Kuvaus

To ensure their collective optimality and acceptability, environmental management strategies should be evidence-based, having sound and objective scientific grounds. However, decision-making problems aiming for sustainability are typically complex and wicked, i.e. without a clear optimal solution. Thus different scientific disciplines and approaches can provide very different – though still scientifically valid – formally optimal solutions. On top of this, lately, environmental research literature has presented vast amounts of case studies on divergent participatory processes, suggesting stakeholders and assessment end-users should be involved in each step of the impact and scenario assessments. Researchers from different fields of science, as well as stakeholder parties, each tend to frame differently the social-environmental systems to be analyzed to answer the same assessment questions. Consequently, the key variables and even their interpretation of causalities in the system analyzed may vary remarkably. Above all, the framing of the assessment question per se may come from the end-user of the assessment results, potentially being the orderer and financer of the study. We discuss the impact of question and system framing on the assessment results from the perspective of decision analysis. We explore whether and when there is a risk that models end up producing policy-based evidence instead of the originally targeted evidence-based policy.
Alkuperäiskielienglanti
TilaJulkaistu - 2019
OKM-julkaisutyyppiEi sovellu
TapahtumaSustainability Science Days 2019 - University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Suomi
Kesto: 9 toukokuuta 2019 → …

Konferenssi

KonferenssiSustainability Science Days 2019
MaaSuomi
KaupunkiHelsinki
Ajanjakso09/05/2019 → …

Tieteenalat

  • 1172 Ympäristötiede
  • 519 Yhteiskuntamaantiede, talousmaantiede

Lainaa tätä

@conference{cadfb879e4b94b9d82fc021cf2a163cf,
title = "The question of framing in environmental impact assessments: evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence?",
abstract = "To ensure their collective optimality and acceptability, environmental management strategies should be evidence-based, having sound and objective scientific grounds. However, decision-making problems aiming for sustainability are typically complex and wicked, i.e. without a clear optimal solution. Thus different scientific disciplines and approaches can provide very different – though still scientifically valid – formally optimal solutions. On top of this, lately, environmental research literature has presented vast amounts of case studies on divergent participatory processes, suggesting stakeholders and assessment end-users should be involved in each step of the impact and scenario assessments. Researchers from different fields of science, as well as stakeholder parties, each tend to frame differently the social-environmental systems to be analyzed to answer the same assessment questions. Consequently, the key variables and even their interpretation of causalities in the system analyzed may vary remarkably. Above all, the framing of the assessment question per se may come from the end-user of the assessment results, potentially being the orderer and financer of the study. We discuss the impact of question and system framing on the assessment results from the perspective of decision analysis. We explore whether and when there is a risk that models end up producing policy-based evidence instead of the originally targeted evidence-based policy.",
keywords = "1172 Environmental sciences, 519 Social and economic geography",
author = "Annukka Lehikoinen and Janne Hukkinen and Nina Janasik and Kaaronen, {Roope Oskari} and Sakari Kuikka",
note = "Konferenssiesitelm{\"a} (diat); Sustainability Science Days 2019 ; Conference date: 09-05-2019",
year = "2019",
language = "English",

}

The question of framing in environmental impact assessments : evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? / Lehikoinen, Annukka; Hukkinen, Janne; Janasik, Nina; Kaaronen, Roope Oskari; Kuikka, Sakari.

2019. Sustainability Science Days 2019, Helsinki, Suomi.

Tutkimustuotos: KonferenssimateriaalitMuu konferenssimateriaaliTutkimus

TY - CONF

T1 - The question of framing in environmental impact assessments

T2 - evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence?

AU - Lehikoinen, Annukka

AU - Hukkinen, Janne

AU - Janasik, Nina

AU - Kaaronen, Roope Oskari

AU - Kuikka, Sakari

N1 - Konferenssiesitelmä (diat)

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - To ensure their collective optimality and acceptability, environmental management strategies should be evidence-based, having sound and objective scientific grounds. However, decision-making problems aiming for sustainability are typically complex and wicked, i.e. without a clear optimal solution. Thus different scientific disciplines and approaches can provide very different – though still scientifically valid – formally optimal solutions. On top of this, lately, environmental research literature has presented vast amounts of case studies on divergent participatory processes, suggesting stakeholders and assessment end-users should be involved in each step of the impact and scenario assessments. Researchers from different fields of science, as well as stakeholder parties, each tend to frame differently the social-environmental systems to be analyzed to answer the same assessment questions. Consequently, the key variables and even their interpretation of causalities in the system analyzed may vary remarkably. Above all, the framing of the assessment question per se may come from the end-user of the assessment results, potentially being the orderer and financer of the study. We discuss the impact of question and system framing on the assessment results from the perspective of decision analysis. We explore whether and when there is a risk that models end up producing policy-based evidence instead of the originally targeted evidence-based policy.

AB - To ensure their collective optimality and acceptability, environmental management strategies should be evidence-based, having sound and objective scientific grounds. However, decision-making problems aiming for sustainability are typically complex and wicked, i.e. without a clear optimal solution. Thus different scientific disciplines and approaches can provide very different – though still scientifically valid – formally optimal solutions. On top of this, lately, environmental research literature has presented vast amounts of case studies on divergent participatory processes, suggesting stakeholders and assessment end-users should be involved in each step of the impact and scenario assessments. Researchers from different fields of science, as well as stakeholder parties, each tend to frame differently the social-environmental systems to be analyzed to answer the same assessment questions. Consequently, the key variables and even their interpretation of causalities in the system analyzed may vary remarkably. Above all, the framing of the assessment question per se may come from the end-user of the assessment results, potentially being the orderer and financer of the study. We discuss the impact of question and system framing on the assessment results from the perspective of decision analysis. We explore whether and when there is a risk that models end up producing policy-based evidence instead of the originally targeted evidence-based policy.

KW - 1172 Environmental sciences

KW - 519 Social and economic geography

M3 - Other conference material

ER -