." An Internal USGS Report. 2003.
|13||Guest Participant: Michael Mery, Chair Tomales Bay Watershed Council (Invited; TBWC Embodies the Principles and Concepts Discussed in this Theme; the Importance of a Neutral Mediator)||Mery, Michael. Notes on the Tomales Bay Watershed Council and Environmental Issues.2003, p. 4. |
McVicker, G., and T. Bryan. Community-Based Ecosystem Stewardship. 2002, p. 4.
|14||Framing a Joint Fact Finding Mission Statement in a Contested Ecosystem Management Situation|
|Theme C: Cape Wind Project|
|15||Cape Wind Controversy and Wind Energy in General||Background on the Cape Wind Controversy and Wind Energy in General. |
NY Times Magazine article.
|16||Current Status of Wind Power in General and Off Shore Wind Power in Particular||Susskind, L., and P. Field. "The Mutual-Gains Approach." In Dealing with an Angry Public. New York: The Free Press, 1996, pp. 37-59. |
Readings on the Current Status of Wind Power in General and Off Shore Wind Power in Particular.
|17||NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard)||Readings on NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard).|
|18||Discussion of Readings||Readings on the Cape Wind Controversy.|
|19||Invited Guest Participant to Present the Overview of the wind Controversy|
|20||Invited Guest Participant to Present Pro-View of the Controversy|
|21||Invited Guest Participant to Present the Con-View of the Controversy|