Coping with uncertainty in water management: Qualitative system analysis as a vehicle to visualize the plurality of practitioners' uncertainty handling routines
- PMID: 30682674
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.01.034
Coping with uncertainty in water management: Qualitative system analysis as a vehicle to visualize the plurality of practitioners' uncertainty handling routines
Abstract
Accelerated environmental and societal change and its dynamic present a challenge for water management, making it increasingly relevant to integrate uncertainties into the decision-making process. The challenge to science informing practice is how to provide scientific uncertainty information in a way that this information becomes usable for practitioners. We know that practitioners have developed routines in order to cope with uncertainties, but in order to facilitate the transfer of uncertainty information, this study analyses by whom, when and where in the decision-making process uncertainty routines are used. This research contributes to the plurality of practitioners' perspectives on decision-making under uncertainty in water management. Based on expert elicitation we show that, depending on the business unit and on the time horizon of the management object, practitioners are using different uncertainty routines and hence are in need of more tailor-made uncertainty information to inform their decision-making. Our qualitative systems modeling approach highlighting a reservoir management example serves as a boundary object visualizing the intersection of uncertainty routines and fostering cross-communication and acknowledgement of different perspectives among practitioners. It thus provides a platform for learning. Moreover, it provides a clear understanding of the uncertainty information needs which scientists may cover and increases the usability of their research findings, closing the science-practice gap in adaptive management and transformation processes.
Keywords: Decision-making; Expert elicitation; Qualitative system analysis; Science-practice gap; Uncertainty handling; Water management.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science-practice gap in ecology and conservation.Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2018 May;93(2):1032-1055. doi: 10.1111/brv.12385. Epub 2017 Nov 20. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2018. PMID: 29160024 Review.
-
Making framing of uncertainty in water management practice explicit by using a participant-structured approach.J Environ Manage. 2010 Mar-Apr;91(4):844-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.10.016. Epub 2009 Nov 27. J Environ Manage. 2010. PMID: 19945210
-
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003. PMID: 14698953 Review.
-
The experience of adults who choose watchful waiting or active surveillance as an approach to medical treatment: a qualitative systematic review.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Feb;14(2):174-255. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2016-2270. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016. PMID: 27536798 Review.
-
Climate change and European forests: what do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management?J Environ Manage. 2014 Dec 15;146:69-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.030. Epub 2014 Aug 24. J Environ Manage. 2014. PMID: 25156267
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
