Wicked Environmental Problems

For almost a century, advocates for preservation and for development have argued about the effects of human actions on the environment. These arguments have been made more difficult to resolve because there are still considerable uncertainties in science, and because it takes a long time for the effects of human actions to show up in the environment. Both sides, and other groups who fall along a continuum between them, have exploited these uncertainties in appeals and litigation. The logical result was for government agencies to produce more complex documents justifying their decisions and to include and advocate for more science, causing many to assume these disputes were based in science. But we believe the evidence shows that the underlying differences in stakeholder positions are not so much related to uncertainties in science or failure to consider particular aspects of the scientific literature, but rather to conflicting values and preferences, and therefore differing views on desirable outcomes. These elements of the argument are rarely, if ever, considered in the decision-making process. As a result, most environmental arguments continue to produce more detailed documents and longer processes without resolving the underlying issues.

When it comes to environmental conflict, what makes some decisions more difficult than others? For example, the state of California routinely experiences thousands of wildfires each year, hundreds of which are the natural result of lightning strikes. If these naturally occurring phenomena are so common, what makes decisions related to the management of these situations so challenging?

In this chapter, we discuss in more detail the four major environmental controversies introduced in Chapter 1. These four examples—restoration of the Everglades, management of Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Tanzania, carbon trading in the European Union, and management of the Sierra Nevada national forests—illustrate the breadth of environmental challenges that fall into the category of wicked problems. The cases involve a range of socioeconomic contexts in both developed and developing countries and center on a variety of natural resources. Forest planning in the Sierra Nevada will be our primary case study throughout the book, but we will draw on the other three cases frequently to illustrate our points.

Wicked environmental problems are characterized by scientific uncertainty, deep public disagreement over desired states and preferred outcomes, the impossibility of finding an optimal solution, and the requirement that despite these unknowns and conflicts the responsible decision maker must act (Allen and Gould 1986). In these conditions, public managers—whether or not they recognize that they face a wicked problem—often respond by applying such strategies as the precautionary principle, adaptive management, or public participation.

Planners and decision makers often propose an adaptive management approach to deal with scientific uncertainties. As discussed in chapter 4, however, when this approach is combined with the precautionary principle, as was the case in both the Northwest Forest Plan and the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment, it may lead to unintended negative effects that undermine management outcomes. The experimental nature of adaptive management accepts the possibility of some adverse outcomes. Indeed in adaptive policy making, limited adverse consequences can serve as the basis for learning. Yet this inherent threat of harm can conflict with precautionary approaches, resulting in significant constraints on management options.

The goal of this chapter is to both review the best practices of participatory processes and outline an approach that provides sufficient and appropriate participation within the context of wicked environmental problems. It is now part of the received wisdom that public participation is essential in managing complex environmental problems. Such participation is both intended to elicit (at least implicitly) broadly held public values relevant to the management decision at hand, and to incorporate those values into the final decision. However, because typical participatory processes generally fall victim to shortcomings that limit their utility in dealing with wicked problems, decision makers are often frustrated with, and question, the ultimate benefits of public participation.

The survey of the workshop participants described in Chapter 8 offered a broad overview of the multiple stakeholder perspectives regarding the management of the national forests in the Sierra Nevada region. Even among groups that seem superficially homogeneous, such as individuals who work for the Forest Service, we found a diversity of opinions about how best to manage the forests.

In chapter 1, we briefly mentioned some historical factors that may contribute to the transformation of complicated problems into wicked problems. These include broad, structural socioeconomic and demographic changes and also more immediate triggering events that polarize public debate and shift the political dynamics of environmental management dilemmas. Here we explore these themes in more detail. We also present and discuss three take-home lessons for public managers. We suggest that a public manager facing a wicked problem should (1) stop looking for the perfect solution; (2) seek instead a satisficingresponse; and (3) consider applying the iterative, analytic, adaptive, participatory process described in this book (particularly in chapters 6–9).