The dynamic feasibility of resisting (R), accepting (A), or directing (D) ecological change.

Ecological transformations are occurring as a result of climate change, challenging traditional approaches to land management decision-making. The resist-accept-direct (RAD) framework helps managers consider how to respond to this challenge. We examined how the feasibility of the choices to resist, accept, and direct shifts in complex and dynamic ways through time. We considered 4 distinct types of social feasibility: regulatory, financial, public, and organizational. Our commentary is grounded in literature review and the examples that exist but necessarily has speculative elements because empirical evidence on this newly emerging management strategy is scarce. We expect that resist strategies will become less feasible over time as managers encounter situations where resisting is ecologically, by regulation, financially, or publicly not feasible. Similarly, we expect that as regulatory frameworks increasingly permit their use, if costs decrease, and if the public accepts them, managers will increasingly view accept and direct strategies as more viable options than they do at present. Exploring multiple types of feasibility over time allows consideration of both social and ecological trajectories of change in tandem. Our theorizing suggested that deepening the time horizon of decision-making allows one to think carefully about when one should adopt different approaches and how to combine them over time.

La viabilidad dinámica de resistir (R), aceptar (A) o dirigir (D) el cambio ecológico Resumen Las transformaciones ecológicas ocurren por el cambio climático, lo que representa un reto para los enfoques tradicionales para decidir en torno a la gestión de tierras. El marco resistir­aceptar­dirigir (RAD) ayuda a los gestores a considerar cómo responder a este reto. Analizamos cómo la viabilidad de las opciones para resistir, aceptar y dirigir cambia de manera compleja y dinámica con el tiempo. Consideramos cuatro tipos distintos de viabilidad: regulatoria, económica, pública y de organización. Nuestro comentario está basado en la revisión bibliográfica y los ejemplos que existen, pero por necesidad tiene elementos especulativos ya que la evidencia empírica sobre esta estrategia emergente de gestión es escasa. Esperamos que las estrategias de resistir se vuelvan menos viables con el tiempo conforme los gestores encuentren situaciones en las que resistir no es viable de forma ecológica, económica, pública o por regulación. Al igual esperamos que cada vez más los marcos regulatorios permitan su uso, si el costo disminuye, y si el público los acepta, los gestores verán cada vez más viables las estrategias de aceptar y dirigir que las que utilizan actualmente. La exploración de varios tipos de viabilidad a lo largo del tiempo permite considerar las trayectorias sociales y ecológicas del cambio en conjunto. Nuestra teoría sugiere que profundizar en el horizonte temporal de las decisiones permite que se analice con cuidado sobre cuando se deben adoptar enfoques diferentes y cómo combinarlos con el tiempo.

Becoming an Actionable Scientist: Challenges, Competency, and the Development of Expertise.

Demand has grown for actionable science to support real-world decision-making around climate change and related environmental management challenges. Producing actionable science requires scientists to hold a distinct set of competencies, yet relatively little is known about what these competencies are or how to train scientists to develop them. We conducted interviews with mid- and late-career scientists to empirically identify competencies they used when producing actionable science and to understand how they developed those competencies. We describe expertise in terms of 18 competencies-categorised as cognitive, interpersonal, or intrapersonal-that scientists integrated and applied to address the challenges associated with actionable science. We argue that scientists must engage in the social process of producing actionable science (i.e., learning by doing) to become an expert. Expert actionable scientists discussed the importance of learning through different contexts, processes, interactions, and relationships. By naming the competencies that constitute expertise, as well as methods for expertise development, our findings facilitate greater conscious awareness of the process of becoming an actionable scientist, a gradual process that starts during graduate training and continues as a career proceeds. Our results can inform the development of formal learning opportunities as well as the informal learning process that occurs whereby scientists take charge of their own learning.

Negotiation and Decision Making with Collaborative Software: How MarineMap 'Changed the Game' in California's Marine Life Protected Act Initiative.

Environmental managers and planners have become increasingly enthusiastic about the potential of decision support tools (DSTs) to improve environmental decision-making processes as information technology transforms many aspects of daily life. Discussions about DSTs, however, rarely recognize the range of ways software can influence users' negotiation, problem-solving, or decision-making strategies and incentives, in part because there are few empirical studies of completed processes that used technology. This mixed-methods study-which draws on data from approximately 60 semi-structured interviews and an online survey--examines how one geospatial DST influenced participants' experiences during a multi-year marine planning process in California. Results suggest that DSTs can facilitate communication by creating a common language, help users understand the geography and scientific criteria in play during the process, aid stakeholders in identifying shared or diverging interests, and facilitate joint problem solving. The same design features that enabled the tool to aid in decision making, however, also presented surprising challenges in certain circumstances by, for example, making it difficult for participants to discuss information that was not spatially represented on the map-based interface. The study also highlights the importance of the social context in which software is developed and implemented, suggesting that the relationship between the software development team and other participants may be as important as technical software design in shaping how DSTs add value. The paper concludes with considerations to inform the future use of DSTs in environmental decision-making processes.

Environmental Behavior's Dirty Secret: The Prevalence of Waste Management in Discussions of Environmental Concern and Action.

Humankind and the planet face many thorny environmentally related challenges that require a range of responses, including changing behaviors related to transportation, eating habits, purchasing, and myriad other aspects of life. Using data from a 1201-person survey and 14 Community Listening Sessions (CLSs), we explore people's perceptions of and actions taken to protect the environment. Our data indicate a striking prevalence of waste management-related actions. Survey respondents described actions and concerns related to trash, recycling, and composting as the most common environmental behaviors; similarly, participants in CLSs discussed waste-related topics, for which we did not prompt, as frequently as those topics for which we specifically prompted. Explanations for this prevalence emerging from the data include (1) the nature of waste-related behaviors (concrete, supported by infrastructure, simple, compatible with lifestyle); (2) norms and social dynamics (family interactions, feelings of belonging/participation, government policy); and (3) internal psychological processes (internalized norms and environmental concern). We also found that many waste-related discussions were relatively superficial, focusing on immediate waste-related issues (e.g., litter or recycling) rather than larger issues such as consumption. Our results may provide insight into future efforts to encourage pro-environmental behavior. Given that most pro-environmental behavior involves tasks more complex and lifestyle-changing than those related to simple aspects of waste management, we suggest focusing on the latter two intertwined categories that our data suggest are important: encouraging social dynamics and related development of norms concerning environmental behavior (category 2), and fostering internalized norms and environmental concern (category 3).