IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v34y2014i4d10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Out of the Land of Oz: the importance of tackling wicked environmental problems without taming them

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia H. Stahl

    (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

Abstract

Struggling with complex environmental decision making often makes us feel that only the wizard in the movie, “The Wizard of Oz” (Fleming in Wizard of Oz, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, California, 1939) can produce agreeable solutions. However, this need not be the case if we distinguish between the technical information used in decision making versus the process of decision making. Making environmental decisions is a wicked problem, meaning that values are imposed, whether or not we explicitly acknowledge or understand what those values are. Classic wicked problems are those such as how to choose among potential ozone control policies, climate change policies or developing a sustainability plan. In contrast, tame problems are those where there is a knowable truth. Classic tame problems are those such as estimating the ground level ozone level given source emissions and meteorology within a chosen spatial and temporal scale such as that stipulated by assessing compliance with the federal ozone standard. Lack of understanding that environmental decision making utilizes tame problem information while remaining a wicked problem is a barrier to finding policy solutions. Hence, we challenge environmental professionals to rethink their processes of decision making with the tame/wicked insight offered here.

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia H. Stahl, 2014. "Out of the Land of Oz: the importance of tackling wicked environmental problems without taming them," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 473-477, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-014-9522-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bohringer, Christoph & Jochem, Patrick E.P., 2007. "Measuring the immeasurable -- A survey of sustainability indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-8, June.
    2. Cynthia H. Stahl & Alan J. Cimorelli, 2005. "How Much Uncertainty is Too Much and How Do We Know? A Case Example of the Assessment of Ozone Monitor Network Options," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1109-1120, October.
    3. Clark, Judy & Burgess, Jacquelin & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. ""I struggled with this money business": respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 45-62, April.
    4. Frame, Bob & Brown, Judy, 2008. "Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 225-241, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mary A. Fox & L. Elizabeth Brewer & Lawrence Martin, 2017. "An Overview of Literature Topics Related to Current Concepts, Methods, Tools, and Applications for Cumulative Risk Assessment (2007–2016)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    3. Zachary A. Collier & Igor Linkov & James H. Lambert, 2014. "Tools and strategies for climate change decision making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 471-472, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Povellato, Andrea & Bodini, Antonella & Longhitano, Davide & Scardera, Alfonso, 2012. "Assessing farm sustainability. An application with the Italian FADN sample," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124381, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    2. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    3. Blackburn, Nivea & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse & Hooper, Val, 2014. "A dialogical framing of AIS–SEA design," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 83-101.
    4. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    5. Michael Ahlheim & Oliver Frör & Antonia Heinke & Alwin Keil & Nguyen Minh Duc & Pham Van Dinh & Camille Saint-Macary & Manfred Zeller, 2008. "Landslides in mountainous regions of Northern Vietnam: Causes, protection strategies and the assessment of economic losses," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 298/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    6. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    7. Ray L. Ison & Kevin B. Collins & Ben L. Iaquinto, 2021. "Designing an inquiry‐based learning system: Innovating in research praxis to transform science–policy–practice relations for sustainable development," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 610-624, October.
    8. Nisreen Salti & Jad Chaaban & Alexandra Irani & Rima Al Mokdad, 2021. "A Multi-Dimensional Measure of Well-being among Youth: The Case of Palestinian Refugee Youth in Lebanon," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 1-34, February.
    9. Daniela Cristina Momete & Manuel Mihail Momete, 2021. "Map and Track the Performance in Education for Sustainable Development across the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-14, November.
    10. Duck Bong Kim, 2019. "An approach for composing predictive models from disparate knowledge sources in smart manufacturing environments," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1999-2012, April.
    11. Daniela C. Momete, 2016. "Building a Sustainable Healthcare Model: A Cross-Country Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-15, August.
    12. Henrik Svedsäter, 2003. "Economic Valuation of the Environment: How Citizens Make Sense of Contingent Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 122-135.
    13. Gregory Hill & Steven Kolmes & Michael Humphreys & Rebecca McLain & Eric T. Jones, 2019. "Using decision support tools in multistakeholder environmental planning: restorative justice and subbasin planning in the Columbia River Basin," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(2), pages 170-186, June.
    14. Ernest Reig‐Martínez & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, 2011. "Ranking farms with a composite indicator of sustainability," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(5), pages 561-575, September.
    15. Franks, Jeremy & Frater, Poppy, 2013. "Measuring agricultural sustainability at the farm-level: A pragmatic approach," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 2(4), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Zhicheng Lai & Lei Li & Zhuomin Tao & Tao Li & Xiaoting Shi & Jialing Li & Xin Li, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of Ecological Well-Being Performance from the Perspective of Strong Sustainability: A Case Study of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-25, January.
    17. Carmen García-Peña & Moneyba González-Medina & Jose Manuel Diaz-Sarachaga, 2021. "Assessment of the Governance Dimension in the Frame of the 2030 Agenda: Evidence from 100 Spanish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, May.
    18. Pollesch, N.L. & Dale, V.H., 2016. "Normalization in sustainability assessment: Methods and implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 195-208.
    19. Szabó, Zoltán, 2011. "Reducing protest responses by deliberative monetary valuation: Improving the validity of biodiversity valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 37-44.
    20. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9522-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.