Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
interdisciplinary backgrounds that represent the larger decision to ensure that
the needs of stakeholders are not overlooked. This is not to say that the
stakeholders involved in identifying alternative management actions are
the same as the larger stakeholder group, usually they are not. This is primarily
due to the technical knowledge necessary to present plausible alternatives. Still
there are opportunities where the benefit of being naive may present novel
actions that might not otherwise be considered.
The brainstorming process should begin by identifying alternatives for indi-
vidual objectives, but always be looking for opportunities when one action may
fulfill the needs of multiple objectives. Identifying alternatives also means being
mindful of those actions that must be done (e.g., standing policy), constraints
(real or perceived) and potential trade-offs between objectives and various
management actions. In developing alternatives, it is important that the “brain-
storming” process focus on developing high-quality management actions that
are: (1) explicitly designed to address the outlined objectives, (2) technically
sound in that they build on the best known practices, (3) concise yet comprehen-
sive enough to include the technical understanding for implementation,
(4) designed to expose trade-offs between the decision process by having
mutually exclusive strategies, and (5) developed to achieve the greatest good
for the stakeholders involved.
Once an extensive list of alternatives has been identified, it can be useful to
group them into strategies or portfolios based on general similarities in what they
aim to achieve. Sometimes these portfolios can represent the needs of specific
stakeholder groups or specific conditions that could be achieved. For example,
management actions on a river system may be grouped together into portfolios
that meet the needs of sport-fishery, endangered species, or irrigation; alterna-
tively, they may be grouped based on their ability to return the river to 50%,
75%, or 95% of historical flows. Both methods have merit, the first in that it is
generally clear to the stakeholders what objectives are being met and then where
trade-offs must be considered, and the second in that the inherent interests of any
particular group are not the driving factor and thus the process can be less
contentious.
4.
Elucidate Consequences
- The list of alternative management actions is only
effective if it creates an opportunity to evaluate and compare actions in light of
the objectives before implementation. It is important to realize that the process
of identifying management consequences is not a value judgment, but an
analytical assessment of the most likely outcome of the action(s). Using the
best scientific knowledge available, this process is a modeling exercise focused
on predicting the likely outcomes of each alternative and thus the likelihood that
each achieves the desired objective. Depending upon our knowledge of the
system, this process can be highly quantitative where extensive data are modeled
and probabilities assigned to each outcome or as is often the case, if little or
nothing is known about the system, this process can depend heavily on expert
opinion or comparisons to similar systems. In both cases, there is a degree of
uncertainty associated with predicted outcomes as well as the parameters