Usable environmental knowledge from the perspective of decision-making: the logics of consequentiality, appropriateness, and meaningfulness

Environmental knowledge is a crucial input for public and private decision-making, yet often useful environmental knowledge appears to be unusable for decision-makers. To better understand how usable knowledge can be produced, we need to build on a better understanding of decision-making processes. We distinguish three different logics of decision-making and discuss their implications for knowledge use: (1) the logic of consequentiality, rooted in theories of rational choice, in which environmental knowledge is used because of its utilitarian value; (2) the logic of appropriateness, rooted in institutional theories, in which environmental knowledge is used because it fits existing rules and routines; and (3) the logic of meaningfulness, rooted in theories of sensemaking and interpretation, in which environmental knowledge is used because it makes sense to decision-makers. The theory and practice of environmental knowledge (co-)production can profit from considering these different logics of decision-making.

[1]  N. Crossman,et al.  Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units , 2012 .

[2]  Louis Lebel,et al.  Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  G. Veltri,et al.  The Theoretical and Methodological Framework. Semiotic Cultural Psychology, Symbolic Universes and Lines of Semiotic Forces , 2019, Symbolic Universes in Time of (Post)Crisis.

[4]  David W. Cash,et al.  Knowledge systems for sustainable development , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  R. Moss,et al.  To co-produce or not to co-produce , 2018, Nature Sustainability.

[6]  Sean Pascoe,et al.  Is economic valuation of ecosystem services useful to decision-makers? Lessons learned from Australian coastal and marine management. , 2016, Journal of environmental management.

[7]  C. Weible,et al.  The new policy sciences: combining the cognitive science of choice, multiple theories of context, and basic and applied analysis , 2017, Policy Sciences.

[8]  M Brugnach,et al.  More is not always better: coping with ambiguity in natural resources management. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[9]  Nabil Amara,et al.  New Evidence on Instrumental, Conceptual, and Symbolic Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies , 2004 .

[10]  Lorrae van Kerkhoff,et al.  Developing integrative research for sustainability science through a complexity principles-based approach , 2014 .

[11]  Aaron M. McCright,et al.  The Political Divide on Climate Change: Partisan Polarization Widens in the U.S. , 2016 .

[12]  E. Ostrom,et al.  Rules and games , 1991 .

[13]  Fergus Green.  The logic of fossil fuel bans , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[14]  Daniel A. Newark.  Leadership and the Logic of Absurdity , 2017 .

[15]  S. Lavorel,et al.  Actionable knowledge for land use planning: Making ecosystem services operational , 2018 .

[16]  Minna-Maaria Hiekkataipale,et al.  What Should a Manager Like Me Do in a Situation Like This? Strategies for Handling Ethical Problems from the Viewpoint of the Logic of Appropriateness , 2017 .

[17]  David Behar,et al.  Co-producing actionable science for water utilities , 2016 .

[18]  A. McCright,et al.  The Politicization of Climate Change and Polarization in the American Public's Views of Global Warming, 2001–2010 , 2011 .

[19]  Kim M. Cobb,et al.  The legacy of climategate: undermining or revitalizing climate science and policy? , 2012 .

[20]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  On knowledge generation and use for sustainability , 2019, Nature Sustainability.

[21]  Robert Costanza,et al.  Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? , 2017 .

[22]  Yakov Ben-Haim,et al.  What Makes a Good Decision? Robust Satisficing as a Normative Standard of Rational Decision Making , 2011 .

[23]  M. V. Eeten,et al.  ‘Dialogues of the deaf’ on science in policy controversies , 1999 .

[24]  Ole‐Kristian Hope.  The Politics of Middle Management Sensemaking and Sensegiving , 2010 .

[25]  Catrien J.A.M. Termeer,et al.  Changing climate, changing frames Dutch water policy frame developments in the context of a rise and fall of attention to climate change , 2013 .

[26]  Sierra C. Woodruff,et al.  Numerous strategies but limited implementation guidance in US local adaptation plans , 2016 .

[27]  Kathleen M. Sutcliffe,et al.  Special Issue: Frontiers of Organization Science, Part 1 of 2: Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[28]  K. Weick.  FROM SENSEMAKING IN ORGANIZATIONS , 2021, The New Economic Sociology.

[29]  A. Dewulf,et al.  Nine lives of uncertainty in decision-making: strategies for dealing with uncertainty in environmental governance , 2018, Policy and Society.

[30]  Donald D. Searing.  Roles, Rules, and Rationality in the New Institutionalism , 1991, American Political Science Review.

[31]  P. Beier,et al.  A How‐to Guide for Coproduction of Actionable Science , 2017 .

[32]  Nadja Kabisch,et al.  Citizen science for assessing ecosystem services: Status, challenges and opportunities , 2017 .

[33]  Christoph Knill,et al.  Neglected challenges to evidence-based policy-making: the problem of policy accumulation , 2018 .

[34]  Denise Lach,et al.  Taming the waters: strategies to domesticate the wicked problems of water resource management , 2005 .

[35]  Scott E. Kalafatis,et al.  Overcoming barriers during the co-production of climate information for decision-making , 2015 .

