Turbulence and Train Wrecks: Using Knowledge Strategies to Enhance the Application of Integrative River Science to Effective River Management

Abstract

'Conducting an epistemological analysis of the scientific disciplines involved in environmental problems can help establish realistic expectations about the role of science, the adequacy of information, and the effectiveness of management policies in dealing with particular problems.' --Benda et al. 2002, 1134. The research literature is rife with tales of woe in the development and application of crossdisciplinary science in environmental management — failed scientific projects, disenchanted teams, unsatisfied managers, an upset public, and so on (e.g., Hobbs 1997; Kondolf 1998; Chenoweth et al. 2002; Wohl et al. 2005). Borrowing the graphic metaphor from Benda et al. (2002), these failures, in terms of time, personal grief, and money, can be referred to as "train wrecks." In this chapter, we consider steps that can be taken to avoid these train wrecks. Part of the solution relates to sharing "common ground" among all stakeholders at the outset (Allen and Kilvington 2005). Scientific questions that address environmental problems must be framed in relation to their human dimension, considering social, political, and economic issues (Wu and Hobbs 2002; Graf 2005; Hillman and Brierley 2002, 2005). This involves smoothing what Cullen (1990) describes as the "turbulent boundary" between environmental scientists and resource managers. Such turbulence arises because of a lack of effective communication that arises from a misunderstanding of the cultures within which each works. This can generate mutual distrust, stifle information flow, and hamper problem restoration (Allen and Kilvington 2005).