University of Toronto School of the Environment ENV 1001: Environmental Decision‐Making Fall term, 2014 Draft: 29 August 2014 Fridays 10:00 am – 12:00 pm ES 4001, 33 Willcocks St. (easiest access is from Forestry entrance on Bancroft Ave., next to the GSU, elevator is on your right) Instructors: Becky Raboy, Assistant Professor Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Ramsey Wright, Room 508 (416) 978‐6665 [email protected] Douglas Macdonald, Senior Lecturer School of the Environment Earth Sciences 5 Bancroft Room 1049B, (416) 978‐1558 [email protected] Office hours: By appointment (arrange by email or in class) Subject While progress has been made in some areas, in particular management of toxic substances in industrialized countries like Canada, after fifty years of high‐profile global attention to the issue, the major environmental problems such as climate change and biodiversity loss are getting worse, not better. Obviously, when it comes to protecting the environment and themselves, humans are making some good decisions and a lot of bad decisions. Why is that? This course addresses that question by attempting to understand the basic concept of decision making and then examining current environmental decision‐making. For the purpose of this course, environmental decision‐making is defined as: 1) selection from a set of alternatives of an action intended to protect the environment or to achieve another purpose but which has implications for ecological well‐being and; 2) the implementation of that decision. The course subject includes environmental decisions made by individuals, groups, business firms, NGOs and governments. Government decisions include policy, program design and regulatory approvals decisions, domestically and at the international scale. Throughout the course we examine prescriptive models for how environmental decision‐making could or should be done, and ways in which environmental decision‐making is done, influenced by such things as interest and power. 1
Educational objectives Our objective is to provide a comprehensive introductory foundation for graduate students pursuing interdisciplinary environmental studies. At the end of the course students will have gained an increased understanding of: 1) the complexities of decision‐making by individuals, groups, organizations and governments within the natural, built and social environments in which they are embedded; and, 2) environmental decision‐making tools available to make such decisions. In addition, students will become more equipped to evaluate the efficacy (or lack of it) of the decision making process through the exploration and evaluation of case studies and examples provided in class and through the student term papers (recognizing that what constitutes a “good” environmental decision is by no means self‐evident and will be a major theme of class discussion). Another objective is to help students with the challenge of communication across disciplinary boundaries. For valid reasons, experts in each field speak to other experts in the same field by means of a specialized language based on common conceptualizations and using specialized technical terms. This produces increased efficiency and clarity within each discipline but also produces major problems for disciplines working together. Throughout the course, we will be using various techniques to help us better understand one another’s disciplinary languages and thereby learn more about how those from different disciplines can work together on environmental issues. Course format The course is offered in twelve two‐ hour classes, each with lecture and seminar discussion. Readings The course reader (a CSPI course pack) is available for purchase at the University of Toronto Bookstore. One copy is on short‐term loan at the Noranda Library, 5 Bancroft Ave (2nd floor). Additional required readings will be available online, posted as links on our Portal site. Portal Site We will maintain a course Portal site where you can obtain posted lecture notes, links to course readings and any course announcements. Please check in frequently with this site. Assignments Assignment Word count (excluding any citations) Approx. 1500 words
Due Date
1) Individual Environmental 3 Oct
Decision 2) Course Reflection Paper Approx. 2500 words
31 Oct
3) Polar Bear Position Paper Approx. 750 words
7 Nov
4) Final Paper‐ Analysis of an Approx. 5,000 ‐ 6000 words
5 Dec
environmental decision 5) Participation n/a On going
1. This is a group mark. All students within a group will earn the same mark. Value 15 % 20 % 10 % (GROUP MARK)1
40 % 15% 2
Additional details of assignments: 1) Analysis of your own environmental decision making: Describe and provide analysis of an individual environmental decision you have recently made. Explain how and why you made the decision, in terms of your objective, criteria/methods you used to compare alternative actions, your values (and those of others around you) and available empirical knowledge as you made the decision. Also evaluate the effectiveness of your implementation of the decision. Draw upon concepts addressed in the course and include a few citations through to the September 26 class. 2) Reflections on environmental decision making: Drawing on required readings, course lectures and class discussion, write a short paper exploring one argument or theme which has been discussed in the course. You might find inspiration from a question about the course subject you have been puzzling over, insight or new perspective respecting the course subject that you have gained or a point you wish to add to a past group discussion. No matter the source of your inspiration, the paper should be well thought out and researched, citing readings, class discussion and a few additional outside references. Examples include: a discussion on whether or not humans make rational decisions; considering whether values have greater influence on the decision than does scientific evidence; assessment of the conditions under which public participation might work; consideration of the efficacy of consensual decision making to actually protect environment. There are many other possibilities. The paper should be structured by means of an introduction stating the subject; a research question providing the purpose; sections of the paper which address relevant aspects of the subject; and a conclusion which provides analysis in order to answer the research question. We recommend you discuss your plan for the paper with one of the instructors early in the process. 