Jim Sinner

Factors influencing successful collaboration for freshwater management in Aotearoa, New Zealand

Public participation in freshwater management has been widely advocated as an effective way to resolve the tensions between contested values and objectives while maintaining ecological integrity. However, questions remain regarding which processes and factors contribute to successful processes and outcomes for freshwater. Using a comparative case-study methodology, we unravel the “noise of participation” to assess the factors that influence the success of participatory decision making in collaborative processes currently underway in Hawke’s Bay and Northland, Aotearoa, New Zealand. In Hawke’s Bay, participants have been periodically surveyed to solicit their perceptions of how the process is working and the likelihood of achieving desirable outcomes. In Northland, five identical processes are currently underway, one per catchment, providing the basis for an intraregional assessment of collaboration. Our results suggest that participants’ perceptions change within the process, and that those changes may involve complex, dynamic, and reciprocal interactions within the collaborative group. Results also show the strong influence of external conditions. The choice of stakeholder participants is also critical to ensuring the viability of collaboration. Key factors include participants’ previous interactions and relationships, which may help to prime them for collaboration. These factors are dynamic and evolve through different cycles. Although both collaborative processes are still underway, these insights may help focus greater attention to process design and stakeholder selection from the outset to ensure successful outcomes. Ultimately, a successful collaborative process is one that is able to incorporate feedback and adapt to changing the dynamic and often complex external environment.

Making sense of environmental values: a typology of concepts

Debates about environmental values and valuation are perplexing, in part because these terms are used in vastly different ways in a variety of contexts. For some, quantifying human and ecological values is promoted as a useful technical exercise that can support decision-making. Others spurn environmental valuation, equating it with reducing ethics to numbers or “putting a price tag on nature.” We make sense of these complexities by distilling four fundamental concepts of value (and valuation) from across the literature. These four concepts—value as a magnitude of preference, value as contribution to a goal, values as individual priorities, and values as relations—entail fundamentally different approaches to environmental valuation. Two notions of values (as magnitudes of preference or contributions to a goal) are often operationalized in technical tools, including monetary valuation, in which experts tightly structure (and thus limit) citizen participation in decision-making. This kind of valuation, while useful in some contexts, can mask important societal choices as technical judgments. The concept of values as priorities provides a way of describing individuals’ priorities and considering how these priorities differ across a wider population. Finally, the concept of values as relations is generally used to foster deliberative forms of civic participation, but this tends to leave unresolved the final translation of civic meanings for decisionmakers. We argue that all forms of valuation—even those that are technical tools—constitute technologies of participation, and that values practitioners should consider themselves more as reflexive facilitators than objective experts who represent the public interest. We thus encourage debate about environmental values to pivot away from theoretical gridlock and toward a concern with citizen empowerment and environmental democracy.

Mechanisms and risk of cumulative impacts to coastal ecosystem services: An expert elicitation approach

Coastal environments are some of the most populated on Earth, with greater pressures projected in the future. Managing coastal systems requires the consideration of multiple uses, which both benefit from and threaten multiple ecosystem services. Thus understanding the cumulative impacts of human activities on coastal ecosystem services would seem fundamental to management, yet there is no widely accepted approach for assessing these. This study trials an approach for understanding the cumulative impacts of anthropogenic change, focusing on Tasman and Golden Bays, New Zealand. Using an expert elicitation procedure, we collected information on three aspects of cumulative impacts: the importance and magnitude of impacts by various activities and stressors on ecosystem services, and the causal processes of impact on ecosystem services. We assessed impacts to four ecosystem service benefits - fisheries, shellfish aquaculture, marine recreation and existence value of biodiversity-addressing three main research questions: (1) how severe are cumulative impacts on ecosystem services (correspondingly, what potential is there for restoration)?; (2) are threats evenly distributed across activities and stressors, or do a few threats dominate?; (3) do prominent activities mainly operate through direct stressors, or do they often exacerbate other impacts? We found (1) that despite high uncertainty in the threat posed by individual stressors and impacts, total cumulative impact is consistently severe for all four ecosystem services. (2) A subset of drivers and stressors pose important threats across the ecosystem services explored, including climate change, commercial fishing, sedimentation and pollution. (3) Climate change and commercial fishing contribute to prominent indirect impacts across ecosystem services by exacerbating regional impacts, namely sedimentation and pollution. The prevalence and magnitude of these indirect, networked impacts highlights the need for approaches like this to understand mechanisms of impact, in order to develop strategies to manage them.

