Timo P. Karjalainen

The value of scientific information on climate change: a choice experiment on Rokua esker, Finland

This article presents an application of the choice experiment method in order to provide estimates of economic values generated by water quantity improvements in the environment. More importantly, this is the first choice experiment study valuing scientific information and in particular scientific information on climate change. The case study of interest is Rokua in Northern Finland, a groundwater dependent ecosystem very sensitive to climate change and natural variability. The study deals with the uncertainty about the actual dynamics of the system and the effect of future climate change by exploring whether the public values sustained provision of resources for scientific research to better understand long-term environmental changes in Rokua. Data are analysed using a nested multinomial logit and an error component model. Evidence from this study suggests that individuals are willing to pay in order to assure scientific research so as to better understand long-term environmental changes. As a result, policy should consider investing in and supporting related research. Other aspects of water management policy valued by the public are water quantity, recreation, and total land income.

Science and issue advocacy in a forestry debate in Northern Finland

Scientists can use a number of strategies to inform policymakers. They can be “honest brokers” by communicating a variety of management options and opening up discussion about a range of uncertainties, or they can be “issue advocates” by arguing for specific management options. This article looks at a forestry debate between two groups of scientists in northern Finland and maps their argumentative strategies. Three strategies are distinguished relating to: (1) the state of the resource and its indicators; (2) scalar framing; and (3) future uncertainties due to climate change. Use of these strategies revealed polarized arguments about risks and sustainability, but seemed not to provide middle ground proposals for management options. This can be explained, we argue, because the conflict situation produces an easily polarized debate where it is a risk to play “honest broker”. It seems that the deeper scientists go in the defence of the preferred management option, the more they reduce their ability to provide neutral and credible policy advice.

The Contribution of Non-Use Values to Inform the Management of Groundwater Systems: The Rokua Esker, Northern Finland

Rokua in Northern Finland is a groundwater dependent ecosystem very sensitive to climate change and natural variability. As such, the water level of most of the lakes is a function of the level of the groundwater table of the esker which is naturally recharged. The management of an ecosystem like this is very challenging and complex because of the many associated use and non-use values. The scope of this study is to expose, apart from the use values, the nonmarket values attached to the ecosystems services of groundwater systems and reveal their importance. In particular, this chapter illustrates the contribution of stated preference methods to orient policy making and presents results from an application of a choice experiment and contingent valuation method regarding ground water quantity. General public�s elicited values highlight the importance of water management policy which contributes to the sustainability of groundwater dependent ecosystems. Importantly results highlight the need to broaden the policy options beyond the consideration of market and use values of groundwater systems. Instead these systems should be considered as part of the broader ecosystems and broader services considered in decision making.

How to Earn the Status of Honest Broker? Scientists’ Roles Facilitating the Political Water Supply Decision-Making Process

ABSTRACT “Honest broker” refers to scientists facilitating complex political decisions from a neutral position, aiming to expand the scope of choice available instead of advocating a certain policy. This article reflects on the experiences of three scientists acting as honest brokers while carrying out a multicriteria evaluation to help politicians choose the water supply option for the city of Oulu, Finland. The process was considered successful and many politicians said that they have never before been that well informed when making a decision. The case primarily shows that besides the common knowledge brokerage roles targeting knowledge exchange, the honest brokerage approach relates more to managing social relationships and balancing political games and rapidly evolving discussions. Trustful relationships increased the perceived credibility of the brokers and ensured two-way communication. On the other hand, the brokers faced ethical dilemmas and difficulties of staying impartial while finding out confidential information related to political strategies.