3) Position paper on management of Canadian polar bear populations: On November 14 the class will conduct a role‐playing exercise in which different stakeholders will work together to use a structured decision making process as a means of deciding policies governing polar bears in the territory of Nunavut. Stakeholders will include groups such as: Inuit local residents, hunters, governments of Nunavut and Canada, academic scientists and others. The class will be divided into groups, each group representing one of these actors. In preparation for the role playing, each group will generate a short paper setting out the actor’s position prior the structured decision making process. The papers will be posted on the course website prior to to the Nov. 14 class, so that we all have an understanding of the spectrum of positions involved in the decision making process. The position paper should briefly state the actor’s interest in the issue, their view of the most important scientific facts, the values which are most important to the actor and the actor’s preferred recommendation. 4) Analysis of a complex environmental decision: Present a case study of a complex environmental decision that includes an in‐depth analysis regarding the decision and the decision making process. Ideally you will select a decision made by an actor or a group of actors 3
on a subject relating to the research that you are undertaking in your home department. The paper has two objectives: 1) to provide analysis of why the decision was made; and, 2) to evaluate the decision making process in terms of such things as efficiency, participatory access, use of scientific data, recognition of relevant values. The paper should also include a clear description of the decision making process (including elements such as who the decision maker is, relevant stakeholders, timeline of events, alternative assessed). We recommend you start planning this paper early and discuss your plans with one of the course instructors. Note – More detailed assignment instructions will be provided for all assignments. Evaluation Criteria for evaluation of written material: Written work will be evaluated in terms of two aspects, mechanics and analysis. For purposes of evaluation, more weight is given to the latter, but both are essential.  Mechanics refers to such things as page format, punctuation, spelling, tables and figures, referencing, absence of minor factual errors and clarity of writing style. Mechanics of written assignments must be close to perfection.  Analysis refers to the content of the writing. When appropriate, has an argument or hypothesis been made and supported. Is there strong logic and good structural flow? Analysis should display broad understanding of the subject matter, insight into that aspect of the subject which is the focus of the paper, and originality of thought. Criteria for evaluation of class participation: Participation will be based on student’s interventions in class. The objective is to work together to develop our insights. Please come to class prepared to make at least two interventions (comment or question) respecting the required readings for that week. Beyond that, we encourage you to actively participate in discussion – we will facilitate discussion in such a way that all voices can be heard. In general to earn full in‐class participation marks, comments should reflect a strong understanding of the readings, awareness of current and previous class discussion, show insight into course subject matter, help fellow students better interpret the material and/or spark debate. Shallow comments, those that are off‐topic, or merely a reiteration of comments that have already been said will not carry as much weight. If for any reason during the term you feel you are struggling to participate, please see one of us to see how we can remedy this situation. 4
Class topics and readings overview # Date Prof Topic Readings1 1 12 Sep DM, Course intro, initial model of BR decision making and the issue of interdisciplinarity 2 19 Sep BR, Overview of the environmental o Millennium Ecosystem DM problem: Earth systems, human Assessment (2005) impacts and causes. o Meyer (1996) 3 26 Sep DM An introduction to decision making o Nitta (2014) and environmental decision o Moran (2010) making 4 3 Oct BR Case Study: The challenge of o Clark et al. (2012) environmental decision making ‐‐ o Peacock et al. (2011) polar bears in the Canadian arctic 5 10 Oct DM Individual environmental decision o Gazzaniga et al. (2007) making, public opinion o Gifford (2002) 6 17 Oct DM Organizational environmental o Hatch (1997) decision making: business firms o Reinhardt (2000) 7 24 Oct DM Governmental environmental o Roberts (2011, 2nd ed.); Chap 6 decision making: domestic and o Speth and Haas (2006); Chap 3 international 8 31 Oct BR Tools for environmental decision o Harding et al. (2009); Chap 8 making; environmental assessment o Morrison‐Saunders et al. (2014) 9 7 Nov BR Tools for environmental decision o Failing et al. (2013) making; structured decision making o Neckles et al. (2014) 1 14 Nov BR Structured decision making role‐
o Gregory et al. (2012) Chap 4 0 playing exercise: polar bears in the o Gregory et al. (2012) Chap 5 Canadian arctic 1 21 Nov DM Decision making which allocates o Macdonald and Houle (2014) 1 cost and benefit: a look into Professor Macdonald’s research 1 28 Nov BR The role of predictive modelling in o Addison et al. (2013) 2 environmental decision making: a o Zeigler et al. (2013) look into Professor Raboy’s research 1. A few additional required “readings” in the form of reviewing websites and webpages will be assigned for some classes. The links will be posted on Blackboard the week before each class. These sites should be skimmed for content, but do not have to be read in great detail unless otherwise specified. Additional optional readings will sometimes also be posted. 5
Full Citations and where to find documents References listed by class number: 2. Overview of the environmental problem: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Summary for Decision Makers. Portal link Meyer, William B. (1996). "Chapter 2 Changes in Population and Society." In Human Impact on the Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Course Reader 3. Decision making and environmental decision making Nitta, Keith (last updated Jan. 24, 2014). “Decision making” Encyclopedia Britannica online. Portal link Moran, Emilio F. (2010). Chapter 7. Environmental Decision Making. Environmental Social Science: Human‐Environment Interactions and Sustainability. Chichester, UK: Wiley‐Blackwell. Course Reader 4. The challenge of environmental decision making: polar bears in the Canadian arctic Peacock, E., Derocher, A. E., Thiemann, G. W., & Stirling, I. 2011. Conservation and management of Canada’s polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in a changing Arctic 1 1 This review is part of the virtual symposium “Flagship Species–Flagship Problems” that deals with ecology, biodiversity and management issues, and climate impacts on species at risk and of Canadian importance, including the polar bear (Ursus maritimus), Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), and caribou (Rangifer tarandus).Canadian Journal of Zoology, 89(5), 371‐385. Course Reader Clark, D. A., Meek, C., Cheechoo, J., Clark, S., Lee Foote, A., Lee, D., & York, G. 2012. Polar bears and CITES: A rejoinder to Parsons and Cornick. Marine Policy. Portal link 5. Individual environmental decision making; public opinion Gazzaniga, Michael S., Todd F. Heatherton, Steven J. Heine, Daniel C. McIntyre (2007). “How Do We Make Decisions and Solve Problems?” Psychological Science. New York: W.W. Norton. pp. 305 – 312. Course Reader Gifford, Robert (2002). extract from “Chapter 3. Environmental Attitudes, Appraisals and Assessments.” Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice. Canada: Optimal Books. pp. 56‐66; and 88‐93. Course Reader 6. Organizational environmental decision making; business firms Hatch, Mary Jo (1997). “Organizational Decision Making” in Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 270 – 281. Course Reader Reinhardt, Forest L. (2000). "Chapter 1. The Environment as a Business Problem." In Down to Earth: Applying Business Principles to Environmental Management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp 1 ‐ 15. Course Reader 7. Governmental environmental decision making; domestic and international Roberts, Jane (2011, second edition). Chapter 6. “Environmental policy making in government." In Environmental Policy. New York: Routledge. pp. 145‐174. Course Reader 6
Speth, James Gustave and Peter M. Haas (2006). Chapter 3 “From Stockholm to Johannesburg: First Attempt at Global Environmental Governance” in Global Environmental Governance Washington: Island Press. pp. 52‐ 81. Course Reader 8. Tools for environmental decision making; environmental assessment Harding et al. (2009). Chapter 8: Tools for Environmental Decision Making. In: Environmental Decision‐Making: Exploring Complexity and Context. Federation Pr. 193‐224. Course Reader Morrison‐Saunders et al (2014). “Strengthening impact assessment: a call for integration and focus.” Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 32:1, 2‐8.Portal link 9. Tools for environmental decision making; structured decision making Failing, L., Gregory, R. and Higgins, P. (2013). Science, Uncertainty, and Values in Ecological Restoration: A Case Study in Structured Decision‐Making and Adaptive Management. Restoration Ecology, 21: 422–430. Portal link Neckles, Hilary et al (2014). “Use of Structured Decision Making to Identify Monitoring Variables and Management Priorities for Salt Marsh Ecosystems.” Course Reader 10. Structured decision making role‐playing exercise: polar bears in the Canadian arctic Gregory, R. et al. (2012). Chapter 4: Understanding Objectives. In: Structured Decision Making: A Practical Guide to Environmental Management Choices. Wiley‐
Blackwell. 69‐92. Portal link, E‐book Gregory, R. et al. (2012). Chapter 5: Identifying Performance Measures. In: Structured Decision Making: A Practical Guide to Environmental Management Choices. Wiley‐Blackwell. 93‐121. Portal link, E‐book 11. Macdonald research: environmental decision making which allocates cost and benefit Macdonald, Douglas and David Houle (2014). “Political implications of the distributive effects of Canadian climate‐change policy.” Draft. Revised iteration of paper presented at annual conference of the Canadian Political Science Association, Edmonton, 2012. Unpublished paper. Portal link 12. Raboy research: the role of predictive modelling in environmental decision making respecting a threatened primate in fragmented habitat Addison, P. F., Rumpff, L., Bau, S. S., Carey, J. M., Chee, Y. E., Jarrad, F. C., ... & Burgman, M. A. (2013). Practical solutions for making models indispensable in conservation decision‐making. Diversity and Distributions,19(5‐6), 490‐502. Portal link Zeigler, Sara L., Kristel M. De Vleeschouwer and Becky E. Raboy (2013). “Assessing Extinction Risk in Small Metapopulations of Golden‐headed Lion Tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysomelas) in Bahia State, Brazil. Biotropica, 45 (4) 528‐535. Portal link 7