Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
was conducted by a multidisciplinary team assembled from Harvard University,
regional based university departments and institutes, and the United States Army,
and involved extensive landscape modeling using digital technologies. The San
Pedro report identifies three major scenarios, with variations of each. They
included current trajectories of change in development and water use, constrained
scenarios, and open development orientated scenarios. San Pedro is one of a series
of alternative futures projects undertaken by Harvard University for US federal
agencies, and exemplifies the expert led approach to applied landscape science in
alternative futures. The projects are tightly focused, technically sophisticated, and
completed in relatively short time frames (typically 2 years or so).
The second case is the Willamette Valley, Oregon (Baker et al.
2004
), which is
bounded on the west by the Coastal Range and on the east by the Cascade
Mountain Range. Two thirds of area is forested, primarily in upland areas, while
much of the valley has been converted to agricultural use. Projected population
growth is expected to place enormous demands on water and land resources. The
study was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
completed by the Pacific Northwest Ecosystem Research Consortium (PNW-ERC)
involving researchers at Oregon State University, the University of Oregon, the
University of Washington, and the U.S. EPA, and again used sophisticated digital
landscape models. Three visions of the future were created through to the year
2050—Plan Trend, Development and Conservation. The Willamette project
exemplifies a strongly stakeholder based approach to alternative futures. Whilst
also technically sophisticated, it is particularly notable for the institutional
arrangements set up to engage a wide range of stakeholders and communities
throughout the process and to assure that all scenarios would include plausible
decisions and management practices as defined by stakeholders. The project ran
for around a decade.
12.3.2 Discursive Moments in Alternative Futures
Analysis of the two contrasting cases has highlighted that irrespective of the style
of engagement, both of these science based exercises involved a number of points
at which decisions had to be made about similar questions, each of which would
materially affect the project outcome. Each decision point- that we have termed
'discursive moments'—can be viewed as a fork in the road, a mix of deliberation
and values based decision that determines future possibilities of both action and
outcome. The moments are: identification of project scope; selection of the method
and selection and assembly of the planning team; determination of the project
design; data collection and management; development, selection and testing
assumptions of scenarios; assessment of the effects of scenarios upon future
landscapes; and selection of implementation outcomes and outputs.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search