Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managing the Science-Policy Interface in a Complex and Contentious World

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Restoring Lands - Coordinating Science, Politics and Action

Abstract

Most of the significant problems planners, resource managers, and public sector decision makers have to deal with are emergent from dynamic interactions among component elements of complex adaptive systems. Such problems are known as ‘wicked’ problems because inherent uncertainty is high, so that it is not possible to precisely predict the outcomes of any action or event, and addressing the problems involve trade-offs between competing and often incompatible objectives and thus require balancing among differing value judgments. This complexity has profound implications for the role of science in policy making. Adaptive co-management has been suggested as an appropriate approach for addressing science-intensive ‘wicked’ problems, but has proven difficult to implement. Successful cultivation of an effective collaborative adaptive management process requires careful attention to process design to ensure that the necessary diversity of viewpoints and expertise - scientific, technical, and experiential - are fully included and that substantive and constructive dialogue is supported. Scientists seeking to more effectively integrate their science into such a process face the challenge of how to participate effectively without compromising the quality of their science. In this paper, we present concepts and recommendations that should be considered when designing an adaptive co-management process, and explore ideas for management of the science-policy interface.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ackoff R (1999) Transformational leadership. Strat Leader 27(1):21

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler PS, Birkhoff JE (2002) Building trust: when knowledge from “Here” meets knowledge from “Away”. The National Policy Consensus Center, Portland. Available online at: http://www.resolv.org/about_pub_bt.html

  • Adler PS, Barrett RC, Bean MC, Birkhoff JE, Ozaawa CP, Rudin EB (2000) Managing scientific and technical information in environmental cases: principles and practices for mediators and facilitators. Resolve, Inc., Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen GM, Gould EM Jr (1986) Complexity, wickedness, and public forests. J For 84(4):20–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen PM, Strathern M, Baldwin JS (2005) The evolutionary complexity of social economic systems: the inevitability of uncertainty and surprise. In: McDaniel RR Jr, Driebe DJ (eds) Uncertainty and surprise in complex systems: questions on working with the unexpected. Springer, New York, pp 31–50

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Anderies JM, Walker BH, Kinzig AP (2006) Fifteen weddings and a funeral: case studies and resilience-based management. Ecol Soc 11(1):21. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art21/

  • Andrews CJ (2002) Humble analysis: the practice of joint fact-finding. Praeger, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  • Beierle TC, Konisky DM (2000) Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning. J Pol Anal Manag 19(4):587–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beirle T, Cayford J (2002) Democracy in practice – public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Beratan KK (2007) A cognition-based view of decision processes in complex social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 12(1): 27. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art27

  • Birkland TA (1997) After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramson RA, Bliss T (2002) Methods for whole system change in public organizations and communities: an overview of the issues. Public Organ Rev 2:211–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs S (2003) Command and control in natural resource management: revisiting Hollings and Meffe. Ecol Manag Restor 4(3):161–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff JM (2002) Assessing and improving partnership relationships and outcomes: a proposed framework. Eval Program Plann 25:215–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM (1998) Competing on the edge: strategy as structured chaos. Harvard Business School, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchy M, Hoverman S, Averill C (1999) Understanding public participation in forest planning in Australia. Australian National University, working paper 99:2. Available online at: www.anu.edu.au/Forestry/staff/index-frame.html

  • Buck LE, Geisler CC, Schelhas J, Wollenberg E (2001) Biological diversity: balancing interests through adaptive collaborative management. CRC, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Calton JM, Payne SL (2003) Coping with paradox: multistakeholder learning dialogue as a pluralist sensemaking process for addressing messy problems. Bus Soc 42(1):7–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CAMNet (2011). Defining collaborative adaptive management. Collaborative Adaptive Management Network. http://www.adaptivemanagement.net/about/define-collaborative-adaptive-management. Accessed 1 Feb 2011.

  • Carlsson L, Berkes F (2005) Co-management: concepts and methodological implications. J Environ Manag 75:65–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW (2000) ‘In order to aid in diffusing useful and practical information…’: cross-scale boundary organizations and agricultural extension. Environment and Natural Resources Program, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, discussion paper 2000–2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Catton W (1989) Choosing which danger to risk. Society 27:6–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnley G (2000) Enhancing the role of science in stakeholder-based risk management decision making: RiskWorld. Available online at: http://www.riskworld.com/Nreports/2000/Charnley/NR00GC00.htm

