David W. Cash

Knowledge systems for sustainable development

The challenge of meeting human development needs while protecting the earths life support systems confronts scientists, technologists, policy makers, and communities from local to global levels. Many believe that science and technology (S&T) must play a more central role in sustainable development, yet little systematic scholarship exists on how to create institutions that effectively harness S&T for sustainability. This study suggests that efforts to mobilize S&T for sustainability are more likely to be effective when they manage boundaries between knowledge and action in ways that simultaneously enhance the salience, credibility, and legitimacy of the information they produce. Effective systems apply a variety of institutional mechanisms that facilitate communication, translation and mediation across boundaries.

Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy and Boundaries: Linking Research, Assessment and Decision Making

The boundary between science and policy is only one of several boundaries that hinder the linking of scientific and technical information to decision making. Managing boundaries between disciplines, across scales of geography and jurisdiction, and between different forms of knowledge is also often critical to transferring information. The research presented in this paper finds that information requires three (not mutually exclusive) attributes - salience, credibility, and legitimacy - and that what makes boundary crossing difficult is that actors on different sides of a boundary perceive and value salience, credibility, and legitimacy differently. Presenting research on water management regimes in the United States, international agricultural research systems, El Nino forecasting systems in the Pacific and southern Africa, and fisheries in the North Atlantic, this paper explores: 1) how effective boundary work involves creating salient, credible, and legitimate information simultaneously for multiple audiences; 2) the thresholds, complementarities and tradeoffs between salience, credibility, and legitimacy when crossing boundaries; and 3) propositions for institutional mechanisms in boundary organizations which effectively balance tradeoffs, take advantage on complementarities, and reach thresholds of salience, credibility, and legitimacy.

Information as Influence: How Institutions Mediate the Impact of Scientific Assessments on Global Environmental Affairs

The recognition that information matters in world affairs raises a number of questions as to when, how, and under what conditions it influences the behavior of policy actors. Despite the vast and growing array of institutions involved in collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information potentially relevant to global governance generally, and global environmental change specifically, our understanding of the role that these “information institutions” play in world affairs remains limited. This paper examines how institutions mediate the impact of scientific assessments on global environmental affairs and highlights the pathways through which information has influence on the policy and politics of environmental issues. We identify salience, credibility and legitimacy as the critical attributions that different audiences make about an assessment that determine whether they will change their thoughts, decisions, and behavior in response to it. We also outline how institutional rules regarding participation, framing, and scope and content allow knowledge systems to reach needed thresholds of salience, credibility, and legitimacy and to balance the tradeoffs and tensions among them.

Distributed Assessment Systems: An Emerging Paradigm of Research, Assessment and Decision-making for Environmental Change

Universitys Global Environmental Assessment Project (NSF Award No. SBR-9521910), the Center for International Earth Science Information Network, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Integrated Assessment Center at Carnegie Mellon University (NSF Award No. SBR-9521914). I thank William Clark, Jill Jaeger, Susanne Moser, Eileen Shea, and Anne Weiss for critical review of earlier drafts. *Corresponding author. Tel.: 1#617-496-9330; fax: 1#617-4960606. E-mail address: david}cash@harvard.edu (D.W. Cash). Global Environmental Change 10 (2000) 241}244