Thursday, August 7, 2008 - 3:20 PM

SYMP 20-5: Translating scientific knowledge to policy makers: The case of urban ecological systems

Richard V. Pouyat, US Forest Service

Background/Question/Methods

Until the late 1990s, our understanding of urban ecological systems in North America was lacking.  Research activities in urban ecology focused more on ecological processes embedded within cities (i.e., ecology in the city) rather than integrative studies of greater metropolitan areas as biophysical-social complexes (i.e., ecology of the city).  In the former case, methodologies, conceptual frameworks, and mathematical ecological models were developed without people explicitly included.  In the latter case, an integrated approach allows for feedbacks between the human and biophysical domains.  This requires an understanding of human behavior.  However, even with the integration of the human and ecological domains, ecologists remain observers from outside the system.  This presentation will explore the “human-centered approach” to the study of urban ecological systems, which embeds the ecological community within urban ecological systems, and how this approach results in the more effective integration of science and policy decision making and enhanced ecological literacy.

Results/Conclusions

With a human centered approach the ecological community is part of the human ecological system and thus becomes integral to feedback mechanisms.  This approach ties the scope and nature of research conducted more closely to societal needs and thus science becomes more influential in the policy decision making process.  Moreover, with a human centered approach the development of personal relationships between ecologists and users of ecological knowledge are more likely to occur and likewise the potential for enhancing ecological literacy.  Ways in which the human centered approach can be achieved include 1) embedding ecologists in the policy making process, 2) developing institutional interfaces between scientists and users of ecological knowledge, 3) fostering the inclusion of a diversity of scientific institutions (e.g., federal, academic, non-profit), and 4) fostering a diversity of career pathways for PhD trained ecologists.