  • Chess C (2000) Evaluating environmental public participation: methodological questions. J Environ Plann Manag 43(6):769–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen NL, Agee JK, Brussard PF et al (1989) Interpreting the Yellowstone fires of 1988. Bioscience 39:678–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark CW (1985) Bioeconomic modeling and fisheries management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark WC (1999) Designing effective assessments of global environmental issues: towards a conceptual framework for learning from experience. Harvard University, Cambridge, GEA Project: 18

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark RN, Meidinger EE, Miller G, Rayner J, Layseca M, Monreal S, Fernandez J, Shannon MA (1996) Integrating science and policy in natural resource management: lessons and opportunities from North America. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, general technical report PNW- GTR-441

    Google Scholar 

  • Colfer CJP (1995) Who counts most in sustainable forest management? Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), CIFOR working paper No. 7, Bogor

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK, Sungu Y, Hohnson D, Dunn M (2001) Complex systems in crisis: anticipation and resilience in dynamic environments. J Conting Crisis Manag 9(3):144–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley A, Moote MA (2003) Evaluating collaborative natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 16:371–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connick S, Innes JE (2003) Outcomes of collaborative water policy making: applying complexity thinking to evaluation. J Environ Plann Manag 46(2):177–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortner HJ, Moote MA (1994) Trends and issues in land and water resources management: setting the agenda for change. Environ Manag 18(2):167–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Ruth M (1998) Using dynamic modeling to scope environmental problems and build consensus. Environ Manag 22(2):183–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels SE, Walker GB (2001) Working through environmental conflict – the collaborative learning approach. Praeger, Westport, 299 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson-Hunt IJ, Berkes F (2003) Nature and society through the lens of resilience: toward a human-in-ecosystem perspective. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 53–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas PM (1995) What do policymakers and policy-implementers need from scientists? In: Improving interactions between coastal science and policy. Proceedings of the California symposium, Irvine, CA. National Academies Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Eidelson RJ (1997) Complex adaptive systems in the behavioral and social sciences. Rev Gen Psychol 1(1):42–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreya C, de Loë RC, Kreutzwiser RD (2008) Imagined communities, contested watersheds: challenges to integrated water resources management in agricultural areas. J Rural Stud 24:304–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson AC, McCay B (1998) Crossing the threshold of ecosystem resilience: the commercial extinction of northern cod. In: Folke C, Berkes F (eds) Linking social and ecological systems: institutional learning for resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 311–337

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (1999) Technological deliberation in a democratic society: the case for participatory inquiry. Sci Public Policy 26(5):294–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2000) Citizens, experts, and the environment. Duke University Press, Durham, 336 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C (2002) Social-ecological resilience and behavioural responses. The Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, discussion paper 155. Available online at: http://www.beijer.kva.se/publications/pdf-archive/Disc155.pdf

  • Folke C, Pritchard L Jr, Berkes F, Colding J, Svedin U (1998) The problem of fit between ecosystems and institutions. International human dimensions programme on global environmental change, working paper no. 2. Available online at: http://www.ihdp.uni-bonn.de/html/publications/workingpaper/workpaper01.html

  • Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2003) Building resilience for adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Berkes R, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 352–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Hahn T, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goergen MT, Floyd DW, Ashton PG (1995) An old model for building consensus and a new role for foresters. J For 95(1):8–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson L (1999) Resilience, flexibility and adaptive management – antidotes for spurious certitude? Conserv Ecol 3(1). Available online at: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss1/art7

  • Gunderson L, Holling C (2001) Panarchy: understanding transformation in systems of human and nature. Island, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) (2002) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Guston DH (1999) Stabilizing the boundary between US politics and science: the role of the office of technology transfer as a boundary organization. Soc Stud Sci 29(1):87–111

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guston DH (2000) Between politics and science: assuring the integrity and productivity of research. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton LC, Haedrich RL, Duncan CM (2004) Above and below the water: social/ecological transformation in northwest Newfoundland. Popul Environ 25(3):195–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healey P (1997) Collaborative planning: shaping places in fragmented societies. UBC, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Himmelman AT (1996) On the theory and practice of transformational collaboration: from social service to social justice. In: Huxham C (ed) Creating collaborative advantage. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, pp 19–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoenicke R, Davis JA, Gunther A, Mumley TE, Abu-Saba K, Taberski K (2003) Effective application of monitoring information: the case of San Francisco Bay. Environ Monit Assess 81:15–25

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (2003) Introduction. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS, Meffe GK (1996) Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conserv Biol 10(2):328–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxham C (2000) The challenge of collaborative governance. Public Manag 2:337–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Imperial MT, Hennessey T (2000) Improving watershed governance: collaboration, public value, and accountability. In: Proceedings of the American Political Science Association, 96th annual meeting, Washington, DC, 31 Aug–3 Sept 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes JE, Booher DE (1999) Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. J Am Plann Assoc 65(4):412–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson BL (1999) The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource management agencies. Conserv Ecol 3(2):art. 8. Available online at: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8

  • Kates RW, Clark WC (1996) Expecting the unexpected? Environment 38(2):6–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan RS, Norton DP (2001) Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part 1. Accounting Horizons 15(1):87–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgore BM (1979) Fire management in the natural parks: an overview. In: Proceedings of tall timbers fire ecology conference, Florida State University Research Council, Tallahassee

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight RL, Meffe GK (1997) Ecosystem management: agency liberation from command and control. Wildl Soc Bull 25(3):676–678

    Google Scholar 

  • Koontz TM, Steelman TA, Carmin J, Korfmacher KS, Moseley C, Thomas CW (2004) Collaborative environmental management: what roles for government? Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachapelle PR, McCool SF, Patterson ME (2003) Barriers to effective natural resource planning in a “messy” world. Soc Nat Res 16:473–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasker RD, Weiss ES (2003) Broadening participation in community problem solving: a multidisciplinary model to support collaborative practice and research. J Urban Health 80(1):14–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee KN (2001) Appraising adaptive management. In: Buck LE, Geisler CC, Schelhas J, Wollenberg E (eds) Biological diversity: balancing interests through adaptive collaborative management. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 3–26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1998) Ecosystems and the biosphere as complex adaptive systems. Ecosystems 1(5):431–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowndes V, Wilson D (2001) Social capital and local governance: exploring the institutional design variable. Polit Stud 49:629–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magill AW (1991) Barriers to effective public interaction: helping natural resource professionals adjust their attitudes. J For 89(10):16–18

    Google Scholar 

  • McCool SF, Guthrie K (2001) Mapping the dimensions of successful public participation in messy natural resources management situations. Soc Nat Resour 14:309–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Meffe GK (1984) Effects of abiotic disturbance on coexistence of predator-prey fish species. Ecology 65:1525–1534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller A (1999) Environmental problem solving: psychosocial barriers to adaptive change. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Milward HB, Provan KG (2000) Governing the hollow state. J Public Adm Res Theory 8(2):203–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore JL (2000) What is stopping sustainability? Examining the barriers to implementation of clouds of change. In: Woollard RF, Ostry AS (eds) Fatal consumption: rethinking sustainable development. UCB, Vancouver, pp 101–129

    Google Scholar 

  • North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson P, Folke C, Hahn T (2004) Social-ecological transformation for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in southern Sweden. Ecol Soc 9(4):2. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss4/art2/

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson P, Gunderson LH, Carpenter SR, Ryan P, Lebel L, Folke C, Holling CS (2006) Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):18. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art18/

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1995) Designing complexity to govern complexity. In: Hanna S, Munasinghe M (eds) Property rights and the environment: social and ecological issues. The Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics and the World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozawa CP, Susskind L (1985) Mediating science-intensive policy disputes. J Pol Anal Manag 5(1):23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2002a) Participative and stakeholder-based policy design and modeling processes. Integr Assess 3(1):3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2002b) Towards sustainability in the water sector – the importance of human actors and processes of social learning. Aquat Sci 64(4):394–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrinos A (2000) At the interface between science and public policy: lessons learned from assessments. Acclimations, newsletter of the US National Assessment of the potential consequences of climate variability and change. Available online at: http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/nationalassessment/newsletter/2000.Fall/lessons.html

  • Payne JW, Bettman JR, Luce MF (1998) Behavioral decision research: an overview. In: Birnbaum MH (ed) Measurement, judgment, and decision making: handbook of perception and cognition, 2nd edn. Academic, New York, pp 303–359

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel HW, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Pol Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robison WL (1994) Decisions in doubt. University Press of New England, Hanover, 263 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruitenbeek HJ, Cartier CM (2001) The invisible wand: adaptive co-management as an emergent strategy in complex bio-economic system. CIFOR, Bogor, occasional paper no. 34. Available online at: http://www.island.net/∼hjr/wand.htm

  • Schneider SH (2000) The role of science: guidance and service. In: Schmandt J, Ward CH (eds) Sustainable development: the challenge of transition. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 131–152