Collaborative freshwater planning: changing roles for science and scientists

ABSTRACT Collaborative approaches to freshwater planning are increasingly popular. In principle, collaborative processes allow wider access to all forms of knowledge, referencing the socio-ecological system and stakeholder values. Relevant science must be more broadly defined. Here we explore how the roles and skillsets of scientists and the nature of science knowledge differ in collaborative freshwater planning compared to traditional consultative processes, to assist those designing and participating in such processes. Our observations are drawn from interviews with scientists, policy planners, facilitators and an indigenous adviser from project teams managing collaborative processes in four regions of New Zealand. Results indicate that the role of the scientist in a collaborative process is less top-down informer, and more facilitator of learning. Thus ‘front-room’ scientists involved in collaborative planning processes require a broader skill set than those required for a traditional consultative process. Humility and an ability to see other participants’ points of view are traits facilitating successful engagement with indigenous groups and stakeholders. More science is needed on social, economic and cultural values. Risk and uncertainty can be tested using scenarios. Employing a wider range of science disciplines and scientists who act as integrators enables a greater sharing of local and indigenous knowledge even though such knowledge cannot always be tested or modelled.

Multiple stressor effects on marine infauna: responses of estuarine taxa and functional traits to sedimentation, nutrient and metal loading

Sedimentation, nutrients and metal loading to coastal environments are increasing, associated with urbanization and global warming, hence there is a growing need to predict ecological responses to such change. Using a regression technique we predicted how maximum abundance of 20 macrobenthic taxa and 22 functional traits separately and interactively responded to these key stressors. The abundance of most taxa declined in response to sedimentation and metal loading while a unimodal response was often associated with nutrient loading. Optimum abundances for both taxa and traits occurred at relatively low stressor levels, highlighting the vulnerability of estuaries to increasing stressor loads. Individual taxa were more susceptible to stress than traits, suggesting that functional traits may be less sensitive for detecting changes in ecosystem health. Multiplicative effects were more common than additive interactions. The observed sensitivity of most taxa to increasing sedimentation and metal loading and the documented interaction effects between multiple stressors have important implications for understanding and managing the ecological consequences of eutrophication, sedimentation and contaminants on coastal ecosystems.

Group elicitations yield more consistent, yet more uncertain experts in understanding risks to ecosystem services in New Zealand bays

The elicitation of expert judgment is an important tool for assessment of risks and impacts in environmental management contexts, and especially important as decision-makers face novel challenges where prior empirical research is lacking or insufficient. Evidence-driven elicitation approaches typically involve techniques to derive more accurate probability distributions under fairly specific contexts. Experts are, however, prone to overconfidence in their judgements. Group elicitations with diverse experts can reduce expert overconfidence by allowing cross-examination and reassessment of prior judgements, but groups are also prone to uncritical “groupthink” errors. When the problem context is underspecified the probability that experts commit groupthink errors may increase. This study addresses how structured workshops affect expert variability among and certainty within responses in a New Zealand case study. We find that experts’ risk estimates before and after a workshop differ, and that group elicitations provided greater consistency of estimates, yet also greater uncertainty among experts, when addressing prominent impacts to four different ecosystem services in coastal New Zealand. After group workshops, experts provided more consistent ranking of risks and more consistent best estimates of impact through increased clarity in terminology and dampening of extreme positions, yet probability distributions for impacts widened. The results from this case study suggest that group elicitations have favorable consequences for the quality and uncertainty of risk judgments within and across experts, making group elicitation techniques invaluable tools in contexts of limited data.

Choice experiments and collaborative decisions on the uses and values of rivers

ABSTRACT There is growing interest in deliberative and collaborative approaches to environmental management and in obtaining information on values to inform these processes. We explore the question of when a discrete choice experiment (DCE) is most useful for policy formulation, through discussion of a DCE designed to identify public preferences for freshwater management. The study was conducted in a contested New Zealand policy context with a collaborative stakeholder group considering the uses and values of local rivers. Using a DCE, survey responses were collected and analysed to estimate public preferences for changes in river attributes. This produced informative results, but suffered from a limited sample and a decision not to use a focus group to aid survey design. The results were challenged by members of the stakeholder group on various grounds that went well beyond these limitations. The group was not ready to accept the DCE results as an input for decision-making, with one referring to the study as ‘manufacturing consent’. For DCE to produce results that are accepted in contested policy contexts, it needs to be more integrated into the stakeholder engagement process. This has implications for moves towards greater use of collaborative decision-making for natural resource management.