Search

Interdisciplinary environmental degree programs (environmental studies/science(s) and similar programs) in higher education in the U.S.A. are both diverse and dynamic in their curriculum designs. Though these characteristics afford flexibility and adaptability, they are also seen as weaknesses that can undermine programs' perceived legitimacy both within and beyond their host institutions. The lack of a clear identity, definition of core competencies, and prescriptions for interdisciplinary pedagogy can create confusion among program stakeholders and skepticism among institutional administrators. To learn more about how interdisciplinary environmental curricula vary across the U.S.A., a national survey was conducted of program administrators to investigate their programs and identify their views of what an ideal curriculum would entail. The study demonstrates that consensus exists on field identity: an applied, interdisciplinary focus on the interface of coupled human-natural systems with a normative commitment to sustainability. The study also reveals that three ideal curricular models are espoused by these administrators: Systems Science, Policy and Governance, and Adaptive Management. Program attributes related to these models are also reported. We conclude the article with a brief description of how the three models are related to developing an interdisciplinary environmental workforce, describe the potential next steps for extending the study, and express our optimism that a consensus can be forged on core competencies guidelines and model-specific recommendations for curricular content related to three broad knowledge areas and two skill sets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP) and other constituencies have advocated the development of core competency guidelines for environmental educational programs for many years. Despite the high level of interest, no consensus has emerged on program identity that could lead to their development. The lack of a clearly defined identity has threatened program legitimacy and raised concerns about how well these programs are preparing students for entry into the environmental profession. To address these concerns, the Council of Environmental Deans and Directors, a group of academic environmental program leaders operating under the auspices of the National Council for Science and the Environment, launched a study to learn more about extant program curricula and investigate the potential for reaching consensus on core competence areas. In this article, we review selected findings from the study to date and discuss their implications for the development of core competency criteria. Despite differing perspectives on curriculum design, our research indicates that programs share a common vision of program identity congruent with sustainability. A review of employer and employee surveys and reports from environmental professionals also point toward participation in and understanding of sustainability processes as increasingly important components of practice. Taken together, these findings indicate that sustainability could serve as an overarching paradigm to inform the development of core knowledge and skill competency recommendations for curriculum design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on a five-phase research project that has been sponsored by the Council of Environmental Deans and Directors (CEDD). It informs that CEDD is an organization of environmental program managers which is operated by the National Council for Science and the Environment. It further informs that the aim of the project is to focus on social, political and ecological contexts related to environment. It states that the expansion of the Internet technologies and availability of new interdisciplinary research approaches have made environment-related issues' study easy.

Environmental policy formulation is a difficult business under the best of circumstances. In many cases, policymaking is complicated by factual uncertainty about the likely outcomes of policy intervention and by persistent value conflicts over desired policy ends and goals. This is nowhere more true than in formulating policy to manage adverse impacts to a watershed caused by natural and human activities. In the case of the Illinois River watershed in eastern Oklahoma, controversy over whether and how economic activities in the watershed should be regulated has effectively stifled meaningful policy reforms for three decades. As part of a test of a novel watershed management policymaking protocol funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency, a Q methodological study of stakeholders' perspectives on impact concerns and impact management preferences was conducted to diagnose the conflicts that have pre-empted policy initiatives for so long. We found that the conflicts that exist are not bipolar, but orthogonal – opening the way to potential super-optimum solutions that can satisfy everyone. This study demonstrates the power of Q methodology to assess conflict and thereby suggest strategies for its resolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and risk assessment are operationally different but share the common purpose of supporting decisions about reducing threats to human welfare. Both analysis methods also involve a complex mixture of science and value judgments reflecting epistemological as well as moral and esthetic values. The inability of risk assessment and LCA to be “value free” has been a source of considerable controversy in both communities. Recognition of the contingent and social nature of human interpretation of the risks and environmental impacts created by public and private decisions has led to an increased appreciation of the importance of involving interested and affected parties in risk characterization. Comparison of the value–based nature of LCA and risk assessment demonstrates the need for participation in LCA. Although the need for participation by affected parties in decision–making processes is gaining acceptance, there is little agreement as to how participation should be structured. Risk assessment and LCA have a shared need for research examining the design and analysis of participation processes appropriate to a given decision context. A proposed framework recommends participation strategies designed to enhance the effectiveness of policy–driven analyses such as risk assessment and LCA based on the level of trust that interested and affected parties have for other policy participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BSTRACT: Current research in the Illinois River Basin is designed to develop and test a policy formulation protocol that will foster watershed management policy that is fully legitimated (i.e., policy that is technically effective, economically efficient, administratively implementable, politically feasible, and socially acceptable). This paper describes the results of the initial baseline impact assessment that includes physical, biological, economic, legal, and social systems as well as the development of a watershed management decision support system that is used to integrate technical information and analyses, and to facilitate policy maker and stakeholder negotiation workshops. Numerically modeled and visually simulated environmental impacts serve as the basis for developing alternative policy maker scenarios for prospective watershed management policies. These scenarios, which will be subjected to stakeholder review and negotiation, will undergo iterative review and amendment by policy makers and stakeholder groups to produce a recommended watershed management policy that satisfies all five substantive legitimation criteria. Preliminary results from the baseline social impact assessment indicate that fully legitimated policy is indeed obtainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]