Lecture 10: Policy and Science in the Great Lakes

Facilitated by Dr. Gail Krantzberg

ADAPTIVE COMANAGEMENT

I enjoyed the focus on our local Great Lakes: a history of issues, the development of policies (i.e. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement [GLWQA]), and the numerous remaining issues unaddressed by the GLWQA thereby calling for its revision.

One of the concepts being recommended for revising the management of the Great Lakes is "adaptive co-management." As most new jargon does, it looked flashy and sounded 'right', but it was meaningless to me. And so to remedy my ignorance, I read, and now I share.

Adaptive co-management (AcM) has been defined as "a process by which institutional arrangements and ecological knowledge are tested and revised in a dynamic, ongoing, self-organized process of learning-by-doing" (Olssen et al., 2004, p. 75). Attributes of AcM include: dynamic learning process (as opposed to stagnant); horizontal and vertical collaboration; and management structures that are flexible, evolving, and context appropriate (i.e. place-based). It couples learning and action. AcM attempts to deal with uncertainty, flex with changing conditions, and respond to the anthropogenic activities affecting biological processes on every scale.

An interesting aspect of AcM theory is that management responses (to ecosystem change) are tuned to match the dynamics of the ecosystem.

First, ecosystem dynamics need to be understood, and due to their complexity this requires collaboration. According to Olssen et al. (2004), this knowledge is stored in a ‘social memory,’ i.e., it is captured, embedded, and emerges in public debate and decisions regarding responses to ecological change. With practice this collaborative learning process matures. And while it’s maturing, it embeds (management) practices which cultivate the ecological memory. Thus, in theory, this learning/management process is self-strengthening. The degree to which management responds to environmental feedback and provides further sustainable direction is the degree to which it is successful.

What I find interesting is the active link between learning and doing. Each reinforces the other. It sounds simple enough. As we learn about a lake ecosystem, for example, our dealings with it ought, and ought to be able, to incorporate new information. (There has to be room for a knowledge broker somewhere in there.) Considering the other priorities of decision-makers, I can see how this sort of knowledge can become quite contentious. I also see the decision-maker’s need for continuing education and diverse networking. And I’m sure it wouldn’t hurt the scientists and other learners to acquaint themselves with commerce and management either.

If you’re interested in further reading, Olssen et al. (2004) exemplify this management model with case studies from Sweden and Canada and suggest seven essentials for the emergence of self-organized, adaptive comanagement systems.

---

Olssen P, Folke C, and Berkes F (2004). Adaptive comanagement strategies for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Environmental Management 34(1), 75-90.

Seminar 8 ~ Capacity Building for Managing Water Challenges

24 January 2011

Facilitated by Dr. Colin Mayfield

In Colin's seminar we looked at the role of capacity building to overcome water challenges, and specifically at providing a core knowledge base to participants in Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) with a real UNU-INWEH case study. Afterward Colin recommended some TED Talks by Hans Rosling. One thing that particularly stuck out to me was, to borrow a phrase from Alex Bielak, the multitasking of every piece of information. I’ll append ‘gifts and skills’ to information, and expand multitasking to include cross-tasking (using one set of skills or knowledge in the context of another).

HANS ROSLING

If you avoid or yawn at statistics, Hans Rosling’s datasets just might wake you up. His research lies in global health which investigates the role of poverty on public health around the world. A number of things struck me from his presentations.

He possesses a number of skill-sets and knowledge-sets: statistics, computer programming, global health and poverty. He’s an orator and an educator. Add in some creativity, audacity, humour, and a fully dilated, critical eye, and interesting things start to happen.

His data is not amazing per se: it's not his and he doesn't have exclusive access to it. It's how he uses and arranges and displays it. He layers multiple levels of information with animated graphics to create a kind of artistic statistics. He essentially translates the trends of thousands of numbers, tables, charts, etc. to produce something palatable, even enjoyable, and accessible for the average person and politician, all in a matter of minutes.

DIVERSE, COMPETENT, CREATIVE

What I find intriguing about Dr. Rosling is what spawns from his combined skills, knowledge, and character. Let’s call this combination ‘the palette from which one paints’. First, as I noted above, his palette is diverse. Second, with his own palette he paints well. Third, he employs his creativity. Forgive me for trying to pull life-lessons out of our friend, but… I’m reminded of the advantages of being diverse in skills and knowledge. Not too diverse, like trying to know or do everything, but within one’s capacity. And doing certain, different things well. I personally appreciate his creative edge. Who says you can’t do art and math together?

So what does this have to do with water, or more particularly capacity building? For starters, UNU-INWEH’s Water Virtual Learning Center (WVLC), derived from the general knowledge of multiple disciplines, is essentially a smaller, broad-spectrum palette with individual colours (knowledge sets) taken from the larger, narrow-spectrum palettes of many disciplines. It’s been seen that when IWRM personnel have a more comprehensive, broad-spectrum understanding, good things happen.

What about the research of our WWB class? Could we combine photography, hot-air balloons, and topography for effective low-budget mapping? Hilary seems to think so. Or who knows what could come of Matt’s love of adventure, economics, and obscure eighteenth-century French philosophers. (Okay, perhaps I’m the obscure one.) Or my own… ? What’s on your palette?

Seminar 9 ~ Knowledge Mobilization and Transfer

7 February 2011

Dr. Alex Bielak (my apologies Alex for the late post)

Just as confused as your average grandmother, I read up quite a bit on all these knowledge-things. I ended up learning quite a bit about knowledge-translation (KT), knowledge-mobilization (KMb), knowledge-brokering (KB), or whatever other appendage you might add. And so I’d like to begin by mobilizing some of the whats, hows and wisdoms I gleaned from several broker’s stories.

• The what, who, when, how, why of KMb:
  ‘Knowledge mobilization is getting
  the right information
  to the right people
  at the right time
  in the right format
  so as to influence decision-making’ (Daryl Rock)
• KT/KB enables better connections between two worlds: research and practice, science and politics, knowledge-makers and knowledge-users, by working at the interface
• Over and over these brokers attest that establishing lasting interpersonal relationships between the two (or more?) worlds is essential and critical to success… because often the inhabitants of each are quite alien to the other… this interpersonal thread stands against the ‘old way’ of ‘trying to convince people [merely] through writing’ (Ben Levin)
• Laugh. It’s important. Really. (David Yetman)
  

Arming myself with some new (and helpful) jargon, I saw that this translating-brokering business is not new at all. I’ve been learning about learning and see considerable overlap with education. Consider the definition provided in the first point above. Is this not what good educators try to do? The purpose may be altered, or at least expanded… But like the researcher (K-maker or K-finder) needs someone (K-mobilizer) to get the K to the decision-maker (K-user), so does the scientist/ historian/ philosopher/ writer (K-maker or K-finder) need someone (K-mobilizer = educator) to get the K to the learners (K-users, K-enjoyers, K-?). Of course one person may where many K-hats. My point is that this idea is not new. And though it is not new, I think that older KMb contexts (like education) have something to learn.

In essence, there are three teams in this K-game: K-maker-finders, K-translater-mobilizers, and K-user-enjoyers. And yes this is a non-competitive, cooperative game. At least it’s supposed to be. But it doesn’t have to be boring. Let’s play.

In the following list of places, groups, etc., name each of the three teams. Depending on how you frame each, there may be more than one answer.

• Google.com
• TED Talks
• Mills Library
• Your high school
• The Toronto Raptors
• The Hamilton Spectator
• A walk-in medical clinic
• Community water resource development project
  

Now that we’ve generalized this to many K-contexts… could we generalize it further? Say, by replacing K with… food? There are certainly food-makers, food-mobilizers, and food-users. How about entertainment? Fashion? The arts? Or something terrible, like terror? … Discoverer-Generators, Translator-Mobilizers, User-Enjoyers.

As I write, I think these categories will help me to play this K-game well… to know my role and do it well, and to understand the role and needs of the other teams. Perhaps even as I develop my research plans and return to Kenya to work with the Il Ngwesi communities.

Jesse