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schonberger RJ (1996) World class manufacturing: the next decade. The Free, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shindler B, Aldred Cheek K (1999) Integrating citizens in adaptive management: a prepositional analysis. Conserv Ecol 3(1):art. 9. Available online at: http://www.consecolo.org/vol3/iss1/art9

  • Sit V, Nyberg V (2000) Designing an adaptive management field project: a case study. In: Hollstedt C, Southerland K, Innes T (eds) From science to management and back. Southern Interior Forest Extension and Research Partnership, Karnloops, 59–62. Available online at: http://www.forrex.org/publications/FORREXSeries/ss1/paper18.pdf

  • Squire L (1995) Evaluating the effectiveness of poverty alleviation programs. N Dir Eval 67:27–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanford JA, Ward JV (1992) Management of aquatic resources in large catchments: recognizing interactions between ecosystem connectivity and environmental disturbance. In: Naiman RJ (ed) Watershed management. Springer, New York, pp 91–124

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Susskind LE, Field P (1996) Dealing with an angry public: the mutual gains approach to resolving disputes. The Free Press, New York, 276 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind LE, Levy PF, and Thomas-Larmer J (2000) Negotiating environmental agreements. Island, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind L, McKearman S, Thomas-Larmer J (eds) (1999) The consensus building handbook. SAGE, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Cleve FB, Simenstad C, Goetz F, Mumford T (2004) Application of “Best Available Science” in ecosystem restoration: lessons learned from large-scale restoration efforts in the U.S. Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No. 2004-1, Washington Sea Grant Program, University of Washington, Seattle. Available online at: http://pugetsoundnearshore.org

  • Van Winkle W, Coutant CC, Jager HI, Mattice JS, Orth DJ, Otto RG, Railsback SF, Sale MJ (1997) Uncertainty and instream flow standards: perspectives based on hydropower research and assessment. Fisheries 22(7):21–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar H (2007) Governance, complexity, and democratic participation: how citizens and public officials harness the complexities of neighborhood decline. Am Rev Public Adm 37:17–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner FH (2001) Freeing agency research from policy pressures: a need and an approach. Bioscience 51(6):445–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker B, Carpenter S, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming G, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson GD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social- ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6(1):art. 14. Available online at URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss1/art14

  • Walker BH, Gunderson LH, Kinzig AP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Schultz L (2006) A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):art. 13. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/

  • Walters CJ (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. McMillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters CJ (1997) Challenges in adaptive management of riparian and coastal ecosystems. Conserv Ecol 1(2):art. 1. Available online at: http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss2/art1

  • Webber E, Khademian A (2008) Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity buildings in network settings. Publ Admin Rev 68(2):334–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White House (2005) White House conference on cooperative conservation. St. Louis (MO): US Department of the Interior

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P (2002) The competent boundary spanner. Publ Admin 80(1):103–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiltshire K (2001) Scientists and policy-makers: towards a new partnership. Keynote address delivered to the Intergovernmental Council, Management of Social Transformations (MOST) Programme, UNESCO. Available online at: http://www.unesco.org/most/igc01re2.htm

  • Wohl EE (2000) Anthropogenic impacts on flood hazards. In: Wohl EE (ed) Inland flood hazards: human, riparian, and aquatic communities. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 104–141

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Loucks OL (1995) From the balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology. Q Rev Biol 70(4):439–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yorque R, Walker B, Holling CS, Gunderson LH, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Brock WA (2001) Toward and integrative synthesis. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island, Washington, DC, pp 419–438

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate Lynn Scarlett’s thoughtful and constructive review, and equally valuable reviews of an earlier draft of this paper by David Howell and Tonya Clayton of the U.S. Geological Survey. The views expressed herein are those of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695-8008, USA

    Kathi K. Beratan

  2. Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Herman A. Karl

Authors
  1. Kathi K. Beratan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Herman A. Karl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathi K. Beratan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of New Hampshire, Durham, New, Trapelo Road, Lincoln, 01773, USA

    Herman A. Karl

  2. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, S. Lincoln St 830, Arlington, 22204, Virginia, USA

    Lynn Scarlett

  3. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, C, Chestnut Hill Av 163#306, Brighton, 02135, Massachusetts, USA

    Juan Carlos Vargas-Moreno

  4. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, C, Cambridge, 21039, Massachusetts, USA

    Michael Flaxman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Beratan, K.K., Karl, H.A. (2012). Managing the Science-Policy Interface in a Complex and Contentious World. In: Karl, H., Scarlett, L., Vargas-Moreno, J., Flaxman, M. (eds) Restoring Lands - Coordinating Science, Politics and Action. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2549-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation