Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA

Some ecological economists have advocated participatory decision methods, in which people act as citizens rather than consumers, as an epistemologically preferable alternative to a price-based valuation approach for determining the disposition of ecosystems. Q method is a research technique advocate...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecological economics 2006-05, Vol.57 (2), p.190-208
1. Verfasser: Swedeen, Paula
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 208
container_issue 2
container_start_page 190
container_title Ecological economics
container_volume 57
creator Swedeen, Paula
description Some ecological economists have advocated participatory decision methods, in which people act as citizens rather than consumers, as an epistemologically preferable alternative to a price-based valuation approach for determining the disposition of ecosystems. Q method is a research technique advocated by proponents of discursive democracy to assess the self described attitudes of participants in discourse around a particular topic. Techniques that attempt to discern public values around ecological systems without imposing contrived (e.g. only monetary) or unintentionally biased frameworks can be seen as advancing ecological economics as a post-normal science. Understanding the attitudes of groups involved in conflict over ecosystem use is crucial for designing policies that have a chance of being implemented, as well as being equitable and sustainable. Thus, the use of Q method is an essential step for supporting successful public participation in decisions affecting ecosystem sustainability. This paper reports the results of a Q study designed to ascertain: (1) the potential to find a common basis for cooperation among groups with a long history of conflict over forest management issues in the Pacific Northwest of the United States; and (2) the extent to which current science pertaining to sustainable forest ecosystem management is commonly understood among these same actors. Participants were asked to rank 64 statements about forest management in the region, including definitions of sustainable forestry, on a scale of + 4 (strongly agree) to − 4 (strongly disagree). Thirty people with a wide variety of backgrounds and experience with forest issues performed this “Q sort” and then were interviewed to provide context for their answers. The individual Q sorts were correlated and factor analyzed to derive ideal discourse types. Three distinct discourses about sustainable forestry emerged from the factor analysis. Results indicate a strong desire across stakeholder groups to engage in participatory decision-making with people from all sides of the issues. There also appears to be a lack of consensus about the exact meaning of sustainable forestry and a lack of familiarity with scientific concepts of ecosystem resilience among some groups. Recommendations for additional ways in which Q method can be applied by ecological economists as a practical means of advancing the field as a post-normal science are described in the concluding section.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37731288</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0921800905001886</els_id><sourcerecordid>37731288</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-448cc52492571b98e68c20c582422d64d00a0b2154579cc2d4fe67e590cf04c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUV2L1DAULaLguPoXJE8-2XqT5qs-OSx-sqCyLj6GTHrrZGibmmQW5t-bOquvEzi5CZxzONxTVS8pNBSofHNo0IWxYG4YgGiANwDto2pDtWprSUE-rjbQMVprgO5p9SylAwBI2bWbavoWUq7nECc7kuQ8zg6Jn8kSrcve4VuyJd9Jysf-RMJA8h7JEjLO2Rf-ECJJx5Stn-1uxPWPKcfTavDTpr2ff-Uwk9tsM74md7fb59WTwY4JXzzMq-ruw_sf15_qm68fP19vb2onhMo159o5wXjHhKK7TqPUjoETmnHGesl7AAs7RgUXqnOO9XxAqVB04AbgTrZX1auz7xLD72PJZCafHI6jnTEck2mVainT-iKRKioFAL9M5EqV7F0hyjPRxZBSxMEs0U82ngwFs_ZlDuZfX2btywA3pa8i_HIWRlzQ_VdhOX_p5t60VqhynQqKUpbh12fBUkA7KIba7PNUzN6dzbBs-d5jNA_d9j6iy6YP_lKePwn7uiI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14775579</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA</title><source>RePEc</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Swedeen, Paula</creator><creatorcontrib>Swedeen, Paula</creatorcontrib><description>Some ecological economists have advocated participatory decision methods, in which people act as citizens rather than consumers, as an epistemologically preferable alternative to a price-based valuation approach for determining the disposition of ecosystems. Q method is a research technique advocated by proponents of discursive democracy to assess the self described attitudes of participants in discourse around a particular topic. Techniques that attempt to discern public values around ecological systems without imposing contrived (e.g. only monetary) or unintentionally biased frameworks can be seen as advancing ecological economics as a post-normal science. Understanding the attitudes of groups involved in conflict over ecosystem use is crucial for designing policies that have a chance of being implemented, as well as being equitable and sustainable. Thus, the use of Q method is an essential step for supporting successful public participation in decisions affecting ecosystem sustainability. This paper reports the results of a Q study designed to ascertain: (1) the potential to find a common basis for cooperation among groups with a long history of conflict over forest management issues in the Pacific Northwest of the United