Abstract
ABSTRACT Environmental policy formulation is a difficult business under the best of circumstances. In many cases, policymaking is complicated by factual uncertainty about the likely outcomes of policy intervention and by persistent value conflicts over desired policy ends and goals. This is nowhere more true than in formulating policy to manage adverse impacts to a watershed caused by natural and human activities. In the case of the Illinois River watershed in eastern Oklahoma, controversy over whether and how economic activities in the watershed should be regulated has effectively stifled meaningful policy reforms for three decades. As part of a test of a novel watershed management policymaking protocol funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency, a Q methodological study of stakeholders' perspectives on impact concerns and impact management preferences was conducted to diagnose the conflicts that have pre-empted policy initiatives for so long. We found that the conflicts that exist are not bipolar, but orthogonal – opening the way to potential super-optimum solutions that can satisfy everyone. This study demonstrates the power of Q methodology to assess conflict and thereby suggest strategies for its resolution.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.