Elucidating public perceptions of environmental behavior: a case study of Lake Lanier

Abstract Participation of stakeholders in stewardship of the aquatic environment, including participation from members of the general public, has become much more widespread than was the case a decade or so ago. With this shift, from a former predominantly technocratic stance to something of a democratic stance on the style of management, it becomes important to elucidate public perceptions of environmental behavior. The paper examines this issue: from a rather specific perspective, where the role of time is significant; with a specific purpose in mind—for defining illustrative stakeholder aspirations for the future, whose plausibility is to be assessed against a computational model of lake behavior; and for a specific case study, Lake Lanier in the Chattahoochee watershed of Georgia, USA. Perturbations and variation in the behavior of the aquatic environment span many time frames, from the very short-term response associated with storms, infrastructure failure, transient pollution events, and so on, to the much longer-term, for instance, the biogeochemical ‘ageing’ of a lake over many decades and more. Our analysis is devoted to data from a survey of stakeholder imagination and perceptions of how the future state of Lake Lanier may evolve in the relatively short term (2–5 years) and in the long term, defined as 25+ years (the span of a generation). Overall, stakeholders are pessimistic and fear that things will be worse in the longer term. Guided largely by thinking on the perspectives of the social solidarities of Cultural Theory, extraction and analysis of sub-samples of the survey responses show that this outlook over the two frames of time is persistent, irrespective of what are, in principle, rather different ‘global’ attitudes towards the man-environment relationship. Of interest inter alia to the foresight generating procedure, by which the ‘reachability’ of stakeholder-derived futures for the lake is to be assessed using a computational model of the relevant parts of the science base, is the question of whether the same small number of priorities for further research on lake behavior is robust in the face of the rich variety of aspirations for the future inevitable in a democratic community of stakeholders.

[1]  Ângela Guimarães Pereira,et al.  'Between Democracy and Expertise? Citizens' Participation and Environmental Integrated Assessment in Venice (Italy) and St.Helens (UK) , 1999 .

[2]  M. V. Asselt,et al.  Uncertainty in perspective , 1996 .

[3]  Claudia Pahl-Wostl,et al.  Information, public empowerment, and the management of urban watersheds , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[4]  Olufemi O. Osidele Reachable Futures, Structural Change, and the Practical Credibility of Environmental Simulation Models , 2002 .

[5]  K. Korfmacher The Politics of Participation in Watershed Modeling , 2001, Environmental management.

[6]  M. B. Beck Environmental Foresight and Models: A Manifesto , 2002 .

[7]  Suzan Dagg,et al.  Book Review: Public Participation in Sustainability Science — A Handbook, Bernd Kasemir, Jill Jäger, Carlo Jaeger and Matthew T. Gardner (Eds.) , 2003 .

[8]  R. Kasperson,et al.  Sustainability Science , 2019, Critical Skills for Environmental Professionals.

[9]  Karl Dake Orienting Dispositions in the Perception of Risk , 1991 .

[10]  M. Weitzman Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate , 1998 .

[11]  M. Wackernagel,et al.  Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be sustainable—And why they are a key to sustainability , 1996 .

[12]  Peter A. Vanrolleghem,et al.  Modelling and real-time control of the integrated urban wastewater system , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[13]  Claudia Pahl-Wostl,et al.  Models at the interface between science and society: impacts and options , 2000 .

[14]  G Grendstad,et al.  Cultural Myths of Human and Physical Nature: Integrated or Separated? , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[15]  Sanja Pfeifer,et al.  A QUESTION OF TIME : DO ECONOMISTS AND STRATEGIC MANAGERS MANAGE TIME OR DO THEY EVEN CARE ? , 2004 .

[16]  S. Krimsky,et al.  Social Theories of Risk , 1992 .

[17]  Karl Dake Myths of Nature: Culture and the Social Construction of Risk , 1992 .

[18]  G. Hornberger Eutrophication in peel inlet—I. The problem-defining behavior and a mathematical model for the phosphorus scenario , 1980 .

[19]  C. Palmer,et al.  Risk perception: an empirical study of the relationship between worldview and the risk construct. , 1996, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[20]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment , 1998 .

[21]  Stuart R. Borrett,et al.  Institutional perspectives on participation and information in water management , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[22]  I H Langford,et al.  A Quantitative Test of the Cultural Theory of Risk Perceptions: Comparison with the Psychometric Paradigm , 1998, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[23]  Lynn A. Maguire Interplay of Science and Stakeholder Values in Neuse River Total Maximum Daily Load Process , 2003 .

[24]  William C. Clark,et al.  Public Participation in Sustainability Science: Frontmatter , 2003 .

[25]  Martin Pleau,et al.  Global optimal real-time control of the Quebec urban drainage system , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[26]  M. Douglas,et al.  Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers , 1983 .

[27]  E. Mostert The challenge of public participation , 2003 .

[28]  Marcus Janssen,et al.  The battle of perspectives: a multi-agent model with adaptive responses to climate change , 1998 .

[29]  Claudia Pahl-Wostl,et al.  An information tool for citizens to assess impacts of climate change from a regional perspective , 2001 .

[30]  M. Thompson Cultural Theory and integrated assessment , 1997 .

[31]  Marco Verweij,et al.  Is time running out ? The case of global warming , 2003 .

[32]  C. Marris,et al.  Integrating sociological and psychological approaches to public perceptions of environmental risks: detailed results from a questionnaire survey , 1996 .

[33]  Michael Thompson,et al.  The complex life: Human land uses in mountain ecosystems , 1997 .

[34]  R. Spear Eutrophication in peel inlet—II. Identification of critical uncertainties via generalized sensitivity analysis , 1980 .

[35]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Modelling the valuesphere and the ecosphere: Integrating the decision makers’ perspectives into LCA , 2000 .

[36]  M. B. Beck,et al.  Developing a Concept of Adaptive Community Learning: Case Study of a Rapidly Urbanizing Watershed , 2002 .

[37]  M. B. Beck,et al.  Food web modelling for investigating ecosystem behaviour in large reservoirs of the south-eastern United States: lessons from Lake Lanier, Georgia , 2004 .

[38]  M. B. Beck,et al.  An Inverse Approach to the Analysis of Uncertainty in Models of Environmental Systems , 2004 .

[39]  Clair Gough,et al.  Computers, citizens and climate change: the art of communicating technical issues , 1999 .

[40]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Managing the Resilience of Lakes: A Multi-agent Modeling Approach , 1999 .

[41]  M. Bruce Beck Vulnerability of water quality in intensively developing urban watersheds , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[42]  Steve Rayner,et al.  Cultural theory and risk analysis , 1992 .