Learning as an objective within a structured risk management decision process.

Social learning through adaptive management holds the promise of providing the basis for better risk management over time. Yet the experience with fostering social learning through adaptive management initiatives has been mixed and would benefit from practical guidance for better implementation. This paper outlines a straightforward heuristic for fostering improved risk management decisions: specifying learning for current and future decisions as one of several explicit objectives for the decision at hand, drawing on notions of applied decision analysis. In keeping with recent guidance from two important U.S. advisory commissions, the paper first outlines a view of risk management as a policy-analytic decision process involving stakeholders. Then it develops the concept of the value of learning, which broadens the more familiar notion of the value of information. After that, the concepts and steps needed to treat learning as an explicit objective in a policy decision are reviewed. The next section outlines the advantages of viewing learning as an objective, including potential benefits from the viewpoint of stakeholders, the institutions involved, and for the decision process itself. A case-study example concerning water use forfisheries and hydroelectric power in British Columbia, Canada is presented to illustrate the development of learning as an objective in an applied risk-management context.

[1]  Daniel Ward Ohlson,et al.  Exploring the application of adaptive management and decision analysis to integrated watershed management , 1999 .

[2]  Robert W. Hahn,et al.  Reviving Regulatory Reform: A Global Perspective , 2000 .

[3]  Kristen Purcell,et al.  Public Participation and the Environment: Do We Know What Works? , 1999 .

[4]  A. Vining,et al.  Policy analysis : concepts and practice , 1989 .

[5]  R. Gregory,et al.  Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: Creating Insights through Structured Environmental Decisions , 2001 .

[6]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Book Reviews : Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improv ing Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998, 136 pages, $26.00 , 1998 .

[7]  Timothy L. McDaniels,et al.  Using Judgment in Resource Management: A Multiple Objective Analysis of a Fisheries Management Decision , 1995, Oper. Res..

[8]  Lester B. Lave,et al.  Benefit-Cost Analysis: Do the Benefits Exceed the Costs? , 1996 .

[9]  Timothy L. McDaniels,et al.  Democratizing Risk Management: Successful Public Involvement in Local Water Management Decisions , 1999 .

[10]  Lawrence D. Phillips,et al.  Requisite Decision Modelling: A Case Study , 1982 .

[11]  Kai N. Lee Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, Kai N. Lee. 1993. Island Press, Washington, DC. 290 pages. ISBN: 1-59963-197-X. $25.00 , 1993 .

[12]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Democratizing Risk Management: Successful Public Involvement in Local Water Management Decisions , 1999 .

[13]  S. Kelman,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis: an ethical critique. , 1981, Regulation.

[14]  L. Argote Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge , 1999 .

[15]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Using Stakeholder Values to Make Smarter Environmental Decisions , 2000 .

[16]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources , 1986 .

[17]  J. Ruiz Moreno [Organizational learning]. , 2001, Revista de enfermeria.

[18]  C. S. Holling,et al.  Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions , 1997 .

[19]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective , 1978 .