Valuation methods within LCA - Where are the values?

It is generally recognised that the valuation in LCA requires political, ideological and/or ethical values (hence the term). These values, however, are seldom discussed, and this paper may he seen as an early attempt. One result is that not only the valuation weighting factors, but also the choice of valuation methodology and the choice of using a valuation weighting method at all, are influenced by fundamental ethical and ideological valuations. Since there is no societal consensus on these fundamental values, and never will be one in an open democratic society, there is no reason to expect consensus either on valuation weighting factors, or on the valuation method or even on the choice of using a valuation weighting method at all. Another result of the discussion on values is that the ethical and ideological valuations are often made implicitly in the choice of method, data, etc., thus making it difficult to discuss the values and the implications of different standpoints. Although this paper focus on the valuation methods within LCA, it is expected that much of the discussion and the conclusions are of relevance for other environmental management tools, e.g. Environmental Impact Assessment.     

A primer to ‘bio-objects’: new challenges at the interface of science, technology and society

Biotechnological and life science innovations do not only lead to immense progress in diverse fields of natural science and technical research and thereby drive economic development, they also fundamentally affect the relationship between nature, technology and society. Taken this seriously, the ethical and societal assessment of emerging biotechnologies as for example synthetic biology is challenged not only to constrain on questions of biosafety and biosecurity but also to face the societal questions within the different fields as an interface problem of science and society. In order to map this vague and stirring field, we propose the concept of bio-objects to explore the reciprocal interaction at the interface of science and society serious as well to have the opportunity to detect possible junctions of societal discontent and unease before their appearance.     

Pieter Hendrik Nienhuis: Aquatic Ecologist and Environmental Scientist

Prof. Dr. Pieter Hendrik (Piet) Nienhuis worked for almost 40 years in all aspects of aquatic ecology and environmental science and retired on 31 October 2003. He can be characterised as a distinguished scientist, shaped in an applied estuarine and aquatic research ambience of the former Delta Institute for Hydrobiological Research (DIHO) in Yerseke in the Netherlands. His appointment as a full professor at the Radboud University Nijmegen offered him a challenging step from monodisciplinarity in ecology, via multidisciplinarity in the application of ecological knowledge in river science to interdisciplinarity in environmental science and management. This paper describes his education, teaching activities, research, scientific publications, science management, and significance for various scientific disciplines. He made important contributions to biosystematics of angiosperms and algae, the ecology of seagrasses, nutrient cycling and eutrophication in estuarine ecosystems, and the integrated modelling of the ecological functioning of estuaries. Subsequently, he paid much attention to environmental problems in river basins, ecological rehabilitation and sustainable development. His work influenced the view of ecologists, aquatic scientists and water managers in the Netherlands as well as abroad, in particular regarding the drawbacks of compartmentalization of the estuaries and the importance of connectivity and morphodynamics in river systems. In hindsight, it appears as a logical line that he gradually moved from estuarine ecological research that became increasingly driven by societal and environmental problems to the field of environmental science and management.     

The “capacity to reason” in conservation biology and policy: the southern elephant seal branding controversy

Modern environmental research is typically governed by a number of protocols designed to embrace the epistemological and ethical values of society. These protocols evolve in response to changing values, and few disciplines in environmental science have received as much attention as biological conservation. This paper describes the events leading to a controversy regarding a particular research technique used to investigate the cause of a long-term population decline of southern elephant seals (Mirounga leonina) at Macquarie Island, south of Australia – hot-iron branding of individuals. We discuss procedures and protocols that were in place at the time the controversy erupted, the subsequent reflection of the researchers and authorities involved, and the steps taken to avoid future occurrences. Our treatment of the issue is framed within a discussion of modern ethical philosophy, and our aim is to identify the true source of the controversy. We offer several suggestions as to how such events can be avoided in the future, and provide a model framework for incorporating changing ethical values into important biological conservation objectives.     

