Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 23(2): 565-588, 2017 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27027317

ABSTRACT

Professionals in environmental fields engage with complex problems that involve stakeholders with different values, different forms of knowledge, and contentious decisions. There is increasing recognition of the need to train graduate students in interdisciplinary environmental science programs (IESPs) in these issues, which we refer to as "social ethics." A literature review revealed topics and skills that should be included in such training, as well as potential challenges and barriers. From this review, we developed an online survey, which we administered to faculty from 81 United States colleges and universities offering IESPs (480 surveys were completed). Respondents overwhelmingly agreed that IESPs should address values in applying science to policy and management decisions. They also agreed that programs should engage students with issues related to norms of scientific practice. Agreement was slightly less strong that IESPs should train students in skills related to managing value conflicts among different stakeholders. The primary challenges to incorporating social ethics into the curriculum were related to the lack of materials and expertise for delivery, though challenges such as ethics being marginalized in relation to environmental science content were also prominent. Challenges related to students' interest in ethics were considered less problematic. Respondents believed that social ethics are most effectively delivered when incorporated into existing courses, and they preferred case studies or problem-based learning for delivery. Student competence is generally not assessed, and respondents recognized a need for both curricular materials and assessment tools.


Subject(s)
Ecology/education , Ecology/ethics , Education, Graduate/ethics , Curriculum/standards , Curriculum/trends , Interdisciplinary Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
2.
Appetite ; 66: 1-9, 2013 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23428939

ABSTRACT

This study used a mail survey (n=1159 usable surveys) of Pacific northwest (US) residents to understand general seafood preferences (familiarity, price, freshness, health and environmental concerns), beliefs and attitudes specific to aquaculture versus wild products, and how those cognitive factors affect decisions to consume types of farmed seafood products. Respondents strongly agreed that seafood is healthy, and they preferred wild over farmed products. Many respondents were uncertain about human health and environmental benefits and problems associated with aquaculture. While there was agreement that aquaculture reduces pressure on wild fish, there was equally strong agreement that it has the same problems as other agricultural practices. Belief in the superiority of wild seafood was a strong predictor of consumption choices. Belief in the benefits of aquaculture was positively related to higher consumption of farmed products, but--unexpectedly--beliefs related to environmental and health problems associated with aquaculture did not predict specific consumption choices. Nearly half of respondents recalled hearing or reading about aquaculture in the mass media, and recall of negative stories contributed to a general preference for wild products, but not consumption of specific types of farmed products. Consumption of the different classes of products had some different predictors, and communication efforts directed at different beliefs may have different impacts on consumer behavior.


Subject(s)
Aquaculture , Fishes , Food Preferences , Seafood/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Animals , Choice Behavior , Decision Making , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Male , Mass Media , Middle Aged , Northwestern United States , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
4.
Environ Manage ; 44(1): 24-36, 2009 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19290567

ABSTRACT

Understanding how setting attributes influence the nature of the visitor experience is crucial to effective recreation management. Highly influential attributes are useful indicators to monitor within a planning framework, such as Limits of Acceptable Change. This study sought to identify the setting attributes perceived to have the most profound effect on the ability to have "a real wilderness experience" and to assess the degree to which attribute importance varied with situational context and visitor characteristics. To this end, exiting hikers were surveyed at moderate and very high use trailheads in Alpine Lakes Wilderness, WA (USA), and Three Sisters Wilderness, OR (USA). They were asked about the degree to which encountering varying levels of different setting attributes would add to or detract from their experience. Attributes with the largest range of effect on experience, based on evaluations of different levels, were considered most important. The most influential attributes were litter and several types of campsite interaction--people walking through camp and number of other groups camping close by. The perceived importance of setting attributes did not vary much between wilderness locations with substantially different use levels, suggesting that conclusions are robust and generalizable across wilderness areas. There also was little difference in the perceptions of day and overnight visitors. In contrast, we found substantial variation in the perceived importance of setting attributes with variation in wilderness experience, knowledge, attachment, and motivation. Our results validate the emphasis of many wilderness management plans on indicators of social interaction, such as number of encounters.


