Grantee Research Project Results

2004 Progress Report: Socioeconomic and Institutional Research

EPA Grant Number: R828684C004
Subproject: this is subproject number 004 , established and managed by the Center Director under grant R828684
(EPA does not fund or establish subprojects; EPA awards and manages the overall grant for this center).
Center: Center for Integrated Multi‐scale Nutrient Pollution Solutions
Center Director: Shortle, James S.
Title: Socioeconomic and Institutional Research
Investigators: Shortle, James S. , Fisher, Ann , O'Connor, Robert E. , McElfish, James M. , Finley, James
Current Investigators: Shortle, James S. , Thornton, Kent
Institution: Pennsylvania State University
Current Institution: Pennsylvania State University , FTN Associates, Ltd
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: March 1, 2001 through February 28, 2005 (Extended to March 15, 2006)
Project Period Covered by this Report: March 1, 2003 through February 28, 2004
RFA: Environmental Indicators in the Estuarine Environment Research Program (2000) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Aquatic Ecosystems , Ecological Indicators/Assessment/Restoration , Water

Objective:

This is the fourth of four subprojects under the Atlantic Slope Consortium (ASC) center. The goal of this subproject is to provide scientific results that support the choice and communication of suites of environmental indicators that will be meaningful to and relevant for environmental managers and other intended audiences. Specific objectives are to examine: (1) human perceptual and attitudinal dimensions of the types of indicators that different audiences find useful; (2) risk communication methods for presenting indicator information; (3) institutional and jurisdictional obstacles to indicator use; (4) their value for environmental management; and (5) their relationships to socioeconomic indicators at multiple scales.

Progress Summary:

Progress was focused in two main theme areas during Year 4 of the project.

Human Dimensions of Environmental Indicators

To gain a basic understanding of how ecological indicators are differentially perceived and labeled by ecological scientists, policymakers, and the general public, we conducted facilitated interviews with each of these groups over the course of this project. We interviewed 46 policy makers (primarily state and federal officials involved in water quality decisionmaking) and found that properties of useful indicators vary by what they are being used for: setting priorities, regulatory enforcement, monitoring and assessment, or communication to stakeholder groups.

Because the ASC project is intended to link ecological assessments of well-being with public perceptions, we sought to integrate biophysical data on water and watershed quality into our public assessments. An important first step in this area was to conduct focus groups with ecological scientists to gain an understanding of their terminology, their assessments of ecological quality, and the data they utilize to create these assessments. To this end, we conducted focus groups with ecologists at Pennsylvania State University, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, East Carolina University, and the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center.

To help us further understand watershed specific environmental quality, threats to current conditions, use patterns, and terminology, we conducted focus groups with the general public in six watersheds across the region (a subsample of those selected to subsequently receive a mail survey). These watersheds included Spring Creek, Pennsylvania; Conodoguinet Creek, Pennsylvania; Gunpowder Falls, Maryland; Southeast Creek, Maryland; James River, Virginia; and Ware River, Virginia. These watersheds represent a broad range of ecological and socioeconomic conditions. A total of 53 members of the general public participated in these groups. We found that water quality is recognized as generally important to quality of life but that there is low public awareness of “conventional” indicator terminology and relatively poor recognition of interconnections between land use and water quality.

These focus groups provided the basis and “ground-truthing” for developing a mail survey that helped us to understand quality of life and how it relates to use and perceived ecological quality of local watershed conditions, as well as how watershed quality is valued economically and potentially threatened by multiple factors. This survey was developed and pilot tested during Year 4 of the project, and is currently being implemented in eight watersheds in the Atlantic Slope Region. Several of these (Spring Creek, n=550, and Clearfield Creek, n=435) are nearing completion. Several others (Ware River, n=392, and Chickahominy River, n=560) are just underway, with mailings in four other watersheds still to be implemented during summer 2005. Data from these surveys will be compiled and analyzed by September 2005.

Institutional Issues in the Choice and Use of Water Quality Indicators

A second focal area for the Socioeconomic and Institutional Research working group has been an examination of the role of federal and state laws and institutions in shaping the choice and use of indicators. This theme was addressed collaboratively with researchers from the Environmental Law Institute and other ASC institutions. A paper describing the results of this research has recently been accepted for publication in the Columbia Journal of Environmental Law.

Future Activities:

We will complete the general population mail survey described above during summer 2005. Data entry and analysis will follow in time for inclusion of results in the ASC final report.

Journal Articles on this Report : 2 Displayed | Download in RIS Format

Publications Views
Other subproject views:	All 40 publications	8 publications in selected types	All 6 journal articles
Other center views:	All 166 publications	51 publications in selected types	All 44 journal articles

Publications
Type	Citation	Sub Project	Document Sources
Journal Article	Borisova T, Shortle JS, Horan RD, Abler DG. The value of information for water quality protection. Water Resources Research 2005;41(6):W06004.	R828684C004 (2003) R828684C004 (2004) R828684C004 (Final)	Full-text: Wiley - Full Text HTML Exit
Journal Article	McElfish Jr. JM, Varnell LM. Designing environmental indicator systems for public decisions. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 2006;31(1):45-86.	R828684C004 (2004) R828684C004 (Final)	Abstract: Hein Online Exit

Supplemental Keywords:

ecological indicator, human dimension, environmental management, risk assessment, value of information, quality of life, environmental law, economics and decisionmaking, cost of pollution abatement, cost-effective ecosystem protection, ecological assessment, ecological risk assessment, economic incentives, economic models, economic objectives, ecosystem management, ecosystem valuation, environmental benefits assessment, environmental decision making, environmental policy, environmental protection, environmental risk assessment, environmental values, estuarine ecosystems, model-based analysis, policy making, preference survey, public values, socioeconomics,, RFA, Scientific Discipline, Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, ECOSYSTEMS, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Economics & Decision Making, Ecological Indicators, Ecological Risk Assessment, Ecosystem Protection, Economics, Ecosystem/Assessment/Indicators, decision-making, Ecological Monitoring, Social Science, Ecological Effects - Environmental Exposure & Risk, Ecology and Ecosystems, Risk Assessment, economic objectives, public values, socioeconomics, ecological assessment, ecosystem valuation, policy making, ecoindicator, economic models, environmental decision making, ecosystem management, environmental decision-making, cost-effective ecosysem protection, environmental values, economic incentives, valuation, estuarine ecosystems, cost of pollution abatement, decision making, environmental policy, environmental protection, environmental risk assessment, model-based analysis, preference survey

Relevant Websites:

http://www.asc.psu.edu

Progress and Final Reports:

Original Abstract

Main Center Abstract and Reports:

R828684 Center for Integrated Multi‐scale Nutrient Pollution Solutions

Subprojects under this Center: (EPA does not fund or establish subprojects; EPA awards and manages the overall grant for this center).
R828684C001 Integrated Assessment of Estuarine Ecosystems
R828684C002 Development of an Optical Indicator of Habitat Suitability for Submersed Aquatic Vegetation
R828684C003 Integrated Assessment of Watersheds
R828684C004 Socioeconomic and Institutional Research

Top of Page

The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.