States; and (2) the extent to which current science pertaining to sustainable forest ecosystem management is commonly understood among these same actors. Participants were asked to rank 64 statements about forest management in the region, including definitions of sustainable forestry, on a scale of + 4 (strongly agree) to − 4 (strongly disagree). Thirty people with a wide variety of backgrounds and experience with forest issues performed this “Q sort” and then were interviewed to provide context for their answers. The individual Q sorts were correlated and factor analyzed to derive ideal discourse types. Three distinct discourses about sustainable forestry emerged from the factor analysis. Results indicate a strong desire across stakeholder groups to engage in participatory decision-making with people from all sides of the issues. There also appears to be a lack of consensus about the exact meaning of sustainable forestry and a lack of familiarity with scientific concepts of ecosystem resilience among some groups. Recommendations for additional ways in which Q method can be applied by ecological economists as a practical means of advancing the field as a post-normal science are described in the concluding section.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0921-8009</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6106</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Community participation ; Decision making ; Democracy ; Ecosystems ; Environmental economics ; Environmental management ; Forest management ; Post-normal science ; Q method ; Research methods ; Scientific research ; Sustainable development ; Sustainable forestry ; U.S.A ; Washington</subject><ispartof>Ecological economics, 2006-05, Vol.57 (2), p.190-208</ispartof><rights>2005 Elsevier B.V.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-448cc52492571b98e68c20c582422d64d00a0b2154579cc2d4fe67e590cf04c63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-448cc52492571b98e68c20c582422d64d00a0b2154579cc2d4fe67e590cf04c63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,4008,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeecolec/v_3a57_3ay_3a2006_3ai_3a2_3ap_3a190-208.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Swedeen, Paula</creatorcontrib><title>Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA</title><title>Ecological economics</title><description>Some ecological economists have advocated participatory decision methods, in which people act as citizens rather than consumers, as an epistemologically preferable alternative to a price-based valuation approach for determining the disposition of ecosystems. Q method is a research technique advocated by proponents of discursive democracy to assess the self described attitudes of participants in discourse around a particular topic. Techniques that attempt to discern public values around ecological systems without imposing contrived (e.g. only monetary) or unintentionally biased frameworks can be seen as advancing ecological economics as a post-normal science. Understanding the attitudes of groups involved in conflict over ecosystem use is crucial for designing policies that have a chance of being implemented, as well as being equitable and sustainable. Thus, the use of Q method is an essential step for supporting successful public participation in decisions affecting ecosystem sustainability. This paper reports the results of a Q study designed to ascertain: (1) the potential to find a common basis for cooperation among groups with a long history of conflict over forest management issues in the Pacific Northwest of the United States; and (2) the extent to which current science pertaining to sustainable forest ecosystem management is commonly understood among these same actors. Participants were asked to rank 64 statements about forest management in the region, including definitions of sustainable forestry, on a scale of + 4 (strongly agree) to − 4 (strongly disagree). Thirty people with a wide variety of backgrounds and experience with forest issues performed this “Q sort” and then were interviewed to provide context for their answers. The individual Q sorts were correlated and factor analyzed to derive ideal discourse types. Three distinct discourses about sustainable forestry emerged from the factor analysis. Results indicate a strong desire across stakeholder groups to engage in participatory decision-making with people from all sides of the issues. There also appears to be a lack of consensus about the exact meaning of sustainable forestry and a lack of familiarity with scientific concepts of ecosystem resilience among some groups. Recommendations for additional ways in which Q method can be applied by ecological economists as a practical means of advancing the field as a post-normal science are described in the concluding section.