Environmental assessment of products

The evaluation of product alternatives in Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is a critical step on the basis of results as related to their impact category data. Decisions involving several environmental issues are hardly ever straightforward, since one alternative only seldom clearly dominates the others in all aspects. More often, one alternative scores better on some environmental issues and worse on others. A combination of impact data and preferences is then required for evaluation. This can be done using evaluation methods based on fixed societal preferences. However, by applying different evaluation methods to the same data, different “best” alternatives may be chosen. This reduces the credibility of LCA results. Instead of fixed societal preferences an approach has been developed which uses consensus-oriented ranges of societal values for specifying the ranking of the overall environmental attractiveness of alternatives. These ranges may indicate both the uncertainty of decision-makers and the shifting of societal values, e.g. as related to the dynamics of knowledge of environmental problem areas. In this article, an approach is proposed which combines environmental data and uncertain societal values to form a clear statement on alternatives regarding their overall damage. By using a full set of potentially relevant societal preferences, a merely coincidental selection of the best product alternative is ruled out. A step-by-step procedure, narrowing down the feasible range of societal preferences, has been developed. The approach is illustrated using a case study of TV-housing concepts and a survey.     

Reconciling Wildlife Management's Conflicted Purpose With a Land Community Worldview

ABSTRACT To reach its potential wildlife management needs a coherent purpose. Traditional divisions between science, society, and nature, however, create conflicts between responsibility to science, the public, and nature. These divisions emerged as early as Plato's (400 BC) allegory of the cave. In Plato's allegory human society existed inside a cave formed by its own delusions, and a philosopher or scientist could leave the cave and apprehend reality in nature. Wildlife management's simultaneous responsibility to public preferences, objective truth, and biotic integrity provides the foundation for a conservation worldview capable of transcending the divisions embodied in Plato's allegory. In this paper we deconstruct the conflicted worldview standing on that foundation and describe a land community-based worldview for wildlife management that could replace it. The transition from traditional views of science, society, and nature to a land community worldview requires 1) changing scientific stewardship from seeking objective truth to seeking credible truth, 2) changing political stewardship from following societal dictates to representing wildlife within the land community, and 3) changing ethical stewardship from protecting biotic integrity to fighting permanent closure of land community boundaries. Adopting a land community worldview for wildlife management requires relinquishing the illusion of absolute objectivity and a fall from status as neutral arbiters of knowledge but provides a means for honorably seeking reliable knowledge, serving the public and respecting the land community.     

Citizen science in schools: Engaging students in research on urban habitat for pollinators

Citizen science can play an important role in school science education. Citizen science is particularly relevant to addressing current societal environmental sustainability challenges, as it engages the students directly with environmental science and gives students an understanding of the scientific process. In addition, it allows students to observe local representations of global challenges. Here, we report a citizen science programme designed to engage school‐age children in real‐world scientific research. The programme used standardized methods deployed across multiple schools through scientist–school partnerships to engage students with an important conservation problem: habitat for pollinator insects in urban environments. Citizen science programmes such as the programme presented here can be used to enhance scientific literacy and skills. Provided key challenges to maintain data quality are met, this approach is a powerful way to contribute valuable citizen science data for understudied, but ecologically important study systems, particularly in urban environments across broad geographical areas.     

A Theoretical Foundation for Life-Cycle Assessment

The presence of value judgments in life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) has been a constant source of controversy. According to a common interpretation, the international standard on LCIA requires that the assessment methods used in published comparisons be "value free." Epistemologists argue that even natural science rests on "constitutive" and "contextual" value judgments. The example of the equivalency potential for climate change, the global warming potential (GWP), demonstrates that any impact assessment method inevitably contains not only constitutive and contextual values, but also preference values. Hence, neither life-cycle assessment (LCA) as a whole nor any of its steps can be "value free." As a result, we suggest a more comprehensive definition of objectivity in LCA that allows arguments about values and their relationship to facts. We distinguish three types of truth claims: factual claims, which are based on natural science; normative claims, which refer to preference values; and relational claims, which address the proper relation between factual knowledge and values. Every assessment method, even the GWP, requires each type of claim. Rational arguments can be made about each type of claim. Factual truth claims can be assessed using the scientific method. Normative claims can be based on ethical arguments. The values of individuals or groups can be elicited using various social science methods. Relational claims must follow the rules of logic. Relational claims are most important for the development of impact assessment methods. Because LCAs are conducted to satisfy the need of decision makers to consider environmental impacts, relational claims about impact assessment methods should refer to this goal. This article introduces conditions that affect environmental decision making and discusses how LCA—values and all—can be defended as a rational response to the challenge of moving uncertain scientific information into the policy arena.     