Subject(s)
Perception , Wilderness , Adult , Camping/statistics & numerical data , Female , Human Characteristics , Humans , Male , Oregon , Recreation , Surveys and Questionnaires , Washington
5.
Environ Manage ; 43(3): 369-80, 2009 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18982386

ABSTRACT

In this article, we examine how issues of scale affect the integration of recreation management with the management of other natural resources on public lands. We present two theories used to address scale issues in ecology and explore how they can improve the two most widely applied recreation-planning frameworks. The theory of patch dynamics and hierarchy theory are applied to the recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) and the limits of acceptable change (LAC) recreation-planning frameworks. These frameworks have been widely adopted internationally, and improving their ability to integrate with other aspects of natural resource management has significant social and conservation implications. We propose that incorporating ecologic criteria and scale concepts into these recreation-planning frameworks will improve the foundation for integrated land management by resolving issues of incongruent boundaries, mismatched scales, and multiple-scale analysis. Specifically, we argue that whereas the spatially explicit process of the ROS facilitates integrated decision making, its lack of ecologic criteria, broad extent, and large patch size decrease its usefulness for integration at finer scales. The LAC provides explicit considerations for weighing competing values, but measurement of recreation disturbances within an LAC analysis is often done at too fine a grain and at too narrow an extent for integration with other recreation and resource concerns. We suggest that planners should perform analysis at multiple scales when making management decisions that involve trade-offs among competing values. The United States Forest Service is used as an example to discuss how resource-management agencies can improve this integration.


Subject(s)
Conservation of Natural Resources/trends , Ecology , Recreation , Conservation of Natural Resources/legislation & jurisprudence , Conservation of Natural Resources/methods , Decision Making , Forestry/methods , Forestry/standards , Forestry/trends , Risk Management , Social Planning , Trees/growth & development , United States
6.
PLoS One ; 13(9): e0202948, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30180190

ABSTRACT

This article discusses a formal evaluation of new curricular materials and activities designed to foster understanding of three key issues-expertise, risk, and sociopolitical constraints-related to values and policy in transdisciplinary environmental science. We begin by describing the three issues, along with current thinking about the most appropriate ways to address them in the context of transdisciplinary environmental science. We then describe how we created curricular materials and activities focusing on these three issues that could be tailored for use in a wide range of graduate environmental science programs. The curriculum was adapted by instructors for use in five graduate classes at two US universities, and we used a pre-test, post-test mixed methods design to evaluate its effects on students' ethical reasoning about values and policy. The results of this evaluation suggest that our semi-structured, dialogue-based curriculum enhances student awareness of and reasoning about values and policy in environmental research. We close with several educational recommendations for transdisciplinary environmental science programs that are grounded in our experience with this curriculum.


Subject(s)
Ecology/education , Teaching , Communication , Curriculum , Ethics , Humans , Program Evaluation , Thinking , Universities
7.
Transl Behav Med ; 2(4): 469-79, 2012 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24073147

ABSTRACT

Translational behavioral medicine involves experts from different disciplines and professions interacting to solve complex problems. Coordinating this expertise can be frustrated by the partially tacit nature of expertise and by the various ways in which it manifests in different communities. We describe a method-the Toolbox dialogue method-for addressing these challenges by means of a structured dialogue among team members concerning their respective approaches to complex problems. The Toolbox dialogue method consists of a philosophically grounded questionnaire-the "Toolbox"-deployed in workshops by collaborators from different disciplines and professions. The Health Science Toolbox was modified from an extensively utilized questionnaire designed for Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics (STEM) research and has been piloted with translational medicine teams. Eighty-five percent of participants in STEM workshops indicated a positive impact on awareness of the knowledge, opinions, or scientific approach of teammates. In the Health Science Toolbox, 35 % of questionnaire responses changed substantially from pre- to post-workshop, demonstrating impact of the workshops. The Toolbox dialogue method is a relatively brief workshop encounter that can have a positive impact on mutual understanding within translational medicine teams.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL