Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
through uncertain times. In ecosystem management, there is no omnipotent dictator
who can incorporate diverse, often conflicting values and guide us through a high
degree of uncertainty and irreversibility in decisions with far-reaching and long-last-
ing consequences. The decisions have to be made collectively.
Collaborative social learning is also a way of reducing bounded rationality. There
have been significant research efforts to develop participatory techniques and tools to
overcome bounds in individual rationality and reach consensus through “futuring”
(Frame and Brown 2008). For example, scenario planning is one of the social learning
tools developed in management science. Scenario planning has gained credibility as
an effective tool to prepare for an uncertain future, and the demand for such a tool has
exploded in recent years (Peterson, Cumming, and Carpenter 2003; Chermack
2005). It is “a process of positing several informed, plausible and imagined alternative
future environments in which decisions about the future may be played out, for the
purpose of changing current thinking, improving decision making, enhancing hu-
man and organization learning and improving performance” (Chermack 2004). In
other words, scenario planning is a process of asking a series of “what if” questions to
reach an “Aha!” moment collectively. Each scenario as a story can hold vast informa-
tion, help us identify and communicate the forces that shape our future, and learn
about the weaknesses and strengths of our institutions. Through collective scenario-
building exercises, we can dream effectively as a group to envision the future. In this
context, planning is viewed as an iterative process where the goal is learning, rather
than a one-time activity to make a rational and comprehensive decision.
There are varying degrees of reluctance among scientists and resource managers
to accept or be open to the idea that we cannot have complete information about the
very system we exist in (Ludwig 2001). The dynamic nature of ecosystems does not al-
low us to optimize around a single objective with predicted consequences of our man-
agement actions (Holling and Gunderson 2002). However, the urgency of the prob-
lems demands action now. Ecological economics and other social sciences can
contribute significantly to the success of ecological restoration by clearly aiming to en-
able actions under high uncertainty. If failure is an inevitable natural process in both
ecosystems and social-economic systems, the question to ask is: How can we design in-
stitutions and organizations to anticipate failures and minimize the negative conse-
quences while learning from our collective mistakes and conserving the capacity to
change? Ecological economists, by identifying incentives that motivate individuals to
act as citizens to pursue collectively rational actions for ecological restoration, also
have much to add to the already extensive literature about collective actions for man-
aging common-pool resources. Moreover, they can help restorationists and stakehold-
ers develop better techniques and tools for collective futuring and construction of a
shared vision.
Conclusion
To generate broader support for ecological restoration and promote restorative ac-
tions, we need to openly acknowledge the uncertainty of the human situation and our
