Skip to Main Content
Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-makingAuthor(s): Susan Charnley; Courtney Carothers; Terre Satterfield; Arielle Levine; Melissa R. Poe; Karma Norman; Jamie Donatuto; Sara Jo Breslow; Michael B. Mascia; Phillip S. Levin; Xavier Basurto; Christina C. Hicks; Carlos García-Quijano; Kevin St. Martin
Source: Environmental Science & Policy. 73: 80-88.
Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
Station: Pacific Northwest Research Station
View PDF (197.0 KB)
DescriptionIncreasing recognition of the human dimensions of natural resource management issues, and of social and ecological sustainability and resilience as being inter-related, highlights the importance of applying social science to natural resource management decision-making. Moreover, a number of laws and regulations require natural resource management agencies to consider the “best available science” (BAS) when making decisions, including social science. Yet rarely do these laws and regulations define or identify standards for BAS, and those who have tried to fill the gap have done so from the standpoint of best available natural science. This paper proposes evaluative criteria for best available social science (BASS), explaining why a broader set of criteria than those used for natural science is needed. Although the natural and social sciences share many of the same evaluative criteria for BAS, they also exhibit some differences, especially where qualitative social science is concerned. Thus we argue that the evaluative criteria for BAS should expand to include those associated with diverse social science disciplines, particularly the qualitative social sciences. We provide one example from the USA of how a federal agency −the U.S. Forest Service −has attempted to incorporate BASS in responding to its BAS mandate associated with the national forest planning process, drawing on different types of scientific information and in light of these criteria. Greater attention to including BASS in natural resource management decision-making can contribute to better, more equitable, and more defensible management decisions and policies.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
- We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
- This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
CitationCharnley, Susan; Carothers, Courtney; Satterfield, Terre; Levine, Arielle; Poe, Melissa R.; Norman, Karma; Donatuto, Jamie; Breslow, Sara Jo; Mascia, Michael B.; Levin, Phillip S.; Basurto, Xavier; Hicks, Christina C.; García-Quijano, Carlos; St. Martin, Kevin. 2017. Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-making. Environmental Science & Policy. 73: 80-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.002.
KeywordsBest available science, qualitative social science, environmental management, U.S. Forest Service
- Evaluating indicators of human well-being for ecosystem-based management
- Getting Alice through the door: social science research and natural resource management
- Human dimensions in ecosystem management: a USDA Forest Service perspective
XML: View XML