The prospect for international regulatory interventions in embryo transfer and reproductive technologies in the next century

Historically, international regulatory interventions in the area of animal reproductive technologies have focused on the need for mitigation against the dissemination of diseases with the movement of genetics and germplasm across international borders. The continued globalization of agriculture under the Sanitary/Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement of the World Trade Organization (WTO) ensures that disease considerations arising from third and fourth generation reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilized embryos, transgenics and xenotransplantation will continue to give rise to animal health regulatory measures. Furthermore, in the aftermath of the raising of the public consciousness and the ensuing consumer confidence crisis concerning animal husbandry and livestock production practices following the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy outbreak, evolving societal values are expected to expand regulatory considerations to address veterinary public health and ethical concerns. Consequently, it is expected that the role of the International Embryo Transfer Society in fostering meaningful dialogue and profiling of the research necessary to provide for appropriate science based regulation development will increase in importance.     

A priority paper for the societal and ethical aspects of synthetic biology

As synthetic biology develops into a promising science and engineering field, we need to have clear ideas and priorities regarding its safety, security, ethical and public dialogue implications. Based on an extensive literature search, interviews with scientists, social scientists, a 4 week long public e-forum, and consultation with several stakeholders from science, industry and civil society organisations, we compiled a list of priority topics regarding societal issues of synthetic biology for the years ahead. The points presented here are intended to encourage all stakeholders to engage in the prioritisation of these issues and to participate in a continuous dialogue, with the ultimate goal of providing a basis for a multi-stakeholder governance in synthetic biology. Here we show possible ways to solve the challenges to synthetic biology in the field of safety, security, ethics and the science–public interface.     

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Recent arguments for conventional fisheries management approaches (CFMAs) and against no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs) are reviewed, i.e. CFMAs are more effective, density-dependent factors will lead to reduced fish stock production in and around NTMPAs, rights-based approaches in combination with CFMAs will be more effective, and natural refuges from fishing already exist. It is concluded that these are largely valid but only from a fisheries management perspective. The arguments of proponents of NTMPAs and those of proponents of CFMAs are considered as contrasting storylines, the divergences between which are based on two key factors: different objectives and different science. In relation to different objectives, it is concluded that the arguments against NTMPAs based on their lack of fisheries management benefits must be considered as only applying to the secondary resource conservation objectives of such designations and not to the primary marine biodiversity conservation objectives. On this basis it is argued that it is counter-productive for NTMPAs to be ‘sold’ on a win–win basis, including their potential to deliver fisheries management benefits, as this detracts from their marine biodiversity conservation objectives and leaves such calls open to arguments that CFMAs are better able to deliver fisheries management objectives. In relation to different science, it is concluded that criticisms of NTMPAs and support for CFMAs implicitly resist the shift from Mode 1 (reductive, intra-disciplinary) to Mode 2 (holistic, trans-disciplinary) science that is inherent in calls for NTMPAs as part of an ecosystem approach. Mode 2 science attempts to accommodate both uncertainty and wider societal values and preferences, and it is argued that arguments for NTMPAs should be more explicitly focussed on this potential. It is difficult, if not impossible and inappropriate, to extend the reductive approach inherent in CFMA analyses to encompass the broader ethical and scientific concerns for the health of marine ecosystems and their component populations and habitats that arguments for NTMPAs reflect. NTMPA proponents might focus on stressing that arguments against such designations and in favour of CFMAs do not encompass such valid concerns, therefore they tell only half of the story.

Defining "adverse environmental impact" and making paragraph 316(b) decisions: a fisheries management approach

The electric utility industry has developed an approach for decisionmaking that includes a definition of Adverse Environmental Impact (AEI) and an implementation process. The definition of AEI is based on lessons from fishery management science and analysis of the statutory term "adverse environmental impact" and is consistent with current natural resource management policy. The industry has proposed a definition focusing on "unacceptable risk to the population"s ability to sustain itself, to support reasonably anticipated commercial or recreational harvests, or to perform its normal ecological function." This definition focuses not on counting individual fish or eggs cropped by the various uses of a water body, but on preserving populations of aquatic organisms and their functions in the aquatic community. The definition recognizes that assessment of AEI should be site-specific and requires both a biological decision and a balancing of diverse societal values. The industry believes that the definition of AEI should be implemented in a process that will maximize the overall societal benefit of the paragraph 316(b) decision by considering the facility"s physical location, design, and operation, as well as the local biology. The approach considers effects on affected fish and shellfish populations and the benefits of any necessary best technology available (BTA) alternatives. This is accomplished through consideration of population impacts, which conversely allows consideration of the benefits of any necessary BTA modifications. This in turn allows selection of BTAs that will protect potentially affected populations in a cost-effective manner. The process also employs risk assessment with stakeholder participation, in accordance with EPA's Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. The information and tools are now available to make informed decisions about site-specific impacts that will ensure protection of aquatic ecosystems and best serve the public interest.     