</description><subject>Community participation</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental economics</subject><subject>Environmental management</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>Post-normal science</subject><subject>Q method</subject><subject>Research methods</subject><subject>Scientific research</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Sustainable forestry</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>Washington</subject><issn>0921-8009</issn><issn>1873-6106</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUV2L1DAULaLguPoXJE8-2XqT5qs-OSx-sqCyLj6GTHrrZGibmmQW5t-bOquvEzi5CZxzONxTVS8pNBSofHNo0IWxYG4YgGiANwDto2pDtWprSUE-rjbQMVprgO5p9SylAwBI2bWbavoWUq7nECc7kuQ8zg6Jn8kSrcve4VuyJd9Jysf-RMJA8h7JEjLO2Rf-ECJJx5Stn-1uxPWPKcfTavDTpr2ff-Uwk9tsM74md7fb59WTwY4JXzzMq-ruw_sf15_qm68fP19vb2onhMo159o5wXjHhKK7TqPUjoETmnHGesl7AAs7RgUXqnOO9XxAqVB04AbgTrZX1auz7xLD72PJZCafHI6jnTEck2mVainT-iKRKioFAL9M5EqV7F0hyjPRxZBSxMEs0U82ngwFs_ZlDuZfX2btywA3pa8i_HIWRlzQ_VdhOX_p5t60VqhynQqKUpbh12fBUkA7KIba7PNUzN6dzbBs-d5jNA_d9j6iy6YP_lKePwn7uiI</recordid><startdate>20060501</startdate><enddate>20060501</enddate><creator>Swedeen, Paula</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060501</creationdate><title>Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA</title><author>Swedeen, Paula</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-448cc52492571b98e68c20c582422d64d00a0b2154579cc2d4fe67e590cf04c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Community participation</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental economics</topic><topic>Environmental management</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>Post-normal science</topic><topic>Q method</topic><topic>Research methods</topic><topic>Scientific research</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Sustainable forestry</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>Washington</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Swedeen, Paula</creatorcontrib><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Ecological economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Swedeen, Paula</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA</atitle><jtitle>Ecological economics</jtitle><date>2006-05-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>190</spage><epage>208</epage><pages>190-208</pages><issn>0921-8009</issn><eissn>1873-6106</eissn><abstract>Some ecological economists have advocated participatory decision methods, in which people act as citizens rather than consumers, as an epistemologically preferable alternative to a price-based valuation approach for determining the disposition of ecosystems. Q method is a research technique advocated by proponents of discursive democracy to assess the self described attitudes of participants in discourse around a particular topic. Techniques that attempt to discern public values around ecological systems without imposing contrived (e.g. only monetary) or unintentionally biased frameworks can be seen as advancing ecological economics as a post-normal science. Understanding the attitudes of groups involved in conflict over ecosystem use is crucial for designing policies that have a chance of being implemented, as well as being equitable and sustainable. Thus, the use of Q method is an essential step for supporting successful public participation in decisions affecting ecosystem sustainability. This paper reports the results of a Q study designed to ascertain: (1) the potential to find a common basis for cooperation among groups with a long history of conflict over forest management issues in the Pacific Northwest of the United States; and (2) the extent to which current science pertaining to sustainable forest ecosystem management is commonly understood among these same actors. Participants were asked to rank 64 statements about forest management in the region, including definitions of sustainable forestry, on a scale of + 4 (strongly agree) to − 4 (strongly disagree). Thirty people with a wide variety of backgrounds and experience with forest issues performed this “Q sort” and then were interviewed to provide context for their answers. The individual Q sorts were correlated and factor analyzed to derive ideal discourse types. Three distinct discourses about sustainable forestry emerged from the factor analysis. Results indicate a strong desire across stakeholder groups to engage in participatory decision-making with people from all sides of the issues. There also appears to be a lack of consensus about the exact meaning of sustainable forestry and a lack of familiarity with scientific concepts of ecosystem resilience among some groups. Recommendations for additional ways in which Q method can be applied by ecological economists as a practical means of advancing the field as a post-normal science are described in the concluding section.</abstract><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0921-8009
ispartof Ecological economics, 2006-05, Vol.57 (2), p.190-208
issn 0921-8009
1873-6106
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37731288
source RePEc; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Community participation
Decision making
Democracy
Ecosystems
Environmental economics
Environmental management
Forest management
Post-normal science
Q method
Research methods
Scientific research
Sustainable development
Sustainable forestry
U.S.A
Washington
title Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T08%3A26%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Post-normal%20science%20in%20practice:%20A%20Q%20study%20of%20the%20potential%20for%20sustainable%20forestry%20in%20Washington%20State,%20USA&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20economics&rft.au=Swedeen,%20Paula&rft.date=2006-05-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=190&rft.epage=208&rft.pages=190-208&rft.issn=0921-8009&rft.eissn=1873-6106&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E37731288%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14775579&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0921800905001886&rfr_iscdi=true