[36]  David Robert.  Expected Comparative Utility Theory: A New Theory of Rational Choice: EXPECTED COMPARATIVE UTILITY THEORY , 2018 .

[37]  N. Marshall,et al.  Maybe Bacon Had a Point: The Politics of Interpretation in Collective Sensemaking , 2004 .

[38]  E. McNie.  Reconciling the supply of scientific information with user demands: an analysis of the problem and review of the literature , 2007 .

[39]  A. Ostovar.  Investing upstream: Watershed protection in Piura, Peru , 2019, Environmental Science & Policy.

[40]  John W. Kingdon.  Agendas, alternatives, and public policies , 1984 .

[41]  Scott E. Kalafatis,et al.  What Stakeholder Needs Tell Us about Enabling Adaptive Capacity: The Intersection of Context and Information Provision across Regions in the United States , 2015 .

[42]  Robert F. Rich,et al.  Explaining use of information in public policymaking , 1996 .

[43]  Barbara Gray,et al.  Disentangling approaches to framing in conflict and negotiation research: A meta-paradigmatic perspective , 2009 .

[44]  A. Ruiz-Villaverde,et al.  A Critical Review ofHomo Economicusfrom Five Approaches , 2019, American Journal of Economics and Sociology.

[45]  M. van de Vall,et al.  Using Social Policy Research for Reducing Social Problems: An Empirical Analysis of Structure and Functions , 1982, The Journal of applied behavioral science.

[46]  E. Turnhout.  The politics of environmental knowledge , 2018 .

[47]  A. Dewulf,et al.  Fragmentation and connection of frames in collaborative water governance: a case study of river catchment management in Southern Ecuador , 2011 .

[48]  W. Mauser,et al.  Transdisciplinary global change research: The co-creation of knowledge for sustainability , 2013 .

[49]  Blane Harvey,et al.  Charting knowledge co‐production pathways in climate and development , 2019, Environmental Policy and Governance.

[50]  Karl E. Weick,et al.  Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work , 2012 .

[51]  Wei Liu,et al.  Citizen science for hydrological risk reduction and resilience building , 2018 .

[52]  Paul Cairney,et al.  The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making , 2016 .

[53]  James G. March,et al.  How Decisions Happen in Organizations , 1991, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[54]  S. Rayner,et al.  Weather Forecasts are for Wimps: Why Water Resource Managers Do Not Use Climate Forecasts , 2005 .

[55]  M. Raymond.  Social Practices of Rule-Making in World Politics , 2019 .

[56]  A. Meadow,et al.  The art of co-production of knowledge in environmental sciences and management: lessons from international practice , 2018, Environmental Management.

[57]  C. Termeer,et al.  Knowledge governance: An exploration of principles, impact, and barriers , 2013 .

[58]  J. Bendor,et al.  Incrementalism: Dead yet Flourishing , 2015 .

[59]  James G. March,et al.  A primer on decision making : how decisions happen , 1994 .

[60]  Christine J. Kirchhoff,et al.  Narrowing the climate information usability gap , 2012 .

[61]  R. Bonney,et al.  Next Steps for Citizen Science , 2014, Science.

[62]  Cerian Gibbes,et al.  Local knowledge in climate adaptation research: moving knowledge frameworks from extraction to co‐production , 2017 .

[63]  B. Head.  Toward More “Evidence-Informed” Policy Making? , 2016 .

[64]  R. J. Scott.  The Science of Muddling through Revisited , 2010 .

[65]  Maria Carmen Lemos,et al.  Usable climate knowledge for adaptive and co-managed water governance , 2015 .

[66]  D. Stone.  Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making , 1997 .

[67]  F. Fischer.  Knowledge politics and post-truth in climate denial: on the social construction of alternative facts , 2019, Critical Policy Studies.

[68]  Martin Savransky.  The Adventure of Relevance: An Ethics of Social Inquiry , 2016 .

[69]  M. Lemos,et al.  Adaptation by stealth: climate information use in the Great Lakes region across scales , 2017, Climatic Change.

[70]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  The Logic of Appropriateness , 2008 .

[71]  S. Dessai,et al.  Actionable Knowledge for Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science , 2013 .

[72]  Clark A. Miller,et al.  Co-production in global sustainability: Histories and theories , 2018 .

[73]  S. Grainger,et al.  The development and intersection of highland-coastal scale frames: a case study of water governance in central Peru , 2019, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning.

[74]  Réjean Landry,et al.  Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada , 2001 .

[75]  H. Levrel,et al.  The use of cost–benefit analysis in environmental policies: Some issues raised by the Water Framework Directive implementation in France , 2016 .

[76]  P. Forster,et al.  Adaptation planning and the use of climate change projections in local government in England and Germany , 2016, Regional Environmental Change.

[77]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics , 1989 .

[78]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Frame Reflection: Toward The Resolution Of Intractable Policy Controversies , 1994 .

[79]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. , 1972 .

[80]  Göktuğ Morçöl.  Handbook of Decision Making , 2006 .

[81]  Katie Meehan,et al.  Climate change and transdisciplinary science: Problematizing the integration imperative , 2015 .

[82]  H. Runhaar,et al.  Dialogues of the deaf in Dutch eel management policy. Explaining controversy and deadlock with argumentative discourse analysis , 2013 .