Practising Conservation Biology in a Virtual Rainforest World

The interdisciplinary science of conservation biology provides undergraduate biology students with the opportunity to connect the biological sciences with disciplines including economics, social science and philosophy to address challenging conservation issues. Because of its complexity, students do not often have the opportunity to practise conservation biology. To increase exposure to this science, this paper describes a virtual rainforest island on which students collect data related to forest carbon storage, while also confronting ethical issues. Students are asked to independently make decisions, collect data and explore the island before writing a research report with recommendations for the future management of the island’s forests. The ethics of decision-making are addressed in the students’ research reports and are reinforced through guided class discussion. Students will complete this activity with increased ethical awareness, as well as a better understanding of the challenges associated with the practise of conservation biology.     

What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions

In this essay, we review research from the social sciences on how the public makes sense of and participates in societal decisions about science and technology. We specifically highlight the role of the media and public communication in this process, challenging the still dominant assumption that science literacy is both the problem and the solution to societal conflicts. After reviewing the cases of evolution, climate change, food biotechnology, and nanotechnology, we offer a set of detailed recommendations for improved public engagement efforts on the part of scientists and their organizations. We emphasize the need for science communication initiatives that are guided by careful formative research; that span a diversity of media platforms and audiences; and that facilitate conversations with the public that recognize, respect, and incorporate differences in knowledge, values, perspectives, and goals.     

Christian theological resources for environmental ethics

This essay examines how selected Christian doctrines may inform contemporary environmental ethics. Particular attention is focused on the doctrines of creation, redemption and eschatology. The ethical models of dominion, stewardship, and co-creatorship are developed based on these theological doctrines. It is also argued that these ethical models must be explicitly rooted in the church's biblical, creedal and theological tradition if they are to influence the values, virtues and practices of the church. The applicability of these models as resources for developing a public environmental ethic is also assessed.     

State of environment indicators of 'river health': exploring the metaphor

1. Indicators are crucial to many socio-political schemes for portraying environmental influences of society. For example, the OECD model for State of the Environment Reporting uses three different sorts of indicators (pressure, condition, response) to differentiate the present condition of the environment from the anthropogenic pressures upon it and from any societal responses made to alleviate those pressures (thereby improving aspects of the overall condition). 2. These sorts of indicators have a fundamental technical basis in the science supporting their exposition and usage. However, the criteria used in interpreting the indicator values are likely to be set by considerations that go beyond scientific grounds. That is, indicators are socially determined in the end. However, many scientists find it difficult to involve the public in such reporting. 3. Scientists who are uncomfortable with this non-technical use of their indicator constructs should recognize that it is merely another manifestation of the overall broadening of environmental concern termed ‘ecosystem health’. The emerging field of ecosystem health seeks to take our technical understanding of how the environment functions and combine it with socio-economic goals, using a human health metaphor and an ethical underpinning. 4. River health might be better served by adopting a veterinary approach rather than the model of human health. This is because, like animals, riverine environments come in many different forms and cannot complain of ill health. Desirable interventions will vary with the uses to which we wish to put a river and our reasons for being concerned about a river’s health. A framework for this diagnostic approach is presented. 5. An enormous challenge lies ahead in integrating the various measurements of riverine attributes that might together constitute ‘river health’. We need ways to cater for the pluralism of modern societies, and we need more dynamic assessments of river condition, possibly founded on studies of key ecological processes.     

Decision science for effective management of populations subject to stochasticity and imperfect knowledge

Many species are threatened by human activity through processes such as habitat modification, water management, hunting, and introduction of invasive species. These anthropogenic threats must be mitigated as efficiently as possible because both time and money available for mitigation are limited. For example, it is essential to address the type and degree of uncertainties present to derive effective management strategies for managed populations. Decision science provides the tools required to produce effective management strategies that can maximize or minimize the desired objective(s) based on imperfect knowledge, taking into account stochasticity. Of particular importance are questions such as how much of available budgets should be invested in reducing uncertainty and which uncertainties should be reduced. In such instances, decision science can help select efficient environmental management actions that may be subject to stochasticity and imperfect knowledge. Here, we review the use of decision science in environmental management to demonstrate the utility of the decision science framework. Our points are illustrated using examples from the literature. We conclude that collaboration between theoreticians and practitioners is crucial to maximize the benefits of decision science’s rational approach to dealing with uncertainty.     

The EBM-DPSER Conceptual Model: Integrating Ecosystem Services into the DPSIR Framework

There is a pressing need to integrate biophysical and human dimensions science to better inform holistic ecosystem management supporting the transition from single species or single-sector management to multi-sector ecosystem-based management. Ecosystem-based management should focus upon ecosystem services, since they reflect societal goals, values, desires, and benefits. The inclusion of ecosystem services into holistic management strategies improves management by better capturing the diversity of positive and negative human-natural interactions and making explicit the benefits to society. To facilitate this inclusion, we propose a conceptual model that merges the broadly applied Driver, Pressure, State, Impact, and Response (DPSIR) conceptual model with ecosystem services yielding a Driver, Pressure, State, Ecosystem service, and Response (EBM-DPSER) conceptual model. The impact module in traditional DPSIR models focuses attention upon negative anthropomorphic impacts on the ecosystem; by replacing impacts with ecosystem services the EBM-DPSER model incorporates not only negative, but also positive changes in the ecosystem. Responses occur as a result of changes in ecosystem services and include inter alia management actions directed at proactively altering human population or individual behavior and infrastructure to meet societal goals. The EBM-DPSER conceptual model was applied to the Florida Keys and Dry Tortugas marine ecosystem as a case study to illustrate how it can inform management decisions. This case study captures our system-level understanding and results in a more holistic representation of ecosystem and human society interactions, thus improving our ability to identify trade-offs. The EBM-DPSER model should be a useful operational tool for implementing EBM, in that it fully integrates our knowledge of all ecosystem components while focusing management attention upon those aspects of the ecosystem most important to human society and does so within a framework already familiar to resource managers.     

Links between ecology and ecophilosophy,ethics and the requirements of environmental management

Abstract This paper concerns the ways that our philosophical attitudes to the environment can influence the appropriateness of methodologies for solving environmental problems. Sometimes a public perception is expressed that science takes scant regard of the concerns of the people affected. Is it possible for scientists and managers to respond to such concerns and still fulfil the logical and methodological rigour that their discipline demands? I believe we have to address fundamental issues of definitions and meaning before useful debate can occur among parties interested in environmental decision-making. Delving into the ideas behind our everyday practices of environmental management should promote re-evaluation of our beliefs, attitudes and concerns about nature. I examine environmental science from both ethical and managerial perspectives. I explore how our assumptions and attitudes might influence ecology, in particular issues raised by environmental impacts and conservation. The major points argued here are:

• 1 Any legal requirements of environmental investigations must be met, but perhaps we should act more in line with the spirit of legislation.
• 2 The managerial imperatives of environmental investigations need to be examined closely because of widely perceived problems with the use of science in impact assessment. We must change either our methods of assessment or the regulations and administration of environmental impact assessment (EIA).
• 3 Science is not paramount in the processes of environmental decision-making. We need to be aware of how psychosocial factors affect the ultimately political decisions about environmental problems.
• 4 Philosophy and ethics offer a range of perspectives that may benefit ecology. Scientists need to be aware of these just as they should be of their own leanings about how we treat nature.
• 5 Scientists need to translate social concerns or demands about the environment into properly defined scientific questions, and then study them as a matter of urgency.
• 6 Ecology needs to guide ecophilosophers and environmental ethicists as to how nature works, why we expect variability in ecosystems, what is naturalness, and other issues where a scientific understanding of nature has progressed beyond the point where these observers of ecology have so far taken inspiration.

     

Values-led conservation

In international nature conservation policy, value‐arguments based on science and economic rationalism increasingly overshadow the aesthetic and ethical arguments that originally inspired the conservation movement. We argue that this trend risks removing conservation from the public realm, in part because it facilitates the adoption by nongovernment conservation bodies of corporate values and/or their integration with government bureaucracies. By contrast, the explicit recognition of aesthetic and ethical values would complement arguments based on science and economic utility. We subscribe to a reformist view of globalization that accepts the inevitability of a globalizing world but argues that the process needs humanizing by incorporating quality of life values in the policy process. We argue that re‐emphasis of aesthetic and ethical arguments in international conservation policy would contribute to this goal by reasserting links between conservation bodies and the public, thereby leading to more effective action on the ground.